Buncrana pier victims family being sued

kumate_champ07 · 27-03-2018 9:33am

a parasitic opportunist-solicitor sees an opening in the law and this will set a dangerous precedent for Irish society if it goes ahead. Insurance costs will increase further. you'd almost think the idea came from an insurance company. things will keep getting more cynical as time goes by, where do we draw the line?

valoren · 27-03-2018 9:35am

No amount of potential payout is worth damaging your reputation for. Reputation is everything and you protect your reputation at all costs including foregoing the siren call of a big payout considering the tragedy of the situation. She, and the others, should have realised that as their claims have tarnished them as moneygrubbing chancers and that will follow them forever.

suicide_circus · 27-03-2018 9:36am

average_runner wrote: »

Shouldn't need bollards, it only takes a bit of common sense not to drive on it. He was an adult not a child

People in this country expects everyone to spoon feed them

Personal responsibility is not a feature of our society any more.

The man drove DRUNK onto a SLIPWAY (pictured below) this is a piece of infrastructure which is designed to let a boat be put into the water - a feature of coastal life I think we can agree.

Everything is someone else's fault. Every act of stupidity is an opportunity to cash in.

Jimbob1977 · 27-03-2018 9:41am

Graces7 wrote: »

A huge difference. The council was negligent.
While the car should not have been on the slipway, there were no bollards to prevent this

The mother who lost so much that day has a child to bring up alone . Grief to cope with And the father is 86.

"Ms James lost her partner, her two sons, her mother and her sister in the Buncrana drowning tragedy."

from https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/coroner-s-court/buncrana-tragedy-he-could-have-saved-himself-but-chose-not-to-1.3303122

Please read the whole article?

actually too I wonder how many knew re the mother's lawsuit? I didn't until this thread

Wouldn't bollards obstruct the access and exit of boats? I thought the whole point of a slipway was that boats could be taken in and out of the water by cars, jeeps, pulleys, trailers, etc.

kumate_champ07 · 27-03-2018 9:41am

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I disagree and it's scummy.
I'm sure there are solicitors sitting at their desks around the country reading this with their trousers round their ankles and then they dance a little jig around the office.
Why?
Quite simple.
Because if this succeeds, this will open floodgates for claims. Forget the old system where an accident occurs, someone gets injured and gets compensation.
Now every bystander and helper can sue for trauma as well. Imagine being able to claim for compensation not only for the victim, but everyone on the scene, this could increase payouts tenfold!
And as everry solicitor knows, insurance payouts are a limitless resource that can be gouged without limits and no consequence for anyone, so it's time to go nuts.

This is so far beyond nuts, there isn't even any way to make fun of it anymore, Saul Goodman wouldn't do it.
Imagine 9/11. Some people in the towers, who were above the fire, had no way out. They had 2 choices. Burn to death or jump. Some jumped.
People saw them jump and fall to their death. Were these people traumatised?
Absolutely, there is no denying that and they will suffer for the rest of their lives.
Did one of them sue the relatives for damages?
Absolutely not.
If you think they should, I do not need to debate this with you anymore, because if you don't understand how this would be horrifying beyond imganiation, you are either near autistic with no graps of human emotions or a solicitor.

thanks for putting it much better than I did. the outcome of this will have more of a visible/measurable effect than what happens after Repeal 8th imo

bullvine · 27-03-2018 9:42am

I am confused!

Is this lady suing the estate of a man who has caused her serious mental trauma because he caused the death of himself and most of his family because he was DUI and made a serious error of judgement?

27-03-2018 9:50am

From th journal

“In a Facebook post last night, Stephanie Knox’s sister Laura sought to clarify the situation and said that her sister did not intend that a letter would be sent to Noel McGrotty and had been intending to make a claim against Donegal County Council.

Laura wrote that Stephanie had been informed that a number of other claims were being made in relation to the incident so she sought legal advice“

So she got wind about the involved parties suing the CoCo about the algae being present and thought she’d get in on the act dispite her only involvment was holding the baby after it was taken out of the water.

