Fine Gael TD sues Dublin Hotel after falling off swing

inforfun

Finally footage of that night in the hotel

Patrick2010

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/burglar-sues-shop-owner-after-he-injured-his-testicles-while-robbing-the-premises-36468641.html

A shop owner is being sued by a burglar after he injured himself while robbing a premises in Co Cavan.

A caller named Kevin told Joe Duffy on RTE's Liveline that three men broke into his shop on November 20, 2015.

Kevin claims that one of the burglars injured his testicles while making a getaway from the shop.

"Three men broke into the store at the back of the shop. While they were making their getaway there happened to be someone there and they rang the police and they (burglars) were caught red-handed.

"They had taken stuff from the store and they were ready to load it into the car and make a getaway. The guards came and they were chased back into the store and in the process one of them injured themselves. They were arrested and he was taken to hospital. He injured himself on a shelf or something. He had a cut to his scrotum. In the medical report it said he had to get stitches."

Kevin told Liveline that the three men were given a six month sentence suspended for two years.

However, one of them committed another offence and was jailed.

A few years ago I got a similar letter from a solicitor on behalf of his client who injured himself apparently taking a leak at the rear of the premises I had been renting. Claimed he injured his foot when the fuel tank fell on his foot. Coincidentally there was a spate of fuel tank robberies in the estate at the time.
I was in the happy position of having nothing to do with the premises other than having a company sign up, had moved out months earlier but the landlord requested I left the sign up. I rang up the solicitor and explained this , taking the piss at the same time, saying how unfortunate his client was etc, wondered if he saw anyone interfering with the tank etc. You could tell he knew his client was as guilty as sin, wouldn't be surprised if it was the same solicitor as above.

Kermit.de.frog

These insurance scams have consequences...


https://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/irish-news/theyre-going-to-close-down-the-country-adventure-centre-forced-to-remove-trampolines-due-to-25k-premium-increase-38156411.html

Cienciano

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

These insurance scams have consequences...


https://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/irish-news/theyre-going-to-close-down-the-country-adventure-centre-forced-to-remove-trampolines-due-to-25k-premium-increase-38156411.html

Rathbeggan Lakes is closing too because of insurance costs.

https://www.meathchronicle.ie/news/roundup/articles/2019/05/07/4173638-video-this-is-our-last-season-we-are-going-to-close-the-place-at-the-end-of-august/

Ri_Nollaig

Patrick2010 wrote: »

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/burglar-sues-shop-owner-after-he-injured-his-testicles-while-robbing-the-premises-36468641.html
...

Are they just trying to see how far they can push this before it eventually breaks?
How can the solicitor in question even entertain this?

KSU

Ri_Nollaig wrote: »

Are they just trying to see how far they can push this before it eventually breaks?
How can the solicitor in question even entertain this?

The can and do because of cases like this

https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/dublin-mum-given-550000-payout-13449280

newport2

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Legal firms I would say have the biggest responsibility in bringing fraudulent claims. They should advise their client if there is a case or not. They should carry out due diligence and investigate properly. A 5 minute trawl of Bailey's social media posts would show she was running 10k's and attending music festivals soon after her "accident". They should not accept affidavits on face value without a background check. They should make it clear if a client lies, they will charge him/her full costs before dropping them. Bailey never had a case, no matter if she lied about the effects of the fall or not. It was always her own negligence. So the solicitors gave her bad advice.

Solicitor firms need to act as screens to weed out false claims or not. Too many solicitor firms chance their arm and with the compo culture as it is, they feel they can win, even if the case is weak.

We all know of compensation claims paid out for the least reason.

I would agree with what you say, but I still think a lot of it is down to individual responsibility.

Have I fallen when drinking on a night out? Yes, many times.
Did I get given legal advice to sue the premises? No, because it never even entered my head to seek legal advice.

So I wouldn't phrase it like she did, that she was given legal advice to sue. She went and sought legal advice to see if she could sue. That was her decision.

I think more people have fallen off barstools drinking than swings. Barstool supervisors could be a career in the making.

bucketybuck

Cienciano wrote: »

Rathbeggan Lakes is closing too because of insurance costs.

https://www.meathchronicle.ie/news/roundup/articles/2019/05/07/4173638-video-this-is-our-last-season-we-are-going-to-close-the-place-at-the-end-of-august/

And Bikepark Ireland have had to shut down for the foreseeable future becasue they can't get insurance.

https://www.bikeparkireland.ie

These aren't cowboys that can't get coverage, its good reputable companies doing everything right but still getting hung out to dry in the compo culture. Its why I have no sympathy at all for this creature, I hope the media keeps its foot on her neck and the neck of every false claim scam artist out there.

markodaly

Muahahaha wrote: »

Very true, Paddy McKillen as Irish developers go is an absolute touch of class. He is one of the few that has no time for politicians, he never engaged in the bribery of the Galway tent like the rest of them. McKillen spotted the Irish property crash years before anyone else did (and said as much, calling Irish property overvalued) and he had long since stopped buying property here and by the early 2000's he had shipped off to London and France where he made even bigger fortunes.

