Fine Gael TD sues Dublin Hotel after falling off swing

Jupiter Mulligan

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

What's the story with compensation payouts - are they private or public information? Councillors and TD's should be obligated to make available all of their financial affairs so the public can see if they have conflict-of-interest or if any large payments suddenly fill up the bank account.

If awarded in open court they're public knowledge, but if settled privately then they're confidential.

Jupiter Mulligan

AngryHippie wrote: »

Have we all been distracted for long enough from Exxon and CNOOC getting a rubber-stamped scrutiny free exploration licence by now ?

Nothing smells worse than a convenient storm-in-a-teacup media frenzy over a gombeen on a swing while rook takes queen in the background....:mad:

Nope. I suggest that you wait until the Trump visit is over and Brexit has occurred and then come back to us.

Wheeliebin30

ChikiChiki wrote: »

Wasn't he photographed up on a ladder after the accident. Farrell made a statement in the Dail about compensation culture just weeks before his claim.

It only seems to be coming into public knowledge now. He was posting links to the defamation act on twitter to people during the Maria Bailey scandal.

Hypocrite.

Not defending him but I don’t think there is any claim that if you have whiplash you can’t climb a ladder?

You’re not permanently disabled.

Correct me if I’m wrong.

gmisk

Another non td chancer.
He lost, but they didn't go after him for costs so what's the deterrent?
Passenger loses personal injury claim over Bus Éireann vehicle involved in 4mph scrape with car https://jrnl.ie/4668164

Plumbthedepths

Wheeliebin30 wrote:

Not defending him but I don’t think there is any claim that if you have whiplash you can’t climb a ladder?

I think the issue was how far he was able to twist his head to smile for the camera, whilst up the ladder .

Wheeliebin30

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

I think the issue was how far he was able to twist his head to smile for the camera, whilst up the ladder .

Fair enough.

Sir Oxman

gmisk wrote: »

Another non td chancer.
He lost, but they didn't go after him for costs so what's the deterrent?
Passenger loses personal injury claim over Bus Éireann vehicle involved in 4mph scrape with car https://jrnl.ie/4668164

Aul chancer that one!
I think BE were happy enough the old codger withdrew ANOTHER claim against them so let him off with the costs (they shouldn't have but obv. worth it to them)



Mad stuff.

Suckit

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

I think the issue was how far he was able to twist his head to smile for the camera, whilst up the ladder .

He had said that he suffered spasms for up to 18 months after, and that he had difficulty lifting things. He suffered pain and discomfort for over a year after it, with the first six months being the worst.

Not sure about anyone here, but if I suffered spasms and was in pain and discomfort, I wouldn't be hanging up posters on an electricity pole whilst standing on a ladder.

He was able to do it when his pain and discomfort was at its worst.

Then claimed that the photograph that showed him up the ladder, was staged.

And his car..

"Judge Coghlan also noted in court that a separate claim by Farrell for material damage to his car had been relinquished since the accident. Photographs taken by the driver at the scene (none were produced by Farrell) were shown to the court and some difficulty was had in locating the precise damage to Farrell's motor car."

Mervyn Skidmore

The €2,500 award was really just a handout to his solicitors, as an order for costs was probably granted too (probably ~€10, 000), all courtesy of your insurance premium. The fact that he himself couldn't point out the damage on his car says all we need to know about the "accident".

Millionaire only not

Any td that has time for claims , should pack in the job or be told where to go when election time comes

Suckit

Mervyn Skidmore wrote: »

The €2,500 award was really just a handout to his solicitors, as an order for costs was probably granted too (probably ~€10, 000), all courtesy of your insurance premium. The fact that he himself couldn't point out the damage on his car says all we need to know about the "accident".

It's worse than that. His engineer took photos of his car with 'other damage' that had happened after the bump, and more.
https://www.thesun.ie/news/2854734/photographs-presented-in-alan-farrells-injuries-compo-case/
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057890004


But I couldn't find who his solicitor was.