TheChizler · 27-03-2018 9:51am

cisk wrote: »

So she got wind about the involved parties suing the CoCo about the algae being present and thought she’d get in on the act dispite her only involve the was taking the holding he baby after it was taken out of the water.

Slight correction. She entered the water herself and crawled out holding the baby that she thought had drowned while her boyfriend swam back out to the car.

bullvine · 27-03-2018 9:51am

So shes not actually suing the family but the CC.

suicide_circus · 27-03-2018 9:52am

Algae on a piece of concrete that is submerged in sea water twice a day????!!!?

Graces7 · 27-03-2018 9:53am

Jimbob1977 wrote: »

Wouldn't bollards obstruct the access and exit of boats? I thought the whole point of a slipway was that boats could be taken in and out of the water by cars, jeeps, pulleys, trailers, etc.

They make them so they can be removed in need. Seen them also at shops. Many have a lock Enough to deter drunken whims..as well as illegal parking

Just seen this and I seem to remember another recent slipway near- tragedy.

See

http://www.thejournal.ie/carlingford-car-entered-water-2878043-Jul2016/

Graces7 · 27-03-2018 9:57am

suicide_circus wrote: »

Algae on a piece of concrete that is submerged in sea water twice a day????!!!?

Yep. And this was fresh water and at the edge, so not heavily submerged. Algae thrives in water.

suicide_circus · 27-03-2018 9:58am

Graces7 wrote: »

They make them so they can be removed in need. Seen them also at shops. Many have a lock Enough to deter drunken whims..as well as illegal parking

Just seen this and I seem to remember another recent slipway tragedy.

See

http://www.thejournal.ie/carlingford-car-entered-water-2878043-Jul2016/

Where does it end? Close pedestrian areas when it rains? Close motorways when there is ice? Ground aircraft when there is turbulence? We cant baby proof the whole world. These people died because the driver drove down a wet slipway while drunk.

suicide_circus · 27-03-2018 10:00am

Graces7 wrote: »

Yep. And this was fresh water and at the edge, so not heavily submerged. Algae thrives in water.

My point exactly. So why would you dive a car full of children down It? There is one person to blame here. The driver.

kumate_champ07 · 27-03-2018 10:03am

suicide_circus wrote: »

Where does it end? Close pedestrian areas when it rains? Close motorways when there is ice? Ground aircraft when there is turbulence? We cant baby proof the whole world. These people died because the driver drove down a wet slipway while drunk.

you need to be able to argue this for this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act_of_God

Trigger Happy · 27-03-2018 10:05am

suicide_circus wrote: »

My point exactly. So why would you dive a car full of children down It? There is one person to blame here. The driver.

I don't know why people find this hard to understand to be honest.
Feckin Nanny Staters.

valoren · 27-03-2018 10:06am

Poor journalism.
Is she suing the county council or the estate of the family?

The statement from her sister smacks of deflection.

Stephanie Knox’s sister Laura sought to clarify the situation and said that her sister did not intend that a letter would be sent to Noel McGrotty and had been intending to make a claim against Donegal County Council

So, the claim was made initially against the family estate and after seeing the understandable backlash of that it now suddenly turns out that it was actually meant for the County Council, meaning the slipway was their responsibility and that because of this slipway this accident happened which traumatised her??

Trigger Happy · 27-03-2018 10:07am

valoren wrote: »

Poor journalism.
Is she suing the county council or the estate of the family?

The statement from her sister smacks of deflection.

Stephanie Knox’s sister Laura sought to clarify the situation and said that her sister did not intend that a letter would be sent to Noel McGrotty and had been intending to make a claim against Donegal County Council

So, the claim was made against the family estate and after seeing the understandable backlash of that it now suddenly turns out that it was actually meant for the County Council??

That is some solicitor she has - sues the wrong party!

dr.fuzzenstein · 27-03-2018 10:08am

valoren wrote: »

Poor journalism.
Is she suing the county council or the estate of the family?

The statement from her sister smacks of deflection.