It was Paddy McKillen who had to sue NAMA as they were trying to drag him into their clutches even though he (unlike the rest of Irish developers) was able to pay and service his loans. McKillen wasnt looking for a taxpayer funded bailout like the rest of them but that didn't stop NAMA trying to take his business down. He fought back and won his case in the Supreme Court with an unanimous 7-0 decision in his favour against NAMA.

Next NAMA, under the supervision of Michael Noonan, then hound him even more- they go and sell his loans to his arch enemies the billionaire Barclay brothers. The Barclay Brothers fund the Tory party to the tune of millions, they own the Tory mouthpieces the Daily Telegraph and the Spectator and they are heavy financial backers of Brexit. Noonan and NAMA got into bed with them even though they knew well that the Barclay Brothers only goal was to attempt a hostile take over of Paddy McKillens business. The Barclay brothers couldnt stand the fact that an Irishman called Paddy owned the most prestigious hotels in London (The Connaught, Claridges and the Savoy) and they wanted to take him out. NAMA facilitated their war on Paddy McKillen, they even aided and abetted them by leaking McKillens sensitive financial information to them.
When Noonan was asked about it he came out with his usual sneering "we cant comment on individual cases".

Cue four years of legal battles in London and after over £50m spent in legal fees by McKillen he won out and stopped the hostile takeover of everything he had spent his life working for. That happened on Michael Noonans watch and McKillen blames Noonan and the Dept.of Finance directly. NAMA under Fine Gael literally tried to send Paddy McKillen to the wall.

The McKillens have had enough of Fine Gael politicians over the last decade and I'd imagine that when they saw Maria Bailey suing their business on frivolous grounds they just said enough is enough and fought back. Fair fcuking play to them, this has been a long time coming.

It's a lovely story and all but full of inaccuracies. For example, the take over attempt by the Barclay Brothers started in Jan 2011 when FF was still in government.

Suckit

Aren't these more to do with the insurance cartels than they are with bogey insurance claims, - as much as the Insurance companies would like to have us believe otherwise.

KSU

Suckit wrote: »

Aren't these more to do with the insurance cartels than they are with bogey insurance claims, - as much as the Insurance companies would like to have us believe otherwise.

Fault on both sides

Insurance companies have a host of minor contributing factors.

Consumer side has fraud claims and uninsured payouts drive premiums just as much.

golfball37

Suckit wrote: »

Aren't these more to do with the insurance cartels than they are with bogey insurance claims, - as much as the Insurance companies would like to have us believe otherwise.

Spot on- There was data released a while back that showed in no way could claims account for the rise in Motor Insurance we have seen over the past 5 years. I am claim free 20+ years never had a PP. My insurance on same car spec was 310 euro not that long ago. My requote this year was 865e, I shopped around and got it for 750e. Its outrageous but dodgy claims are not the primary reason at all.

We should be allowed access EU insurance markets not the corrupt cartels that are allowed flourish in Ireland.

inforfun

golfball37 wrote: »

We should be allowed access EU insurance markets not the corrupt cartels that are allowed flourish in Ireland.

Not sure if i would get cheaper insurance in The Netherlands but i am reaheahea.....heally happy i dont have to pay the motortax i would pay there for my car, here. (200 here, 1400 there)

So be careful what you wish for.

Outlaw Pete

Ri_Nollaig wrote: »

How can the solicitor in question even entertain this?

In fairness I'd say injuring testicles is quite common for those who commit burglaries... especially those who get caught.

James Brown

Ri_Nollaig wrote: »

Are they just trying to see how far they can push this before it eventually breaks?
How can the solicitor in question even entertain this?

There is still the idea in some quarters that doctors, barristers and solicitors are some how automatically ethical. They are no more or less naturally so than a pan handler or a bricklayer. In short, the few bob is where it's at.

Mango Joe

…...Hopefully ALL of the floaters in this bowl can be taken out with the same flush.....

McMurphy

markodaly wrote: »

It's a lovely story and all but full of inaccuracies.

Bet you most of the country were thinking the same thing yesterday listening to Maria's interview.

ToBeFrank123

Generally insurance companies pay out if the amount is relatively low, eg 5k-10k without bothering to properly investigate and provided they think the claim seems reasonably legit.
These low profile cases never make it to court or into the media.

Its the high profile major amount ones they fight in court, and which make it to the media, such as Baileys.

But the former type of cases, ie ones that are not fought are just as damaging to businesses. At least they have a chance of winning the high amount ones, they have no chance of fighting the smaller amount claims. And the insurance companies will raise premiums across the particular industry if there are a number of such small claims.

It would be great if the insurance companies fought every claim, and by not fighting the lesser ones, they give a thumbs up to fraudsters to give it a shot.

md23040

dublin99 wrote: »

the legal advice given by the witness's family law firm (where the witness herself may have practised prior to her elevation to such high standing) was to "shake the tree" and try to get some cash instead of accepting the good will gesture of €600 offered by the hotel

The legal profession has a lot to answer for but has chosen the wrong person in Paddy Mc Killen to pick a fight with. He’s a very unassuming Northern guy that doesn’t suffer fools.

