Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Fine Gael TD sues Dublin Hotel after falling off swing

1279280282284285315

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,958 ✭✭✭✭Shefwedfan


    That's a very serious accusation to post on a public message board Johnny.

    You've stated that a TD is blackmailing the taoiseach in relation to information pertaining to a minister. I'm surprised that has been allowed to stand.


    I would have thought you would be more concerned with my comment about two crooked f**ks :p:p:p:p:p


    MB as pointed out by Kaiser already showed her true colours....if she goes down the whole thing will come down


    Maybe Leo should get her to explain that comment, because for everyone else in the World that means she has dirth on someone and if she gets the boot then she willlet it slip


    Based on Leo's cover upjob so far this has only magnified the issue. Why bother doing a report and then not making the report available? or blame the person who is doing the report for making the decision it is not public???

    What exactly is to hide?

    All of this needs to be answered before this goes away.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,105 ✭✭✭Kivaro




    Yes, I posted it on a thread that dealt with the complicity of solicitors in the compensation fraud industry in Ireland. Josepha Madigan's family's law firm would have gained substantially if this particular fraudulent case was not caught on time.

    Here you go:
    Kivaro wrote: »
    I see the Sunday Independent is running with the thread topic this morning. The link is behind a login, but it's here.
    According to their poll, the legal profession in Ireland is encouraging claims, which is feeding the runaway compensation culture in this country.

    And of course, we know why solicitors are driving the compensation culture. Again looking at the Independent this morning, you can see the ludicrous money that solicitors can make with these claims e.g. Fine Gael Minister Josepha Madigan's family's law firm was in line for €11,500 if Fine Gael TD Maria Bailey case was won for €60,000.
    Solicitors don't care if their fees are essentially paid by the rest of us with increased insurance premiums.


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    _Kaiser_ wrote: »
    Not sure why I'm replying here but, didn't Maria herself make some comment during the infamous radio interview inferring that "if I'm going down I'm taking others with me"


    from the IT transcript :

    SOR: Were there political dirty tricks involved?

    MB: I’m not going to cast aspersions on air, because that’s not the way I play, I will deal with that in my own way ...

    That's Paddy making himself losty for a week or two again.

    Talk about lurking in the shadows in silence, sticking your oar in and being burned. :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 582 ✭✭✭sportsfan90


    I'm sure this has probably been covered here already but who did MB support between Leo and Coveney at the time of the FG leadership contest?


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    Kivaro wrote: »
    Yes, I posted it on a thread that dealt with the complicity of solicitors in the compensation fraud industry in Ireland. Josepha Madigan's family's law firm would have gained substantially if this particular fraudulent case was not caught on time.

    Here you go:

    I don't know if you know much about solicitors but receiving a payment of €11,500 for services given is hardly a substantial gain for a law firm.

    By the way, I'd love to know how the €11,500 figure was arrived at. Her legal team would have done some work but would have had lots of other work to do. And depending on how hard The Dean's insurance company wanted to fight the claim, there could be a hell of a lot more work to be done by Bailey's team. My point is that they could give a rough estimate, but it's entirely possible that the €11,500 wouldn't be enough to cover all the work that they may have had to do on the case.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,490 ✭✭✭JeffKenna


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    I don't know if you know much about solicitors but receiving a payment of €11,500 for services given is hardly a substantial gain for a law firm.

    By the way, I'd love to know how the €11,500 figure was arrived at. Her legal team would have done some work but would have had lots of other work to do. And depending on how hard The Dean's insurance company wanted to fight the claim, there could be a hell of a lot more work to be done by Bailey's team. My point is that they could give a rough estimate, but it's entirely possible that the €11,500 wouldn't be enough to cover all the work that they may have had to do on the case.

    Yeah but the point is it would have been €11,500 in legal fee's for a frivolous claim to begin with...


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    As above, I'd say they'd need to have put in one hell of an effort to convince a court that a 39 year old TD should have had lessons/signage instructions on the principles of how a swing works.