Stephanie Knox’s sister Laura sought to clarify the situation and said that her sister did not intend that a letter would be sent to Noel McGrotty and had been intending to make a claim against Donegal County Council

So, the claim was made against the family estate and after seeing the understandable backlash of that it now suddenly turns out that it was actually meant for the County Council??

I find it hard to believe that her solicitor would send a letter to the family when he meant to send it to the council.
Looks like she's fishing for a claim whereever she can find one.

gozunda · 27-03-2018 10:10am

bullvine wrote: »

So shes not actually suing the family but the CC.

+ she is sueing the estate of the late Sean ....

DZQO4ueWkAEBzVa?format=jpg

bloodless_coup · 27-03-2018 10:14am

Whether she is suing the estate of the family or the County Council, for whatever reason, it's still disgusting.

kumate_champ07 · 27-03-2018 10:16am

was there a better alternative to the safety system that was in place ie. did they have knowledge that it was unsafe and chose not to upgrade?

did the deceased ignore a warning sign at the scene?

was the woman a victim, or did she choose her own actions . is a victim someone who is unable to suceed in a stressful scenario?

can a hero be a victim? or does a hero become a victim, how do you put a monetary value on their sadness, can you sue the dead? why should a relative pay for the actions of a family member? can you sue god?

gozunda · 27-03-2018 10:16am

doylefe wrote: »

Whether she is suing the estate of the family or the County Council, for whatever reason, it's still disgusting.

Sueing the family though is really the last twist of the knife ....

Hooks Golf Handicap · 27-03-2018 10:16am

First of all, the clue is the name "slipway".

Secondly, I hope her claim is laughed out of court by the judge who also hits her with all the legal costs.

I once saw a dog get hit by the car.
I should sue the driver of the car who will then counter sue the owner of the dog for my anguish.
We're on the gravy train baby.

Cantona's Collars · 27-03-2018 10:18am

bullvine wrote: »

So shes not actually suing the family but the CC.

Seems that way.

Who would she sue if the family had been involved in an accident on a road around Buncrana?
It's akin to someone getting pissed, driving up the Sally Gap during Storm Emma and sliding over the edge of the mountain then others looking to sue the Council because of an individual's stupidity.
If she wins this case,then we've hit a new low in the country. Donegal Co Co didn't drive the car into the harbour or down a slipway. Personal responsibility comes into it.

The Bishop Basher · 27-03-2018 10:23am

I'd say this "lady" saw an opportunity for an easy few quid and went for it with little thought for the impact it might have on her and those from whom she hopes to profit.

It all sounds so easy and harmless when sitting in the comfortable surroundings of a solicitors office but the reality of the decision she took that day is this poor man receiving notice of her intention to sue on the anniversary of the tragedy.

It's absolute pure unbridled greed in all it's bare ugliness and i have zero sympathy for her and any criticism she receives.

The wife shouldn't have received a penny either. I just don't understand why everyone feels entitled to a load of money just because something bad happened to them. It;s life. Get the **** over ot and stop looking for people to blame.

I ****in hate greed.

Patrick2010 · 27-03-2018 10:24am

Are you confusing 2 different cases, Stephenie Knox and the ex-partners case?, for Cantonas Collars

CeilingFly · 27-03-2018 10:24am

Graces7 wrote: »

A huge difference. The council was negligent.
While the car should not have been on the slipway, there were no bollards to prevent this

If the driver was sober, he probably would have had the wherewithal not to drive on it. But he was pissed - well over 3 times the limit.

