Why we can't have nice things anymore

Kivaro · 29-05-2019 9:24am #1

Festivals, marts, creches, play centres, outdoor parks, and other small businesses around the country are closing down due to exaggerated insurance claims and corresponding insurance costs.

One of the biggest adventure playgrounds in the country had to remove two trampolines from its grounds after its insurance was hiked by €25,000 ........ just for the two trampolines alone. And that's after no claims on those trampolines in the last 15 years. 61 play centres have been threatened with closure this year alone. (From the Irish Independent piece this morning: They're going to close down the country).

Looking at the problem, we have judges awarding ludicrous, non-justifiable awards to claimants; many of whom are serial claimants.
We have an inept Government minister Michael D'Arcy, who for the last 2 years have repeatedly told us ad nauseum on various television programs that he is making great progress in targeting insurance costs.
We have an obvious insurance cartel in this country, who are exacerbating the problem so much that the EU had to send in a team to investigate their practices. Unfortunately, the Insurance cartel know that this formal antitrust investigation will take years to complete, and will gleefully money grab from us while they still allowed to do so.

And then we have the fraudsters, which without a shadow of a doubt, make up the vast majority of claimants in this country.
Case in point (From the examiner this morning): A study has found 100% of Irish whiplash patients attending a spine specialist pursued lawsuits — but the visits almost always stopped once the legal action was settled. Only 3% continued with follow-up treatment when litigation ended. That fact alone speaks volumes.

Since the government is like a deer in the headlights tackling this issue and just watching businesses closing down (and people losing jobs) around the country due to insurance costs, and since Judges will not change their "ways" of awarding payouts that are multiples greater than other parts of Europe, let's have a referendum to drive down these compensation pay-outs.
It is obvious that the current government and solicitor firms do not want this problem solved, so let the people decide .............. in a referendum.

TuringBot47 · 29-05-2019 10:14am

Kivaro wrote: »

Case in point (From the examiner this morning): A study has found 100% of Irish whiplash patients attending a spine specialist pursued lawsuits — but the visits almost always stopped once the legal action was settled. Only 3% continued with follow-up treatment when litigation ended. That fact alone speaks volumes.

Not volumes... a "spine specialist" might've been needed for credibility in court, but a normal physio might be enough to treat them on a longer term basis.

riffmongous · 29-05-2019 10:15am

But what to actually do... The problem being the center and middle classes don't usually do anything except complain and sneer at any actual attempts to act

Set up a petition there, and I'll sign it and share it

Wabbit Ears · 29-05-2019 10:22am

Our local Sonairte closed its doors to the public because of this. Randomers suing because they had minor injuries on a woodland trail. I think its re-opened in a limited capacity since then but the truth of it all is some random judge sitting in his ivory tower decided that he should ruin it for everyone. I don't hate on the claimants, sure if the Judges are just handing out huge sums of cash on a whim why wouldn't they?

https://www.independent.ie/regionals/droghedaindependent/news/huge-insurance-costs-leads-to-sonairte-closure-36076095.html

VinLieger · 29-05-2019 10:23am

Hopefully swingapalooza causes enough chaos for them that they start to properly tackles the issue

sbsquarepants · 29-05-2019 10:24am

Kivaro wrote: »

And then we have the fraudsters, which without a shadow of a doubt, make up the vast majority of claimants in this country.
.

Not a chance - the absolute vast majority of insurance claims are legit.

Not to mention the enormous number of valid claims which aren't pursued because it just wouldn't be worth the hassle (I personally have had 2 over the years, practically everyone I know of has had at least one)

The problem (if you ask me) is down to an insurance cartel - there's money to be made and they want to make it. It's as simple as that.

When the government legally forces you to buy a product off a mere handful of companies - the temptation on those companies to take the piss is just too much to resist.

TuringBot47 · 29-05-2019 10:25am

The problem may be the lump sum nature of these things.
And an insurance company wanting to know the cost up front to deduct it from their pool of money.

Where it probably needs some form of annual payout, regular review of the injury, assessment of money lost due to job loss/etc.

I certainly wouldn't want a measly €3k for a bad back problem potentially for life, or something that will inherently weaken my back permanently.
Like a crashed car, your spine may never completely be as strong as before the crash, ligaments stretched, muscles damaged etc.