    How (with a straight face) could you be telling a judge that someone - who was elected in to parliament, and entrusted with legislation that affects everyone in the states daily lives, couldn't operate a child's play thing completely stone cold sober (according to her)?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,126 ✭✭✭Snow Garden


    As above, I'd say they'd need to have put in one hell of an effort to convince a court that a 39 year old TD should have had lessons/signage instructions on the principles of how a swing works.

    How (with a straight face) could you be telling a judge that someone - who was elected in to parliament, and entrusted with legislation that affects everyone in the states daily lives, couldn't operate a child's play thing completely stone cold sober (according to her)?


    It's a pity it didn't get to court. That would have been fun!

    Farrell essentially got ridiculed in court for his spurious claim even though he won some money.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,490 ✭✭✭JeffKenna


    It's a pity it didn't get to court. That would have been fun!

    Farrell essentially got ridiculed in court for his spurious claim even though he won some money.

    Yeah, but that's the underlying issue to all of this, something is seriously wrong with our system when Farrell can win €2,500 plus legal fee's for a claim like that.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    As above, I'd say they'd need to have put in one hell of an effort to convince a court that a 39 year old TD should have had lessons/signage instructions on the principles of how a swing works.

    How (with a straight face) could you be telling a judge that someone - who was elected in to parliament, and entrusted with legislation that affects everyone in the states daily lives, couldn't operate a child's play thing completely stone cold sober (according to her)?

    They wouldn't have relied on the lack of supervision angle in court because that's essentially ridiculous. They would have gotten an engineering report that would have said the swing was slippy etc. The fact that the Dean put non-slip tape on the swing following this incident could also be used in court to show that the Dean hadn't done all in their power to ensure that people didn't fall off the swing. Would any of this mean that Bailey would win in court, I can't say for sure but she'd be in with a fighting chance because the odds are stacked against the business.

    And if the Dean said that she was drunk, her legal team would respond that it's reasonable to assume that drunk people would use the swing seeing as it's located in an establishment that serves alcohol and that they should have known that someone would fall drunk off the swing. And to be honest, that angle would probably be successful in court.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,126 ✭✭✭Snow Garden


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    They wouldn't have relied on the lack of supervision angle in court because that's essentially ridiculous. They would have gotten an engineering report that would have said the swing was slippy etc. The fact that the Dean put non-slip tape on the swing following this incident could also be used in court to show that the Dean hadn't done all in their power to ensure that people didn't fall off the swing. Would any of this mean that Bailey would win in court, I can't say for sure but she'd be in with a fighting chance because the odds are stacked against the business.

    And if the Dean said that she was drunk, her legal team would respond that it's reasonable to assume that drunk people would use the swing seeing as it's located in an establishment that serves alcohol and that they should have known that someone would fall drunk off the swing. And to be honest, that angle would probably be successful in court.

    :D

    And holding a bottle of beer and reaching for a bottle of wine ?

    Should they remove high bar stools too? Drunk people fall off them too...

    Where are you on the 20,000 or 7000 claim for medical expenses?


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    :D

    And holding a bottle of beer and reaching for a bottle of wine ?

    Should they remove high bar stools too? Drunk people fall off them too...

    I'm just telling you some of the things I've witnessed being argued successfully in court.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,215 ✭✭✭✭Suckit


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    I don't know if you know much about solicitors but receiving a payment of €11,500 for services given is hardly a substantial gain for a law firm.

    By the way, I'd love to know how the €11,500 figure was arrived at. Her legal team would have done some work but would have had lots of other work to do. And depending on how hard The Dean's insurance company wanted to fight the claim, there could be a hell of a lot more work to be done by Bailey's team. My point is that they could give a rough estimate, but it's entirely possible that the €11,500 wouldn't be enough to cover all the work that they may have had to do on the case.
    €11,500 is money they were willing to go out and get their hands dirty for, maybe even risk sullying the family company name.
    It must hae been worth something to them.


  • Registered Users Posts: 21,065 ✭✭✭✭Odyssey 2005


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    I'm just telling you some of the things I've witnessed being argued successfully in court.