Macdarack

eagle eye wrote: »

The cas has been dropped, there is no insurance fraud.


The public are not up in arms. The media are pushing it because the stupid on social media have bitten on this.
Normal people on the street who don't spend their whole day with their heads stuck in a phone have moved on from this long ago.

Still very topical at the moment where I am.

Macdarack

blinding wrote: »

Just because a case was dropped does not mean Insurance Fraud was not attempted ?

Trial by social media still very active thankfully.

BattleCorp

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Since you posed a question about ethics, maybe answer it yourself. Based solely on the subject of this thread ie Maria Bailey. Is Bailey's behaviour ethical and if not does she deserve to be sanctioned for it?

I think Bailey's behaviour is unethical and I'd have no problem with her being sanctioned for it. I've consistently said it in this thread that I don't think she should have put in a claim.

banie01

Sir Oxman wrote: »

Aul chancer that one!
I think BE were happy enough the old codger withdrew ANOTHER claim against them so let him off with the costs (they shouldn't have but obv. worth it to them)



Mad stuff.

Do BE self insure their 3rd party costs?
It may be in their fiduciary interest to ensure that minimum cost is associated with claims and their defence if so.

Seeking a costs order against a plaintiff who likely has not the means to cover it would only add unnecessary cost to the action for BE.

BattleCorp

banie01 wrote: »

Do BE self insure their 3rd party costs?
It may be in their fiduciary interest to ensure that minimum cost is associated with claims and their defence if so.

Seeking a costs order against a plaintiff who likely has not the means to cover it would only add unnecessary cost to the action for BE.

That's the reason a lot of cases are settled. It often costs more to go to court and win than if you just pay off the plaintiff before hand.

banie01

BattleCorp wrote: »

That's the reason a lot of cases are settled. It often costs more to go to court and win than if you just pay off the plaintiff before hand.

100% agreed.
Quite often in my own line of work it's easier to settle than defend.
The fees associated with drafting pleadings and instructing counsel make small cases practically a gimme.
That's for a company that has its own in house counsel team.
Where we defend however, we instruct a retained firm.
In addition to having in house counsel attend.
Huge cost, racks up quickly.


It's a cost and ethical quagmire IMO.
Money or its lack, should never dictate or restrict a plaintiffs access to justice.
But.
It's also important that repercussions follow the plaintiff for any frivolous or exaggerated claims.
Finding the balance that allows that will go a long way towards freeing up the court lists.

Auguste Comte

Macdarack wrote: »

blinding wrote: »

Just because a case was dropped does not mean Insurance Fraud was not attempted ?

Trial by social media still very active thankfully.

Do you think we should just forget about all the unethical insurance claim sponging politicians that are contributing to one of the biggest problems that individuals and small businesses have to deal with or just the Fine Gael spongers?

BattleCorp

banie01 wrote: »

100% agreed.
Quite often in my own line of work it's easier to settle than defend.
The fees associated with drafting pleadings and instructing counsel make small cases practically a gimme.

It's a cost and ethical quagmire IMO.
Money or its lack, should never dictate or restrict a plaintiffs access to justice.
But.
It's also important that repercussions follow the plaintiff for any frivolous or exaggerated claims.
Finding the balance that allows that will go a long way towards freeing up the court lists.

The Injuries Board don't help when it comes to the small cases either. I haven't seen an Injuries Board award for less than €20k in about 4 years. So if someone cuts their finger and get one stitch, are out for a week and then return to work, yep, €20k. Say you have a pain in your back and are out of work for two weeks, yep €20k. It's a fcuking joke.

banie01

BattleCorp wrote: »

The Injuries Board don't help when it comes to the small cases either. I haven't seen an Injuries Board award for less than €20k in about 4 years. So if someone cuts their finger and get one stitch, are out for a week and then return to work, yep, €20k. Say you have a pain in your back and are out of work for two weeks, yep €20k. It's a fcuking joke.

PIAB really isn't fit for purpose.
Allowing arbitration/mediation for certain awards has only driven up insurance and awards.
There is no real incentive to settle via PIAB unless it's a tiny injury.

It is practically a given that of the best interest of a client is compensation,that "engagement" with PIAB is only lip service to ensure the court action for a higher award can proceed unencumbered.

PIAB needs to be removed or absorbed fully into the courts process to eliminate the current 2 track system IMO.

McMurphy

We all know someone who got compo for an injury' - ex-FG candidate defends Bailey

"She was wrong. Let's step up fixing the system. Is there one person who does not know a family member or friend who got compo for a slip, a fall or a whiplash?" the clinical psychotherapist asked on social media.

Gas.

The indo are digging like demented moles on this case, they've also an article on Madigans and whether Josepha played any part of this kerfuffle.

banie01

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

We all know someone who got compo for an injury' - ex-FG candidate defends Bailey



Gas.

The indo are digging like demented moles on this case, they've also an article on Madigans and whether Josepha played Amy part of this kerfuffle.

I think that the Indo have info on exactly what Ms Madigan contributed to this and it does not reflect well on the "culture" of FG when a matter such as this is facilitated by another party member.

Couple it with Farrell and it paints FG as either attracting a cohort of candidates that are ethically unaware?
Or as a party of chancers.

BattleCorp

Out of curiosity Banie01, what's the lowest PIAB award you have seen in the last four years?

It's my experience that they are far too generous.

Ash.J.Williams

Was it a better move by Farrell to snub prime time then to publicly defend himself like Bailey?

Funny watching the twitter abuse unleash upon him yesterday after the segment

banie01

BattleCorp wrote: »

Out of curiosity Banie01, what's the lowest PIAB award you have seen in the last four years?

It's my experience that they are far too generous.

I very rarely deal with PIAB tbh, but from the few cases I have seen there and anecdotally.
The average award seen via there for PL/EL claims is in and around the 22k mark.
That is in the main for the very lowest rung of injury however.

Many I know only engage in the PIAB process only to ensure the case can progress to court and higher level reward.
Usually this is a tactic to give the client a baseline and an idea of the minimum settlement likely before it ever sees the judge.

BattleCorp

banie01 wrote: »

Usually this is a tactic to give the client a baseline and an idea of the minimum settlement likely before it ever sees the judge.

The typical tactic is to omit the loss of earnings and medical expenses from the PIAB form, and then refuse the PIAB offer. Then when it goes to court, the loss of earnings and medical expenses are added back in and hey presto, a much higher award.

McMurphy

banie01 wrote: »

I think that the Indo have info on exactly what Ms Madigan contributed to this and it does not reflect well on the "culture" of FG when a matter such as this is facilitated by another party member.

Couple it with Farrell and it paints FG as either attracting a cohort of candidates that are ethically unaware?
Or as a party of chancers.

Id have to agree with you there baine, soon as I seen Madigans name as the lawyer's in the initial article I smelled a rat.

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Follow the money........

I think the indo know exactly what took place, and are giving FG enough rope to hang themselves.

Josepha will be sweating like a pig in an abattoir.

smurgen

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

We all know someone who got compo for an injury' - ex-FG candidate defends Bailey



Gas.

The indo are digging like demented moles on this case, they've also an article on Madigans and whether Josepha played any part of this kerfuffle.

We all know someone who got or gets absolutely ripped off for insurance also. FG not looking good out of all this.

Macdarack

Auguste Comte wrote: »

Do you think we should just forget about all the unethical insurance claim sponging politicians that are contributing to one of the biggest problems that individuals and small businesses have to deal with or just the Fine Gael spongers?

No way, she and they should be hounded and made examples of. Hopefully it marks a turning point in fraudulent claims helped by this /these high profile cases.

iamwhoiam

Macdarack wrote: »

No way, she and they should be hounded and made examples of. Hopefully it marks a turning point in fraudulent claims helped by this /these high profile cases.

I think this is why people are so angry about this case .Its the straw that broke the camels back and people are sick and angry over claims and huge payouts for a minor injury .,