No negligence on the council - its a slip way leading to the sea. Your eyes tell you that. However when you are pissed and driving, you don't see the obvious. Who knows - if if didn't go into the harbour woudl he have had a head on crash on the way home - suppose there should be bollards in the middle of the raod to prevent drunk drivers having head on crashes?

kumate_champ07 · 27-03-2018 10:28am

Im not sure on the law, but Irish Rail give 1 year off work fully paid to train drivers if they've had someone jump in front of a train that they are driving. the customers dont get anything, i doubt any have tried to sue

Cantona's Collars · 27-03-2018 10:35am

Patrick2010 wrote: »

Are you confusing 2 different cases, Stephenie Knox and the ex-partners case?, for Cantonas Collars

No confusion,The Journal saying that the legal documents were sent to the father of the victims in error and were intended for the County Council.
So her solicitor tells her that there's a case against the council and proceeds with suing. Maybe it's just me but I'd have been happy enough with seeing and helping with a baby being saved despite all the tragedy surrounding the other deaths and in now way would seek financial gain from such a horrible event.

dr.fuzzenstein · 27-03-2018 10:36am

Hooks Golf Handicap wrote: »

First of all, the clue is the name "slipway".

Secondly, I hope her claim is laughed out of court by the judge who also hits her with all the legal costs.

I once saw a dog get hit by the car.
I should sue the driver of the car who will then counter sue the owner of the dog for my anguish.
We're on the gravy train baby.

No, the driver sues the owner of the dog for damages to his car.
You sue the owner of the dog directly for the anguish you suffer from seeing his beloved pet being splatted.
End result, the solicitor makes twice the money, or if you are suing through a different solicitor, twice the business for the legal profession.
This could apply to all gruesome accidents and/or mishaps. If you see anything upsetting, you contact your solicitor and he will find someone to cough up some dosh.
It's actually fantastic, no need to stage an accident and pretend to hobble around on crutches or wear a neckbrace for weeks and months on end, you just need to say you were traumatised by the awful event you witnessed and bingo, you are due some money.
This could mean a huge increase in business for the legal profession, since not only the victim of the accident gets a payout, but any bystander or helper on the scene can put in a claim as well.
You can already sue if you were accused of shoplifting or giving the barman a bum note, why not sue for being upset by what you see, even though you have no involvement in it other than being there?
In the end you will be able to sue for anything that even slightly upsets you.
Maybe the restaurant ran out of your favourite dish, maybe you witnessed someone shouting at his partner, kids or dog, maybe someone on a train asks you to get out of his seat, maybe you didn't react to a green traffic light and the driver behind shouted at you, maybe someone online presented you with an opinion you didn't agree with, maybe that comment wasn't even aimed at you, but you read it and it upset you anyway, the possibilities are endless!
If this goes through, any event you witness, without being directly involved in, could spell cash, since it is enough to have been "traumatised", no matter how, and someone, anyone will be made to pay.

In fact I feel I should be suing Stephanie Knox, since reading this article is hugely upsetting, I might lose some sleep over it, I could even be off sick because I'm so traumatised.
If she suceeds in her claim, I will in mine.

ford2600 · 27-03-2018 10:38am

Events like this on the extreme end of human experiences can have a dramatic life changing effect on some people; not everyone will react the same.

I've had the experience of being the first person at the scene of horrific RTA's twice, and it does stay with you. The first one wasn't comparable to Buncrana event, but was still horrific; two people dying in severely damaged car with me and one other trying to calm the parent of one of the dying, while we were all helpless in assisting the injured other than phoning for help and warning traffic. It had no real effect on me, other than a crystal clear memory of an event from 20 years ago, but I'd imagine it could effect others in a profound way.

I've met, through work, a lot of people who have been involved in fatal accidents, along with emergency services personnel. I'm aware some emergency personnel avail of professional help to deal with traumatic events. If it had a profound effect on Claimant here, you would hope she would privately go and get help and leave the remaining family alone.

I would think, although I'm no legal expert, the only people she could sue would be estate of driver and County Council. I'm not sure there is any precedent for the former (and it is beyond indecent) and building a case the latter would be really difficult; slipways are for access, they will be wet, have algae and are not for sightseeing.

How that poor lady gets through the day in the two years since she lost her family I've no idea. I've met and spoken to quite a few people who have lost a child tragically, the effect and lost 10, 20, 30 years later is almost unfathomable. The world of pain this lady is in most of us will never know or want to.