    Unfortunately I tend to agree with your view on how the court case would have panned out. !
    Disgusting carry on .


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,587 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    I would say D too.

    If the real truth came out, I believe both Bailey's and Madigan's positions would be untenable.

    I think Leo covered his back by saying there have been inconsistencies in Ms Bailey's account of events to him and the media that he cannot reconcile.

    If something comes out that makes Madigans position untenable it also by extension makes Leos position untenable. He is the one saying there is nothing to see here.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    :D

    And holding a bottle of beer and reaching for a bottle of wine ?

    Should they remove high bar stools too? Drunk people fall off them too...

    Where are you on the 20,000 or 7000 claim for medical expenses?

    I'm not standing up for Bailey. I've repeatedly said that I'd be happy for her to lose her seat pronto.

    I don't know what her medical expenses were but I suspect she isn't much different than most people in that she would want to get as much money as possible for her alleged injury.

    Do I believe she would have been happy with €7,000? No, I think she would have preferred €20,000. I reckon she was underplaying it to not look so bad in the eyes of the public. Can I prove any of this, no.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    Suckit wrote: »
    €11,500 is money they were willing to go out and get their hands dirty for, maybe even risk sullying the family company name.
    It must hae been worth something to them.


    The case turned to sh1t due to public attention. Nobody could have predicted that would have happened at the outset of the case, back in 2015 or whenever. I think Bailey wasn't even a TD then.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    Unfortunately I tend to agree with your view on how the court case would have panned out. !
    Disgusting carry on .

    I honestly think she would have won if the case had gone ahead. The only potential fly in the ointment for Bailey would have been if the CCTV showed that feckall of a fall occurred.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,287 ✭✭✭givyjoe


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    I honestly think she would have won if the case had gone ahead. The only potential fly in the ointment for Bailey would have been if the CCTV showed that feckall of a fall occurred.

    Or that the fall was CLEARLY due to her own stupidity. no hands leaning forwards/backwards on a SWING.

    The hotel clearly stated they had CCTV. How on earth could she demonstrate negligence on the hotels part, considering what she stated on the SOR show, along with CCTV footage of the incident.


  • Registered Users Posts: 40,059 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    givyjoe wrote: »
    Or that the fall was CLEARLY due to her own stupidity. no hands leaning forwards/backwards on a SWING.

    The hotel clearly stated they had CCTV. How on earth could she demonstrate negligence on the hotels part, considering what she stated on the SOR show, along with CCTV footage of the incident.

    well as alredy said if the seat on the swing was too slippy, and the tape they added to the seat later could be said to suggest it was, then that is contributory negligence on the part of the hotel.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,287 ✭✭✭givyjoe


    well as alredy said if the seat on the swing was too slippy, and the tape they added to the seat later could be said to suggest it was, then that is contributory negligence on the part of the hotel.

    Except she didn't slip off the seat, she swung too far forwards/backwards with no hands on the swing. If it was such a slippy deathtrap, there'd be thousands of these cases against the Dean resulting from people "slipping" off it.

    Contributory Negligence applies to the complainant, not the defendant. They're either negligent or they're not. The woman clearly fell off the swing from not holding onto the two ropes hanging from the ceiling/attached to the swing, not because it wasn't "sticky" enough.

    They should probably add a seatbelt to it too :rolleyes:


  • Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 20,863 Mod ✭✭✭✭inforfun


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    I honestly think she would have won if the case had gone ahead. The only potential fly in the ointment for Bailey would have been if the CCTV showed that feckall of a fall occurred.

    If you see that people get money because they choose to clamp hot tea in a cup between their body and elbow while they keep a cold cookie in their hand, you can be sure MB would have gotten, maybe not 60.000 but a fair chunk of money at least.


  • Registered Users Posts: 40,059 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    givyjoe wrote: »
    Except she didn't slip off the seat, she swung too far forwards/backwards with no hands on the swing. If it was such a slippy deathtrap, there'd be thousands of these cases against the Dean resulting from people "slipping" off it.

