Bike Gets Stolen .. A New Low

Johngoose

McCrack wrote: »

I don't believe the OP's story

A solicitor is not going to take on a personal injuries claim against a defendant thats not insured never mind the rest of the OPs story.

I say that as one of these low life practising solicitors myself!

There was a case in Ireland recently where a criminal injured his testicles in a break in to a shop and tried to sue later. I think people are being very dismissive of the poster here. I don’t think the poster has anything to worry about though.

McCrack

Johngoose wrote: »

There was a case in Ireland recently where a criminal injured his testicles in a break in to a shop and tried to sue later. I think people are being very dismissive of the poster here. I don’t think the poster has anything to worry about though.

Whatever about that the difference there is the shop has insurance. The OP doesn't.

Thats mainly why I maintain this story is made up.

Odyssey 2005

Quote: gordongekko
I'd be trying to figure out how he got your details. I'd doubt the gardai would just hand them over.

A chap caused an accident a number of years ago whereby he hit another car and in turn my car was substantially damaged. There was nobody in my car ant there were no serious injuries in the other too either,thankfully. Garda called and attended the scene and a person in one car taken away by ambulance for check up.

Anyway,whilst waiting for the tow truck the lad who caused the accident,myself and the garda were chatting and having the crack for about half an hour,all that was missing was a few pints. No animosity whatsoever about the accident(all details had already been swapped).
My point is that when I got home I realised that I had all details except the chaps telephone number. I called the garda (He was still working) and I knew he had the number,He cited data protection and point blank refused to pass on the # even though we had all been talking an hour before hand like 3 mates in the pub.

Yarisbob

Lads - Thanks all again for your posts and advice.
I went to a solicitor yesterday and told him my side and showed him the letter. He couldn't believe that given the circumstances it went this far.
He read over the letter about 4 times and then gathered his thoughts..  He said he found it hard to imagine that another solicitor would even entertain this in any shape form or fashion. He said he would have told him politely to sling his hook as its a total nonsense... He said that he got the impression that lies are being told - Not even untruths but out and out lies.....!
The more we got into the incident the more the solicitor couldn't believe what was being asked for. He said this is a total dead duck and an insult to intelligence.
I asked about court and he asked me had I ever heard of Dante's Inferno ? I hadn't .. He said that if this goes to court the other side will be entering Dante's Inferno... They will get totally roasted - In fact he will cover my costs and do the job out of his own pocket that's how confident he is.
He put it as highly unlikely this will go to court - Its just not a runner and he was surprised that the other solicitor took it on at all. He must have had a part in "Fantasy Island"....!!
He will draft a response letter today and run it by me this afternoon - I will put the fear in them and get this dropped quick smart was his final word on this.
I'll let yous know what comes out of this - Hopefully this is the end of it but you never know with "townies"

MRon8

a very good idea

manatoo

Not a solicitor so open to correction but I wouldn't engage the services of a solicitor whatsoever for this and incur the costs that you would entail and which you wouldn't have a hope of recovering from the other party in this case.

Precedent cases dictate that duty of care does actually exist even in terms of trespass such as this so to respond to the solicitor, it's not an argument worth pursuing that the condition of the bicycle was of no concern to the thief .

I would however respond to the solicitor querying/relaying the below points

1) What were the findings of their assessment of the test for "negligence" in terms of the condition of the bicycle in this case. It's obvious that the bicycle was in the condition it was supposed to be in for what it is, a fixie. For the solicitor to have assessed that a prima facie case existed in this instance they would have to have had a reasonably concluded belief that the bicycle's condition represented a material risk to the public. It appears that no/highly incompetent testing took place by the solicitor on this point before you received notification of a case being taken against you.

2) Advise the solicitor that you will be referring the action to the Law Society of Ireland on the basis of their response to query 1 to establish the quality/nature of their work in taking the case against you. The basis will be frivolous litigation which is in breach of Code of Practice contained within a solicitor's professional membership of the Law Society of Ireland.

Above should ensure the matter is resolved swiftly.

BarryD2

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

I would also report the solicitor that took the case to the law society and CC him on the complaint. It probably wont make any difference but just to let them know what shoddy low life members they have under their banner would do no harm.

What's the difficulty in naming this solicitor here? If they have factually sent this letter out, it should be in the public domain, so that the public can exercise their choices.

magicbastarder

sending a letter specifically addressed to a private citizen does not mean it's in the public domain.

Wheety

godtabh wrote: »

I think they were making to point not to jump to generalizations if you don't know the facts.

Hasn't there been cases were burglars have sued and won for damages for accidents that happened when a crime was been committed

One case I found

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/offbeat/shopkeeper-sued-by-burglar-who-injured-himself-during-break-in-1.3348803

That hasn't been to court yet.

Grab All Association

McCrack wrote: »

I don't believe the OP's story

A solicitor is not going to take on a personal injuries claim against a defendant thats not insured never mind the rest of the OPs story.

I say that as one of these low life practising solicitors myself!

Galadriel wrote: »

The OP is on boards 8 years, 8 years is a long time to hang about before some random trolling.