How you send a solicitors letter anywhere in her direction is beyond belief. Officers of the court my h0le

The Bishop Basher · 27-03-2018 10:40am

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

Maybe it's just me but I'd have been happy enough with seeing and helping with a baby being saved despite all the tragedy surrounding the other deaths and in now way would seek financial gain from such a horrible event.

That's how decent minded people think.

Everyone else let's greed get the better of them and goes for the payout.

And unfortunately in this case it's seems like monkey see monkey do.

The wife got a payout so she thought she might as well have a go.

Hope the money was worth losing her reputation over.

dr.fuzzenstein · 27-03-2018 10:46am

From this artice:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/woman-at-buncrana-pier-drowning-tragedy-makes-damages-claim-1.3441287

Ms Knox’s sister Laura said on Facebook that her sister had been informed by gardaí that people who were present on the pier on the day of the tragedy were lodging claims, so she had gone to her solicitor for advice.

I simply refuse to believe this. I am happy to call utter bullsh*t on that, lies and fabrication.

ItsLikeThis · 27-03-2018 10:53am

hairyprincess wrote: »

The Journal are running with the story now and they’ve the comments section disabled ‘for legal reasons’.

Donegal Daily seem to have deleted their Facebook post aswell

Liam McPoyle · 27-03-2018 11:07am

Greed.

Purely and simply greed.

From the claimant themselves and from the parasitic legal firm representing her.

Regardless of her reasons, her reputation is now irreparably tarnished.

She is from a small town in Donegal and is now pictured on every newspaper and website.

Oh karma, you don't always work but when you Do, it's glorious.

bucketybuck · 27-03-2018 11:09am

Swanner wrote: »

It all sounds so easy and harmless when sitting in the comfortable surroundings of a solicitors office.

No, it does not. Nobody with even a hint of integrity would consider taking these actions whether they were in a comfy office or not. Put most people in the nicest office with the smoothest talking solicitor you ever met and their morals would still rebel against the idea of trying for a quick buck off the backs of a dead family.

On a related note, is there any act so heinous that it won't attract white knight defenders trying to justify it on the internet?

suicide_circus · 27-03-2018 11:11am

A steaming plate of chicken karma served with pilau rice and fluffy naan bread.

iamwhoiam · 27-03-2018 11:23am

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

From this artice:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/woman-at-buncrana-pier-drowning-tragedy-makes-damages-claim-1.3441287

I simply refuse to believe this. I am happy to call utter bullsh*t on that, lies and fabrication.

I am not too sure , Donegal is parochial and gardaí often local and well known .I have been told certain things by a neighbour garda which I actually had no business knowing or did I even want to know .I have changed the subject once or twice as I felt it was actually not at all my business to know

Snickers Man · 27-03-2018 11:25am

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Personally I think there is a rush to judgment here on the thread. We have little information as to the woman's reasons for taking action.

Anyway it is NOT against the family at all, it is against the car insurer. The family does not need to be involved in any way.

Until they try to insure another car and then find that they've lost their "no claims" bonus. That's if they get a quote at all.

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

That is what insurance is for.

Insurance isn't a gravy train for every chancer to claim against in the belief that "only the rich insurance company gets hurt". In the long run, we all pay for over generous insurance claims. It's simple mathematics.

Just look around at all the howls of anguish when motor insurance costs rise, as they have been doing recently. If you want to complain about that, you can't have any sympathy for someone who says "Everybody else is doing it so why can't I?"

Which seems to be the case here.

Triangle · 27-03-2018 11:29am

Deleted User wrote: »

Will it not be through insurance or something?

^
With attitudes like this - no wonder insurance is through the roof.

Snickers Man · 27-03-2018 11:29am

suicide_circus wrote: »

Personal responsibility is not a feature of our society any more.

The man drove DRUNK onto a SLIPWAY (pictured below) this is a piece of infrastructure which is designed to let a boat be put into the water - a feature of coastal life I think we can agree.

Careful now. That sort of attitude cost George Hook his job.