So I'd say it's the big lump sum payout that is the issue here, not the idea of ongoing care for someone who had whiplash (which covers practically all forms of spinal injuries)

Samuel T. Cogley · 29-05-2019 10:25am

Not everything can be solved by a referendum. True a referendum can be held on ordinary legislation, but there's a reason this has never happened, it's simply not needed. All that's needed is for legislation to be introduced you can do that by writing to your TD etc.

....... · 29-05-2019 10:26am

It can be easy to dismiss *some* claims as being fantastical until you dig a bit deeper into them.

Someone I know sued a fast food company because he had bitten into his food and a metal washer was in it, he broke a tooth and ended up with a five digit payout. After it was in the papers I asked my dentist about it and she explained the level of dental work necessary to repair this. And how by the time he had gone through oral surgery and had an implant - he would have spent five digits AND would be left worse off than before because a dental implant requires further care and treatment throughout life and is simply never as good as the original tooth.

Its easy to say "well yer man is grand" when you are not the one going through month of expensive dental work and the end result still being a lesser situation than the one you were in to start with.

Same goes for orthopediac injuries. I know people who still have problems 10 years after car accidents. Sure, they are going around living a normal life, but they also have injuries that cause problems. Its not always visible to people.

We certainly have plenty of chancers and a pretty serious compo culture at work, but there are genuine cases too.

Samuel T. Cogley · 29-05-2019 10:27am

TuringBot47 wrote: »

The problem may be the lump sum nature of these things.
And an insurance company wanting to know the cost up front to deduct it from their pool of money.

Where it probably needs some form of annual payout, regular review of the injury, assessment of money lost due to job loss/etc.

I certainly wouldn't want a measly €3k for a bad back problem potentially for life, or something that will inherently weaken my back permanently.
Like a crashed car, your spine may never completely be as strong as before the crash, ligaments stretched, muscles damaged etc.

So I'd say it's the big lump sum payout that is the issue here, not the idea of ongoing care for someone who had whiplash (which covers practically all forms of spinal injuries)

The New Zealand model is similar to this so it's not unheard of to have an alternative approach, even in a Common Law country.

biko · 29-05-2019 10:27am

1 Start by addressing the issue that "it's always someone else's fault" mindset in TDs and other weaklings.

2 If you are awarded money for a rpoblem, the money should go directly to the doctor treating you, and never to you nor your family
There must be no incentive to make up injuries.

3 Anyone with more than one claim in the last 15 years needs to be scrutinised.

Tilikum17 · 29-05-2019 10:28am

My auld fella was in a small tip with a women (who has sued before). Anyway, she was suing for small tissue damage all over her body. I caught her running in a road race also attending a gym class.

When I sent the details onto his car insurance crowd, they didn’t want to know about it & said they’d be paying out.

Disgraceful.

TuringBot47 · 29-05-2019 10:29am

Really, the only way to tackle this is that you have to sign a legal declaration that you cannot sue a company/person for any injuries/death/loss of property before going on their property.

God knows how that would work for drunk people in pubs/clubs, because they could claim they didn't know what they were signing.
So you'd end up with "private pubs", where you must become a member beforehand and agree to the terms before entering.

Hector Savage · 29-05-2019 10:29am

TuringBot47 wrote: »

Not volumes... a "spine specialist" might've been needed for credibility in court, but a normal physio might be enough to treat them on a longer term basis.

So how much did you get in your claim ?

InTheShadows · 29-05-2019 10:30am

Firstly you need the will of the elected government of the day to tackle the problem. They don't have that will so i can't see anything changing unfortunately.

Samuel T. Cogley · 29-05-2019 10:31am

TuringBot47 wrote: »

Really, the only way to tackle this is that you have to sign a legal declaration that you cannot sue a company/person for any injuries/death/loss of property before going on their property.

God knows how that would work for drunk people in pubs/clubs, because they could claim they didn't know what they were signing.
So you'd end up with "private pubs", where you must become a member beforehand and agree to the terms before entering.

Generally that sort of declaration doesn't prevent someone from suing and neither should it in the case of negligence.

Hector Savage · 29-05-2019 10:31am

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Not a chance - the absolute vast majority of insurance claims are legit.