Not one incident of trolling in his posting history either. It’s mostly cycling related posts. I therefore believe the OP to be telling the truth here.

smacl

Yarisbob wrote: »

he asked me had I ever heard of Dante's Inferno ? I hadn't ..

Off topic, but John Cleese did a rather entertaining narration some years back, if you're that way inclined.

Lusk_Doyle

Tombo2001 wrote: »

A needless snarky comment. I made a comment in good faith, without looking to offend anyone in this discussion - and I really dont appreciate the put down in response.

You should sue him. It'd deffo work 100% of the time 73% of the time.

CramCycle

I have had a letter from my former landlords(deceased) partner, looking for damages to the apartment, with an itemised list and the costs associated (7,000euro). The funny thing but with the exception of the oven needing a clean, all of the other items were known to her partner, most occurred before we moved in and we were happy to let lie. One item was non removal of a large mirror from the hallway, looking for 300euro to dispose of. The mirror belonged to the landlord and I said I was fine for him to leave it there if he wanted. Another two were cracked windows, which I had taken pictures of and mailed to the landlord and estate agent before we moved in and a range of other small items.

One solicitor letter later from me (free of charge from a solicitor who thought the pricing was hilarious), I was handed my deposit back with apologies.

Another solicitor rang me to ask would I be a witness for a RTA I was involved in. I was hit from behind and thrown into another car. The driver admitted fault but despite the costs of repairs to me and the bike, the driver didn't respond to me and eventually life moved on. Two years later this solicitor informs me that the driver is blaming the accident on me and looking for a few thousand. On the steps of the court, the driver refused to turn up, her solicitor accused me of being a scam artist and that I have been involved in similar scams before (untrue). The engineers talked, and the drivers engineer withdrew his report when provided with other data.

Long story short, there are some solicitors who will take on any case, without thought, thinking that if a few people back down before the court date, they have done OK. It is disgraceful and to this day I am pissed as hell at the lies that came out of his mouth.

Neither of those two will face punishment for wasting of the courts time or my time bar the fees for solicitors. just because a story sounds untrue, it really doesn't mean it is.

Lusk_Doyle

^new name for cramcycle is scamcycle!

McCrack

CramCycle wrote: »

I have had a letter from my former landlords(deceased) partner, looking for damages to the apartment, with an itemised list and the costs associated (7,000euro). The funny thing but with the exception of the oven needing a clean, all of the other items were known to her partner, most occurred before we moved in and we were happy to let lie. One item was non removal of a large mirror from the hallway, looking for 300euro to dispose of. The mirror belonged to the landlord and I said I was fine for him to leave it there if he wanted. Another two were cracked windows, which I had taken pictures of and mailed to the landlord and estate agent before we moved in and a range of other small items.

One solicitor letter later from me (free of charge from a solicitor who thought the pricing was hilarious), I was handed my deposit back with apologies.

Another solicitor rang me to ask would I be a witness for a RTA I was involved in. I was hit from behind and thrown into another car. The driver admitted fault but despite the costs of repairs to me and the bike, the driver didn't respond to me and eventually life moved on. Two years later this solicitor informs me that the driver is blaming the accident on me and looking for a few thousand. On the steps of the court, the driver refused to turn up, her solicitor accused me of being a scam artist and that I have been involved in similar scams before (untrue). The engineers talked, and the drivers engineer withdrew his report when provided with other data.

Long story short, there are some solicitors who will take on any case, without thought, thinking that if a few people back down before the court date, they have done OK. It is disgraceful and to this day I am pissed as hell at the lies that came out of his mouth.

Neither of those two will face punishment for wasting of the courts time or my time bar the fees for solicitors. just because a story sounds untrue, it really doesn't mean it is.

If it quacks like a duck it usually is

CramCycle

McCrack wrote: »

If it quacks like a duck it usually is

I'll sue you :pac:

lotmc

My 85 y/o mum was accused of reversing into a car in heavy traffic, and two occupants of said car jumped out and gave her a lot of abuse. She phoned me at the time of the incident, and I hopped on the bike and was there in 10 minutes. Not surprisingly, the car and two occupants had driven off, but my mum was still pretty shaken by what had happened.
Based upon a hunch as to their next move, we went straight to the Garda Station and made a report, based upon the little bit of detail that we had (no names or car details of the other parties). Garda inspected my mum's car to confirm no damage.
Roll on a few months later, and two solicitors letters from a well known solicitors firm, with whiplash / pain / trauma / etc etc being alleged.
Had to report to the insurance company; for an 85 y/o this was particularly problematic as if she loses her insurance, she loses her independence etc etc. But, fortunately the Garda we met recalled the case, and took an active interest in it.
Lets just say that the complainants are probably still regretting the day this Garda became aware of them. It would seem that their "affairs may not have been in order", for which they "would be facing significant consequences".
Never heard any more from them / their solicitor, and two years later my mum is still driving.

07Lapierre

Still driving at 87! Good for her!

rollingscone

lotmc wrote: »

But, fortunately the Garda we met recalled the case, and took an active interest in it. .

This is all too rare in our overstretched police force. And can make all the difference.