Caliden · 27-03-2018 11:34am

Snickers Man wrote: »

Until they try to insure another car and then find that they've lost their "no claims" bonus. That's if they get a quote at all.

Insurance isn't a gravy train for every chancer to claim against in the belief that "only the rich insurance company gets hurt". In the long run, we all pay for over generous insurance claims. It's simple mathematics.

Just look around at all the howls of anguish when motor insurance costs rise, as they have been doing recently. If you want to complain about that, you can't have any sympathy for someone who says "Everybody else is doing it so why can't I?"

Which seems to be the case here.

I've heard several cases of the boyfriends/girlfriends/spouses of people killed in car accidents lodge claims against the driver of the car that the deceased person was a passenger in.

Claiming distress among other things. The insurance companies don't want to refuse these claims as they know the people making these claims will go to the papers and there will be public outcry.

I'm sorry but if you were not in the car or directly injured then you should not be able make a claim.
These 'indirect' claims are messed up.

It's only a matter of time before people passing by car crashes on the road start lodging claims.

suicide_circus · 27-03-2018 11:34am

Snickers Man wrote: »

Until they try to insure another car and then find that they've lost their "no claims" bonus. That's if they get a quote at all.

Insurance isn't a gravy train for every chancer to claim against in the belief that "only the rich insurance company gets hurt". In the long run, we all pay for over generous insurance claims. It's simple mathematics.

Just look around at all the howls of anguish when motor insurance costs rise, as they have been doing recently. If you want to complain about that, you can't have any sympathy for someone who says "Everybody else is doing it so why can't I?"

Which seems to be the case here.

For a nation so prone to whiplash it's odd that people have such brass necks.

ItsLikeThis · 27-03-2018 11:37am

suicide_circus wrote: »

Personal responsibility is not a feature of our society any more.

The man drove DRUNK onto a SLIPWAY (pictured below) this is a piece of infrastructure which is designed to let a boat be put into the water - a feature of coastal life I think we can agree.

Everything is someone else's fault. Every act of stupidity is an opportunity to cash in.

What next? Those who drive onto Rosnowlagh beach every summer and get caught out by the incoming tide to sue Donegal cc for allowing access to the beach?

valoren · 27-03-2018 11:42am

Caliden wrote: »

It's only a matter of time before people passing by car crashes on the road start lodging claims.

Wasn't there a case recently where the partner of a man involved in a serious accident made her way to the scene of the accident and then subsequently sued for the traumatising scene she witnessed?

Caliden · 27-03-2018 11:42am

My car broke down before and the got the car towed through the insurance company.

The fella in the tow truck was telling me that he is often called to fatal car accidents and he has to tow what's left of the car.

He didn't get into too much detail but he did say that the Gardai/Fire bridage crews involved all got offered counselling in cases of particularly bad crashes but he didn't.

If this woman is awarded money this could open a whole lot more claims in the future.

10000maniacs · 27-03-2018 11:42am

bucketybuck wrote: »

Bollocks to you, her, and everybody else who has made "entitlement" such a dirty word.

Funny how these days the only time you hear the word "entitled" is when some scab wants a handout.

Didn't the UK and European judiciary put a stop to this type of idiocy a few years ago? They capped such claims at something like £100 or something like that.
They did the same with whiplash claims and tripping on council property claims. Why can't they do the same here or is our legal system that screwed up?

OutOfMyMind18 · 27-03-2018 11:43am

She put up a post on her facebook about whats going on (attachment)

I think what she is doing despicable. Also, I doubt (but open to correction) that the Garda would come and tell her that others are claiming. Why is there no mention of all these others?

Yes, the driver was drunk. It was a terrible tragedy and the family will always have to live with what happened.

suicide_circus · 27-03-2018 11:44am

ItsLikeThis wrote: »

What next? Those who drive onto Rosnowlagh beach every summer and get caught out by the incoming tide to sue Donegal cc for allowing access to the beach?

I can see no alternative. It's the logical conclusion.

Buncrana pier victims family being sued

Comments