Not to mention the enormous number of valid claims which aren't pursued because it just wouldn't be worth the hassle (I personally have had 2 over the years, practically everyone I know of has had at least one)

The problem (if you ask me) is down to an insurance cartel - there's money to be made and they want to make it. It's as simple as that.

When the government legally forces you to buy a product off a mere handful of companies - the temptation on those companies to take the piss is just too much to resist.

I'd love to know your claims, what do you feel you are owed money for ?

TuringBot47 · 29-05-2019 10:34am

Hector Savage wrote: »

So how much did you get in your claim ?

Thankfully I've never had a crash nor the need for a claim.
But I know that physios cost around €80 a visit, so I imagine a "spine specialist" is big money. No agenda with me, just an outside observer.

Harry Palmr · 29-05-2019 10:43am

Interestingly if insurance companies take the matter seriously things can improve.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/80-damage-to-car-led-to-215000-payout-says-aviva-as-it-ramps-up-fraud-inquiries-38158692.html

Aviva Insurance's ten-fold increase in the number of investigators of suspected fraud it employs has contributed to the insurer winning 80pc of personal injury claims it has defended in the courts this year.
That is according to investigations manager with Aviva Robert Smyth, who said: "It is very evident that in most cases, the courts will dismiss claims when the evidence is there to support a dismissal."

Over the past four years, Mr Smyth has overseen the expansion of Aviva's investigation unit, with 30 officers now investigating suspected fraud, compared with three in 2015.

and the industry has to deal with perpetually unlucky people like this

In a separate case, Mr Smyth welcomed the dismissal of an appeal to the High Court by Ann Marie Mongans (39) of Clancy Park, Ennis, against the scale of an award she received in the circuit court.

The €5,000 Ms Mongans received at Ennis Circuit Court in 2017 was the seventh award she had received, bringing to €110,000 the total received in all of her claims.

The appeal was dismissed at the High Court sitting in Ennis after Ms Mongans failed to show. Mr Smyth confirmed Aviva has paid its own legal costs of €20,000 in the case.

The May 2012 accident was the seventh accident where Ms Mongans has received compensation in a claim history spanning 29 years.

:: Aged seven in 1988, Ms Mongans received €13,970 in compensation after being knocked down;

:: 1998 - Ms Mongans was awarded €9,000 as a result of a road traffic accident;

:: 1999 - Ms Mongans received compensation of €7,000 from a road accident at Clarecastle Rd, Ennis;

:: 2004 - Ms Mongans received €11,000 from a road accident at Market Street in Ennis;

:: 2006 - Ms Mongans received €55,000 as a result of breaking her pelvis and suffering back injuries in a road accident on Ennis's Quin Rd;

:: 2011 - Ms Mongans received €10,000 from a road traffic accident near O'Connell Street in Limerick.

Edgware · 29-05-2019 10:54am

Once the claim is paid many medical visits stop. It's like Lourdes

Edgware · 29-05-2019 10:55am

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Interestingly if insurance companies take the matter seriously things can improve.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/80-damage-to-car-led-to-215000-payout-says-aviva-as-it-ramps-up-fraud-inquiries-38158692.html

and the industry has to deal with perpetually unlucky people like this

Some people just are unlucky

2Mad2BeMad · 29-05-2019 10:56am

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Interestingly if insurance companies take the matter seriously things can improve.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/80-damage-to-car-led-to-215000-payout-says-aviva-as-it-ramps-up-fraud-inquiries-38158692.html

and the industry has to deal with perpetually unlucky people like this

Reminds me of Albert Trotter

LirW · 29-05-2019 11:06am

Whenever a small business experiences trouble on their premises you can see the horror in the manager's face.
I recent went for food in a Dublin restaurant and found a piece of glass in my dessert. I got the waiter over and told him, they reacted well and the manager took over our table. Seriously that poor man was sweating and panicking, but nothing happened to me and it was all good, we got a few freebies and I moved on from that.

But that's it, I probably could have caused them some serious trouble and it simply baffles me how people are so ignorant to get businesses to the point of near-closure and then have the nerve to complain that it's so difficult to find X nowadays because nobody does it anymore. It really destroys small businesses that everyone hypocritically wants to support.

That said, sometimes settlements are dragged through the media and people get mad about it where the case is genuine because the initial injury sounds ridiculous. It's hard to tell apart sometimes.

whisky_galore · 29-05-2019 11:24am

InTheShadows wrote: »

Firstly you need the will of the elected government of the day to tackle the problem. They don't have that will so i can't see anything changing unfortunately.

For every person furious with the cost of insurance and compo culture there's another who will happily shut down their local business or playground for personal gain.
Elected Govt only reflects the kind of people who elect them.

biko · 29-05-2019 11:27am

Hairdresser Annette O’Connor, from Dublin of course; bangs knee, feels pain but bravely manage to finish her meal, gets an ice pack and a drink by staff.

A High Court damages award to a woman who banged her knee against the leg of a table while sitting down to dinner

O’Connor claimed she immediately felt pain and shock but had her meal before retiring to her room where staff had brought her an ice pack and a drink to settle her nerves.

Gimme A Pound · 29-05-2019 11:33am

riffmongous wrote: »

But what to actually do... The problem being the center and middle classes don't usually do anything except complain and sneer at any actual attempts to act

Set up a petition there, and I'll sign it and share it

The centre and the middle classes - what?

People need to stop buying into this anti middle-class bandwagon. It involves zero thought. And give me a centrist before an extreme right or extreme left leaning person any day. They're the one more likely to be open minded about matters like this.

ILoveYourVibes · 29-05-2019 11:35am

Kivaro wrote: »

Festivals, marts, creches, play centres, outdoor parks, and other small businesses around the country are closing down due to exaggerated insurance claims and corresponding insurance costs.

One of the biggest adventure playgrounds in the country had to remove two trampolines from its grounds after its insurance was hiked by €25,000 ........ just for the two trampolines alone. And that's after no claims on those trampolines in the last 15 years. 61 play centres have been threatened with closure this year alone. (From the Irish Independent piece this morning: They're going to close down the country).

Looking at the problem, we have judges awarding ludicrous, non-justifiable awards to claimants; many of whom are serial claimants.
We have an inept Government minister Michael D'Arcy, who for the last 2 years have repeatedly told us ad nauseum on various television programs that he is making great progress in targeting insurance costs.
We have an obvious insurance cartel in this country, who are exacerbating the problem so much that the EU had to send in a team to investigate their practices. Unfortunately, the Insurance cartel know that this formal antitrust investigation will take years to complete, and will gleefully money grab from us while they still allowed to do so.

And then we have the fraudsters, which without a shadow of a doubt, make up the vast majority of claimants in this country.
Case in point (From the examiner this morning): A study has found 100% of Irish whiplash patients attending a spine specialist pursued lawsuits — but the visits almost always stopped once the legal action was settled. Only 3% continued with follow-up treatment when litigation ended. That fact alone speaks volumes.

Since the government is like a deer in the headlights tackling this issue and just watching businesses closing down (and people losing jobs) around the country due to insurance costs, and since Judges will not change their "ways" of awarding payouts that are multiples greater than other parts of Europe, let's have a referendum to drive down these compensation pay-outs.
It is obvious that the current government and solicitor firms do not want this problem solved, so let the people decide .............. in a referendum.

We need to have a word to FG about where they send their kids.

wally1990 · 29-05-2019 11:39am

Tilikum17 wrote: »

My auld fella was in a small tip with a women (who has sued before). Anyway, she was suing for small tissue damage all over her body. I caught her running in a road race also attending a gym class.

When I sent the details onto his car insurance crowd, they didn’t want to know about it & said they’d be paying out.

Disgraceful.

Just had a weird thought ,

Maybe I'm completely wrong but initially I was thinking surely the insurance company should take this on and stand up to these people and this will do the country better

but their fear or excuse is they will lose and pay out even more (that's the risk, even when there is proof of no damage etc)

OR

They just pay out to put an end to it , avoid court , rack up insurance premiums and end up profiting more in the long run from the increased premiums v payouts to settle

So it's a win win for the insurance and aul Joe blogs get screwed.

Maybe that's happening anyway , but either way it's annoying they wouldnt take your evidence nor investigate themselves

sbsquarepants · 29-05-2019 11:43am

Hector Savage wrote: »

I'd love to know your claims, what do you feel you are owed money for ?

I don't feel I'm owed money - I had minor car accidents, no injuries and paid to fix the car myself as claiming would have cost me more in the long rung.

What exactly is the point of comprehensive insurance if you end up paying to fix the car yourself anyway?

I also had a flood in my apartment and had no end of trouble getting money from the insurance (block insurance through management company) I eventually after about a year, got half of it which covered maybe 80% of the cost but only because i'd done all the work myself.

LeinsterDub · 29-05-2019 11:43am

Edgware wrote: »

Once the claim is paid many medical visits stop. It's like Lourdes

Claims should be paid in the form of a card only accepted by licensed medical professionals

jam_mac_jam · 29-05-2019 11:48am

biko wrote: »

Hairdresser Annette O’Connor, from Dublin of course; bangs knee, feels pain but bravely manage to finish her meal, gets an ice pack and a drink by staff.

I didn't realise that this was a Dublin only problem. How interesting.

Doctors room ghost · 29-05-2019 11:50am

Tilikum17 wrote: »

My auld fella was in a small tip with a women (who has sued before). Anyway, she was suing for small tissue damage all over her body. I caught her running in a road race also attending a gym class.

When I sent the details onto his car insurance crowd, they didn’t want to know about it & said they’d be paying out.

Disgraceful.

I hope the money she gets fattens her until she bursts the greedy sow and may she never have a days luck

Skylinehead · 29-05-2019 11:52am

biko wrote: »

Hairdresser Annette O’Connor, from Dublin of course; bangs knee, feels pain but bravely manage to finish her meal, gets an ice pack and a drink by staff.

Explain?

Hedgelayer · 29-05-2019 11:59am

There's a really easy way to out the claim culture, change legislation to people being responsible for their own negligence and shortcomings.

Unless the proprietor was blatantly negligent, there should be no claim.

Or if they're working and have a legitimate accident, let them get a tax free allowance on their pay packet with free medical care covering their expenses and the quicker one gets back on their feet they will get a few years paying less tax to the exchequer....

Reduce it accordingly over the next few years and in time they'll be back on a regular taxation.

I find it hard to explain my idea on paper, maybe someone else could come up with something similar.

LeinsterDub · 29-05-2019 12:07pm

Hedgelayer wrote: »

There's a really easy way to out the claim culture, change legislation to people being responsible for their own negligence and shortcomings.

Unless the proprietor was blatantly negligent, there should be no claim.

Or if they're working and have a legitimate accident, let them get a tax free allowance on their pay packet with free medical care covering their expenses and the quicker one gets back on their feet they will get a few years paying less tax to the exchequer....

Reduce it accordingly over the next few years and in time they'll be back on a regular taxation.

I find it hard to explain my idea on paper, maybe someone else could come up with something similar.

So you're idea is that we all pay for a negligent proprietor?

jam_mac_jam · 29-05-2019 12:08pm

I think there has to be some sort of proof that the place was negligent. There seems to be an acceptance that if there is any injury then there must be payment. In some cases bad things happen and its nobody's fault.

LirW · 29-05-2019 12:14pm

Hedgelayer wrote: »

There's a really easy way to out the claim culture, change legislation to people being responsible for their own negligence and shortcomings.

Unless the proprietor was blatantly negligent, there should be no claim.

Or if they're working and have a legitimate accident, let them get a tax free allowance on their pay packet with free medical care covering their expenses and the quicker one gets back on their feet they will get a few years paying less tax to the exchequer....

Reduce it accordingly over the next few years and in time they'll be back on a regular taxation.

I find it hard to explain my idea on paper, maybe someone else could come up with something similar.

Or go and pay in medical vouchers. You need physio for Whiplash? Here have credits for it, the insurance pays it.

It gets more complex though when people are left with life-long or life-altering injuries that requires an adjustment of their surroundings, like for example major adjustment to their living space or their ability to still stay independent.
Or cases with genuine violation of health and safety codes or negligence causing bad injuries to an employee.

But I think a system where minor injuries are getting payouts directly to the medical provider is the way to go.

Hedgelayer · 29-05-2019 12:16pm

LeinsterDub wrote: »

So you're idea is that we all pay for a negligent proprietor?

That's a clever response , I didnt think about that.

Sure haven't we been paying for negligent sick pay in the public sector for years.

Paying for poor standards of service and lack of insight.

What's your recommendation?

LeinsterDub · 29-05-2019 12:23pm

Hedgelayer wrote: »

That's a clever response , I didnt think about that.

Sure haven't we been paying for negligent sick pay in the public sector for years.

Paying for poor standards of service and lack of insight.

What's your recommendation?

Medical expense paid on a card that's accepted by medical professionals , perjury to be harshly punished , those found to be lying to be hit with all costs . Fraud to be reported to CAB like organisation instead of insurance companies who are writing it off

RustyNut · 29-05-2019 12:30pm

VinLieger wrote: »

Hopefully swingapalooza causes enough chaos for them that they start to properly tackles the issue

Why would they. They will point the finger at Margret Cash and say how bad that sort of thing is while at the same time making dodgy claims and doing the legal work on these claims, which often amounts to more than the actual claim itself while getting a handsome wedge of public money for what seems like not very much.. The system is designed to keep the fat cats fat, that's why it won't change too quickly.

Hedgelayer · 29-05-2019 12:40pm

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Medical expense paid on a card that's accepted by medical professionals , perjury to be harshly punished , those found to be lying to be hit with all costs . Fraud to be reported to CAB like organisation instead of insurance companies who are writing it off

I don't see any problem with that.

There's plenty of people creaming it, it's being done by upper class, middle classes, and other diversity in the population.

I suppose the Judges are just going with the status quo.

There was two people in particular I know of who had similar injuries one decided to take off work and recover and went sick for a year and a half, the other just put up with the pain and stayed working, went to physio and took painkillers and did exercises etc...

Both came out with similar payouts, 24k or there abouts.

But in retrospective the person who kept on working came out the better, because they got their weekly wage and their compensation.

The guy who kept working had legitimate injuries which showed up on an mri the one who stayed at home just proclaimed they had pain, the scans showed nothing...

So in hindsight it pays better to be honest and keep going, as for the spoofer they had no luck since....

The medical proven legitimate injured party is fitter than ever again.

The irony of it.

Sleepy · 29-05-2019 12:44pm

Harry Palmr wrote: »

The appeal was dismissed at the High Court sitting in Ennis after Ms Mongans failed to show. Mr Smyth confirmed Aviva has paid its own legal costs of €20,000 in the case.

This is surely a major part of the problem: excessive legal costs.

If it costs €20k to successfully defend a €5k claim, it's no wonder Insurance companies are so quick to settle with claimants before things get to court.

Perhaps the solution is to be found in the removal of lawyers from the process. Have claimants make their claim before a judge with a member of staff from the insurance company representing the other side?

Or perhaps we could impose limits on the fees the legal profession are entitled to charge?

biko · 29-05-2019 12:52pm

Skylinehead wrote: »

Explain?

Just from reading the compo claim threads here in AH they are all/mainly from the pale.

riffmongous · 29-05-2019 1:51pm

Caspian Broad Squabble wrote: »

The centre and the middle classes - what?

People need to stop buying into this anti middle-class bandwagon. It involves zero thought. And give me a centrist before an extreme right or extreme left leaning person any day. They're the one more likely to be open minded about matters like this.

What bandwagon? In fact the opposite is really the case, any criticism of the middle/centre here on Boards is decidedly unpopular. Even if they are that much more open-minded,it'll be just whinging in the end while any call to actually try do something about it will be met with silence or derision. For sure the far left and right are too quick to go to action but staying quiet except to complain won't help the centre much in the long run.

Kivaro · 29-05-2019 2:37pm

Michael D’Arcy, Fine Gael TD and the Minister of State at the Department of Finance with special responsibility for the Insurance industry/cartel, last week defended the Minister for Justice’s decision to shelve plans for a dedicated Garda Insurance Fraud Unit. For these last few years he was promising us reform, including a Garda unit to go after the fraudsters. And I thought that this was Government policy i.e. other Fine Gael politicians promised the electorate that a Garda unit would be set up to help reduce our premiums. What a bunch of liars/lawyers.

There is very little that we can guarantee in life, but I can 100% guarantee that if there were consequences for fraudulent insurance claims e.g. Gardai investigating/charging people making fraudulent claims, then the amount of claims would substantially decrease.

There would be such a reduction in lawsuits that the insurance premiums would have to be reduced also. (That is not a 100% guarantee though).
Of course, this announcement last week to shelve the Garda unit was kept fairly quiet. I presume that they were worried that maybe one or more of their Fine Gael party colleagues would get "caught up" in the dragnet of insurance fraudsters.

Tell me how · 29-05-2019 6:08pm

Kivaro wrote: »

Festivals, marts, creches, play centres, outdoor parks, and other small businesses around the country are closing down due to exaggerated insurance claims and corresponding insurance costs.

One of the biggest adventure playgrounds in the country had to remove two trampolines from its grounds after its insurance was hiked by €25,000 ........ just for the two trampolines alone. And that's after no claims on those trampolines in the last 15 years. 61 play centres have been threatened with closure this year alone. (From the Irish Independent piece this morning: They're going to close down the country).

Looking at the problem, we have judges awarding ludicrous, non-justifiable awards to claimants; many of whom are serial claimants.
We have an inept Government minister Michael D'Arcy, who for the last 2 years have repeatedly told us ad nauseum on various television programs that he is making great progress in targeting insurance costs.
We have an obvious insurance cartel in this country, who are exacerbating the problem so much that the EU had to send in a team to investigate their practices. Unfortunately, the Insurance cartel know that this formal antitrust investigation will take years to complete, and will gleefully money grab from us while they still allowed to do so.

And then we have the fraudsters, which without a shadow of a doubt, make up the vast majority of claimants in this country.
Case in point (From the examiner this morning): A study has found 100% of Irish whiplash patients attending a spine specialist pursued lawsuits — but the visits almost always stopped once the legal action was settled. Only 3% continued with follow-up treatment when litigation ended. That fact alone speaks volumes.

Since the government is like a deer in the headlights tackling this issue and just watching businesses closing down (and people losing jobs) around the country due to insurance costs, and since Judges will not change their "ways" of awarding payouts that are multiples greater than other parts of Europe, let's have a referendum to drive down these compensation pay-outs.
It is obvious that the current government and solicitor firms do not want this problem solved, so let the people decide .............. in a referendum.

All of the above is fine and true except for this thing about a referendum? Do you know how they work? What exactly would the question be on the ballot?

Next time there is a local or general election, pay attention to the candidates and vote for someone whose principles are aligned with yours. Then, watch them as they serve their term and ring their office or email them if they are going off point. When they are up for re-election, decide if they are deserving of your vote again.

We keep in a situation where things don't change, largely because we have an electorate that doesn't change even though we have the opportunity to do so, or else, it is because the majority of people are simply happy with the way things are going.

Kivaro · 30-05-2019 8:55am

Tell me how wrote: »

All of the above is fine and true except for this thing about a referendum? Do you know how they work? What exactly would the question be on the ballot?

Next time there is a local or general election, pay attention to the candidates and vote for someone whose principles are aligned with yours. Then, watch them as they serve their term and ring their office or email them if they are going off point. When they are up for re-election, decide if they are deserving of your vote again.

We keep in a situation where things don't change, largely because we have an electorate that doesn't change even though we have the opportunity to do so, or else, it is because the majority of people are simply happy with the way things are going.

I know exactly how referendums/referenda works.
Our legislature is failing to legislate on the insurance debacle due to various issues, including incompetence and vested interests.
The citizenry need to take it out of their hands and be allowed to vote on the correct course of action. We need to do similarly with affordable housing and criminal sentencing e.g. stop repeat offenders getting multiple hundreds of 'second chances'.

Regarding your second point about contacting elected representatives; I've been doing that way back since the anchor baby issue. I remember well when Michael McDowell (the then justice minister) assured me after contacting him that there would never be a referendum on the issue in his lifetime, as did other ministers in government at the time.
9 months later the referendum passed when almost 80% of the Irish public decided that heavily pregnant African women showing up at our airports were really taking advantage of our hospitality and our obvious flawed laws.
This referendum happened due to the amount of people like me who were contacting members of government, TDs, local counselors etc.

Tell me how · 30-05-2019 9:48am

Kivaro wrote: »

I know exactly how referendums/referenda works.
Our legislature is failing to legislate on the insurance debacle due to various issues, including incompetence and vested interests.
The citizenry need to take it out of their hands and be allowed to vote on the correct course of action. We need to do similarly with affordable housing and criminal sentencing e.g. stop repeat offenders getting multiple hundreds of 'second chances'.

Regarding your second point about contacting elected representatives; I've been doing that way back since the anchor baby issue. I remember well when Michael McDowell (the then justice minister) assured me after contacting him that there would never be a referendum on the issue in his lifetime, as did other ministers in government at the time.
9 months later the referendum passed when almost 80% of the Irish public decided that heavily pregnant African women showing up at our airports were really taking advantage of our hospitality and our obvious flawed laws.
This referendum happened due to the amount of people like me who were contacting members of government, TDs, local counselors etc.

Honestly, this just backs up my original feeling that the idea for a referendum on insurance costs is nothing more than populist nonsense.

Your anecdote on Michael McDowell further proves my point. He was leader of his party, Tanaiste of the government and he failed to hold his seat in the GE of 2007 because people didn't like what he was doing (for whatever reason) and didn't return him. If the same logic is applied now, then we get the government the people want.

In relation to the 2004 referendum, recent polls indicate that greater than 70% would vote to reverse that decision. Are you in favour of holding that referendum again?

Kivaro · 30-05-2019 10:47am

Tell me how wrote: »

Honestly, this just backs up my original feeling that the idea for a referendum on insurance costs is nothing more than populist nonsense.

At least we now know where you stand on the topic.

Tell me how wrote: »

In relation to the 2004 referendum, recent polls indicate that greater than 70% would vote to reverse that decision. Are you in favour of holding that referendum again?

Some Labour party members recently proposed legislation to reverse what almost 80% of us voted back in 2004. Goes to show why they do so badly in the elections.

Nowhere in the real world would "greater than 70%" of the Irish population vote to allow the return of the debacle that was happening prior to the 2004 referendum.
Besides those on the liberal left, who would want the return of the situation where heavily pregnant Africans, Pakistanis, and others from all over the planet arriving in Ireland and hit the welfare lottery as soon as they touch Irish soil ....... because they are pregnant and are awarded Irish citizenship as soon as the baby is born.

Especially with the insane family reunification program currently being allowed now. One successful asylum seeker recently tried to have 70 "family members" brought to Ireland as part of the reunification program. That's insane. How are we supposed to house and provide welfare services to all of these people that will arrive here if the majority want the reversal of the referendum?
The vast majority of Irish people certainly do not want this.

Tell me how · 30-05-2019 10:52am

Kivaro wrote: »

At least we now know where you stand on the topic.

Some Labour party members recently proposed legislation to reverse what almost 80% of us voted back in 2004. Goes to show why they do so badly in the elections.

Nowhere in the real world would "greater than 70%" of the Irish population vote to allow the return of the debacle that was happening prior to the 2004 referendum.
Besides those on the liberal left, who would want the return of the situation where heavily pregnant Africans, Pakistanis, and others from all over the planet arriving in Ireland and hit the welfare lottery as soon as they touch Irish soil ....... because they are pregnant and are awarded Irish citizenship as soon as the baby is born.

Especially with the insane family reunification program currently being allowed now. One successful asylum seeker recently tried to have 70 "family members" brought to Ireland as part of the reunification program. That's insane. How are we supposed to house and provide welfare services to all of these people that will arrive here if the majority want the reversal of the referendum?
The vast majority of Irish people certainly do not want this.

Ditto.

Let me know if you ever figure out a workable question for the ballot paper for this referendum you want to hold.

Liam28 · 31-05-2019 11:49am

One of the problems with the legal system is that there is no repercussions for fraudulent claims. Maybe legal costs, but some solicitors operate a no win, no fee deal. The example below from the Indo is a clear case of a couple trying it on. After the case is dismissed, there should be civil or criminal charges brought against them, costs awarded against them, and the defendant compensated.
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/watch-couples-personal-injury-claims-dismissed-after-cctv-of-minor-tip-shown-in-court-38164003.html

In the US which had a thriving compo culture, one of the things which reduced fraudulent claims was counter claims. When a claim is lodged, the defendant immediately issues a counter claim against the plaintiff for defamation or libel, loss of earnings, costs, etc. Now it is win or lose, not win or break even.

Why we can't have nice things anymore

Comments