The hotel had no choice to pursue the case since their insurance excess would be at least €15,000, and this was a negligence case issued through the circuit court.

I hope the group allows for this video (smoking gun) to be made public whenever the case is formally withdrawn. It will allow for maximum damage and highlight the ridiculousness of such claims that companies have to spend 1000s defending. It will be a missile straight through one of Fine Gaels central policies.

The insurance market is going to get much worse IMO as there are only three companies out of Lloyd’s (London) quoting for commercial liability insurance, and a hard Brexit will create even more costs and difficulties.

she would remind you of a really incompetent contestant on the apprentice, trying to justify the indefensible on her post show BBC interview.. BUT BUT BUT, Humanity, mental health, social media, beers, wine, my friends Gucci handbag!

I remember some lad on the right hook a few years back talking with some insurance rep and he said that all the claims in the previous year came to no more than 700million and the "Expert insurance rep " was stuttering and trying to make excuses to the tune of the other 2.3 Billion!! they charged .. to be fair the lad tied your man in knots. The industry refused to let him access some list and then shortly after the EU kicked in the doors and took the list.

These are just scumbags with a licence to print money but they're accountable to nobody. It will take another singing down the phone type of David drum scene before anything is done on Leos watch.

Stop moaning ffs

Link broken sorry ignore.

iamwhoiam

This is only the tip of a huge iceberg . These false claims are happening daily and pass unnoticed . Settled outside the doors of court becuase the insurance companies know they haven't a hope in court . Due to the legal system , barristers and judges encouraging this shïte . And we are paying the price of the high payouts

BENDYBINN

The fact that Bailey admitted to having drink taken before she went to hotel suggests to me she was well on it.She knew Cctv would show this......

ToBeFrank123

iamwhoiam wrote: »

This is only the tip of a huge iceberg . These false claims are happening daily and pass unnoticed . Settled outside the doors of court becuase the insurance companies know they haven't a hope in court . Due to the legal system , barristers and judges encouraging this shïte . And we are paying the price of the high payouts

Also a case of not getting their costs if they do win. A lot of people bringing these bogus claims are unemployed or desperately trying to raise quick cash. If they lose the case, they have no hope of paying costs. If the law firm pay the costs, they might dispute them or drag it out for months or years. Insurance companies just say to hell with it, let's just pay out the claim.

BattleCorp

I deal with injury claims as part of my job. I know the insurance industry gets the blame as do the legal profession but one group who never seem to get any of the blame are doctors.

You'd want to see some of the sh1te that comes from them. Talk about exaggerated stuff. Honestly, a lot of doctors will write down anything that the injured party tells them to write down on a report.

I've yet to see a medical report where the doctor states that the injured party is exaggerating their injury.

Cienciano

Suckit wrote: »

Aren't these more to do with the insurance cartels than they are with bogey insurance claims, - as much as the Insurance companies would like to have us believe otherwise.

There's a few people at fault in this cycle. The person putting in the claim, the lawer but the only reason both of them do what they do is because of the massive payout the judge gives.
Something like Maria Bailey who said she had to go to physio. Judge should say "you went to 4 physio sessions, they were €60 each, you're awarded €240". The idea that people think they can get €60k for something like this is crazy. Every week on AH there's a 2 or 3 crazy claim payout threads

ChikiChiki

About to be discussed by Ivan Yates on Newstalk

Gen.Zhukov

Deleted User wrote: »

If memory serves, she said to SOR that the affidavit was made three years after the incident and talked several times about how it was to be changed and how it shouldn’t have been made public as it wasn’t correct.

So am I understanding correctly... people can make an affidavit about an incident, then change it before it gets in front of a judge .... yet many claims are settled BEFORE they get to court?!

I'm pretty sure the statute of limitations for a PI claim is 2 years from date of incident therefore all the paperwork re the claim needs to be done within that 2 years. Not sure about the amendments bit but I read/heard that even if an amendment is made the judge gets to see both versions.

holyhead wrote: »

For the life of me I don’t get why she went on SOR yesterday. She is being lampooned and ridiculed up and down the country. She really does require supervision!
The legal firm also have a lot to answer for. The fact they took her seriously. She comes across as an immature, entitled fantasist with little or no grip on reality.

I'd say she was expecting a much softer ride from SOR than she got ("you know me Sean...etc") and that's where it all went wrong.

vriesmays

Next time she uses a swing it should be on the moon as its gravity isn't as dangerous.

Mad_maxx

BattleCorp wrote: »

I deal with injury claims as part of my job. I know the insurance industry gets the blame as do the legal profession but one group who never seem to get any of the blame are doctors.

You'd want to see some of the sh1te that comes from them. Talk about exaggerated stuff. Honestly, a lot of doctors will write down anything that the injured party tells them to write down on a report.

I've yet to see a medical report where the doctor states that the injured party is exaggerating their injury.

Dealing with a claim myself at the minute, consultant was extremely objective in his report