    Contributory Negligence applies to the complainant, not the defendant. They're either negligent or they're not. The woman clearly fell off the swing from not holding onto the two ropes hanging from the ceiling/attached to the swing, not because it wasn't "sticky" enough.

    They should probably add a seatbelt to it too :rolleyes:

    not sure what the :rolleyes: is about. try to have a civil conversation.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,215 ✭✭✭✭Suckit


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    The case turned to sh1t due to public attention. Nobody could have predicted that would have happened at the outset of the case, back in 2015 or whenever. I think Bailey wasn't even a TD then.


    Yeah, but the point is still that they thought €11,500 was substantial enough for them to take the case.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    Suckit wrote: »
    Yeah, but the point is still that they thought €11,500 was substantial enough for them to take the case.

    And why wouldn't they. Firms aren't in the business of turning away business.

    Lets be realistic, if Bailey wasn't a TD, then we would never have heard of this case, she wouldn't have dropped the case and might well be sitting pretty with a good chance of winning her claim. So why wouldn't a law firm take on a case like that where they had a reasonable chance of winning?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    And why wouldn't they. Firms aren't in the business of turning away business.

    Lets be realistic, if Bailey wasn't a TD, then we would never have heard of this case, she wouldn't have dropped the case and might well be sitting pretty with a good chance of winning her claim. So why wouldn't a law firm take on a case like that where they had a reasonable chance of winning?

    That's not true. Just a few posts ago we'd the hot tea spill. We'd a thread on a girl tripping in her garden. Many posts about the Luas falling off incident etc.
    Bailey's story would be mention as another in a sadly long line of chancers. The fact she's a card carrying member of the law and order party is of massive importance indeed, but she'd still feature in the rogues gallery.

    The law firm featured another FG member. It speaks volumes on the caliber of these 'best' people.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,958 ✭✭✭✭Shefwedfan


    inforfun wrote: »
    If you see that people get money because they choose to clamp hot tea in a cup between their body and elbow while they keep a cold cookie in their hand, you can be sure MB would have gotten, maybe not 60.000 but a fair chunk of money at least.

    That is not as bad as the woman who sat at table and banged her knee and got a big lump of money


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    givyjoe wrote: »
    Except she didn't slip off the seat, she swung too far forwards/backwards with no hands on the swing. If it was such a slippy deathtrap, there'd be thousands of these cases against the Dean resulting from people "slipping" off it.

    Contributory Negligence applies to the complainant, not the defendant. They're either negligent or they're not. The woman clearly fell off the swing from not holding onto the two ropes hanging from the ceiling/attached to the swing, not because it wasn't "sticky" enough.

    They should probably add a seatbelt to it too :rolleyes:

    I'm not trying to be insulting but you don't know she didn't slip off the seat. Not 100%. You didn't carry out an engineering inspection on the swing with Bailey present to explain the chain of events to determine if the swing was dangerous of if all precautionary measures that were reasonably practicable were in place. You don't know if anybody else fell off the swing previously and if they did (which is likely), then what action did the Dean take to prevent it happening again.

    So, with respect, you can't say for certain what the cause of this accident was. And with no court case, and no engineering inspection etc. we will more than likely never know 100% if the Dean were somewhat responsible for the incident.

    Bu the way, from a health and safety point of view, having a swing in a premises that sells alcohol is a recipe for disaster given the litigious nature of Irish people.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    That's not true. Just a few posts ago we'd the hot tea spill. We'd a thread on a girl tripping in her garden. Many posts about the Luas falling off incident etc.
    Bailey's story would be mention as another in a sadly long line of chancers. The fact she's a card carrying member of the law and order party is of massive importance indeed, but she'd still feature in the rogues gallery.

    The law firm featured another FG member. It speaks volumes on the caliber of these 'best' people.

    The hot tea spill, the falling off the Luas stuff etc. were all successful cases.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    Shefwedfan wrote: »
    That is not as bad as the woman who sat at table and banged her knee and got a big lump of money

    She got €20k I believe and the legal costs were close to €150k.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement