Parents thoughts on this insurance payout?

BarryD2

beauf wrote: »

I would have said no all my life till now.

But I'm no longer so sure...

Maybe if all the parents cash in and the creche fees rise appropriately, then it becomes a zero sum game with the legal boyos rolling in the clover. Seems to be where we're headed.

Re OP, no we wouldn't have sued. And would cast a cold eye on these plaintiffs.

Wheety

It has really become like America. When will we see the ads on tv "Where there's blame, there's a claim". Even when there's no blame, there still seems to be a claim.

tipptom

What was the supervision in this case?
Its just not feasible for any small business to have an employee standing at the bottom of every playground item.

Why would the insurance company settle for so much money for a fracture that will be over and forgotten about in a couple of months and how much were they e sueing for in the first place to beat them down to 41k.
Did the family of the child have a medical card or was it done privately?

I think insurance companies need to be questioned on not contesting theses bumper pay outs as its a red rag for anybody to get stuck in for as much as possible.
I think it suits the insurance industry that theses cases are highlighted because they just transfer the pay outs on to customers premiums anyway and they can justify hiking premiums with these cases and will eventually start taking down premiums that have being raised by 500% down by 15% and be lauded by government who will also pat themselves on the back.

Cycle trail beside me invested 600k on new trails and bought new bikes cost 2k and upwards and have now closed down after six months after their yearly premium came around where just one case was pending and they cannot get insurance now.

Sunny Dayz

I don't understand why accidents are now leading to sueing.
You can supervise kids as best you can but you can't control them completely and all of the time. You could be supervising just one child and they can still have an accident. How do we know that supervision was inadequate - maybe the child had already been told to get down off the slide. Kids should be allowed to play and explore in playgrounds and IMO the only reason you may possible sue is due to injury from faulty or neglected equipment.


My son fell in school, some nasty cuts, quite a bit of bleeding, a long afternoon spent in A&E and a few stitches. Teachers were all about us, ringing and texting me to make sure he was ok. When I look back now it was in the hope that I wouldn't sue but Christ that wouldn't even occur to me - it was an accident and the cost of A&E, medication and follow up trip to docs were claimed back from the insurance without any fuss.

ted1

tipptom wrote: »

Why would the insurance company settle for so much money for a fracture that will be over and forgotten about in a couple of months and how much were they e sueing for in the first place to beat them down to 41k.

Because legal fees to defend it would cost more

Megwepz

OP here.... Nice the see that the vast majority of parents here believe it to be completely over the top. Honestly, if this happened to my son at that age I wouldn't even dream of pursuing the creche. In my opinion it's all part of the rough and tumble of growing up?

Agree that children should of course be supervised but if the ratio of carers to children is 1:8 or similar then it's just not physically feasible to have eyes on them all at the same time. I would think that covering the cost of medical expenses and maybe my time off work as a result of the injury would be more than enough.

There are plenty of schools around who have implemented a 'no running' policy on the playground... I mean, come on, what the actual flip??? They will shortly have no play equipment either with this sort of compensation being given out.

Stories like this absolutely boil my blood, my childcare centre has had to close this Summer for the first time as a result of the rising expenses, insurance being the main one, which leaves me completely scuppered for childcare this Summer!

Compo culture in this country has me absolutely seething!!!!

Hoboo

No mention of insurance being involved here. Just the company (I think giraffe would cover it themselves rather than risk a hike for their whole business).

Stinks of a cover up though, that amount is way ott. Get it done and dusted and draw the curtains.

s7ryf3925pivug

ted1 wrote: »

These things happen in a matter of seconds, unless you put them on a short leash no amount of supervision would prevent this

Fair enough. It's not like my kid has never managed to hurt himself in my presence. Still warrants making sure there is adequate supervision (as opposed to assuming there is not).

My default reaction would be anger if my kid fractured his arm at a creche or similar. Doubt I'd actually pursue legal proceedings.

Injury payouts are much greater in Ireland than other countries I believe.

The_Honeybadger

Hoboo wrote: »

No mention of insurance being involved here. Just the company (I think giraffe would cover it themselves rather than risk a hike for their whole business).

Stinks of a cover up though, that amount is way ott. Get it done and dusted and draw the curtains.

I would imagine it was their underwriter who came to the settlement? Giraffe would be required to report such an incident.

shesty

Wheety wrote: »

It has really become like America. When will we see the ads on tv "Where there's blame, there's a claim". Even when there's no blame, there still seems to be a claim.

We do see these ads!!!They don't phrase it like that, but they do the "if you have had an accident" style thing.It's desperate.

Hannibal_Smith

Wheety wrote: »

But what if it happened in a public playground with you there? Sue the council?

What if what if what if. If I was there and my child fell that's a different story. If I was paying the creche to look after him and he fractured his arm, I would strongly think about it.

jlm29

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

What if what if what if. If I was there and my child fell that's a different story. If I was paying the creche to look after him and he fractured his arm, I would strongly think about it.

What would suing achieve? Price hikes? Increased insurance for all? Or does money somehow make bones heal faster and better?

Hannibal_Smith

jlm29 wrote: »

What would suing achieve? Price hikes? Increased insurance for all? Or does money somehow make bones heal faster and better?

The purpose of suing is to seek compensation for damage or injury. If I was paying a creche to mind my kid and they fractured their arm, I wouldn't pat them on the head and thank them.

Not sure what your last sentence is about tbh

jlm29

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

The purpose of suing is to seek compensation for damage or injury. If I was paying a creche to mind my kid and they fractured their arm, I wouldn't pat them on the head and thank them.

Not sure what your last sentence is about tbh

I just don’t understand how it achieves anything, except to be detrimental to society in general, and probably the parent on a personal level. But then, that might be just how I am.
Nobody is suggesting patting anybody on the head or thanking them, but I think there needs to be some understanding that sometimes things just happen, through no fault of anyone’s, just circumstance

Hannibal_Smith

jlm29 wrote: »

I just don’t understand how it achieves anything, except to be detrimental to society in general, and probably the parent on a personal level. But then, that might be just how I am.
Nobody is suggesting patting anybody on the head or thanking them, but I think there needs to be some understanding that sometimes things just happen, through no fault of anyone’s, just circumstance

You should go down to the Four Courts with that

We've had accidents inside creche outside creche, in side school and outside school. Some required stitches some didn't and one was a fracture. No suing on any of them, they were all accidents.

But if my kid was in a creche and fractured a bone? That's x rays hospital visits, time off work. I'm clearly going against the grain here, but that's a bit more serious to me than just one of things.

Blaizes

Well I’m of the opinion that the claims culture is insane here. I can understand claims against hospitals where negligence results in a life changing condition for a baby who will need on going life care. But small stuff no way the medical bill should be covered no more.

This madness will close businesses with soaring insurance costs or else businesses have to pass the cost onto customers in increased fees.Why people have this claims mentality is beyond me. Where a claim is made on behalf of a child the money should be put in trust till the child reaches 21. Maybe that would help to stop this madness.

I think I have missed a golden opportunity here. With 5 kids of which 4 are boys, there have been no end of knocks, bumps, cuts, visits to A&E from schools, creche, playgrounds both public and private etc.
I probably could have sued on to many occasions and would be a millionaire by now. But guess what, when you have a child, you have to expect them to have accidents, to get hurt, to do stupid things that kids like to do which ends up with them getting hurt.
It's rarely negligence by schools or creches or when your kids are at a friends house. Even when looking after my own kids, they have fallen off slides, tripped on stones, got bounced on in the trampoline etc, so I have sympathy for other parents, teachers etc who can't really have their eyes permanently on every child. Turn away for a minute or get distracted and suddenly little johnny has crashed into little Sarah and it's all tears and even a couple of bruises.
So many people just see an easy way to make cash and it's encouraged by our judicial system and culture. Only today, I managed to burn the roof of my mouth when I stuffed a mouthful of cottage pie in my mouth without checking how hot it was first at work. I'll be more careful next time and it's a lesson learned. I don't feel the need to call a firm of solicitors.
Rant over!

Hannibal_Smith

Blaizes wrote: »

Well I’m of the opinion that the claims culture is insane here. I can understand claims against hospitals where negligence results in a life changing condition for a baby who will need on going life care. But small stuff no way the medical bill should be covered no more.

This madness will close businesses with soaring insurance costs or else businesses have to pass the cost onto customers in increased fees.Why people have this claims mentality is beyond me. Where a claim is made on behalf of a child the money should be put in trust till the child reaches 21. Maybe that would help to stop this madness.

I think the money is lodged into the court until they're 18?

Gatling

Wheety wrote: »

But what if it happened in a public playground with you there? Sue the council?

Many people do

NIMAN

I would have to answer 'no', as we have all had knocks, bumps, broken bones etc over the years and our parents never thought of suing, cos these things happen.

Unfortunately the world has changed, we now see people who think there is always someone to blame, and that there is money to be got very easily.

I accept a fractured wrist to a toddler is bad, and it did require surgery, but the '2 small pale scars' comment was a bit trivial. I suppose everything has to be added to get as much money as possible.

Anyway, I am trying to look at it from another angle. The likes of the 80k awarded for the 14 yr old getting burned by coffee, you can kinda see why people go for the easy money. Think of that girl if she was to go to Uni in 4 years time. That is very costly. Perhaps her parents think "that 80k will put her through her degree with no debt on the other side".

If that was their thinking, then maybe more of us might consider it?

But you can see why play parks, creches etc will simply just either close to tell kids they can't play in future. They can't afford to have 2 toddlers run into each other.

Blaizes

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

I think the money is lodged into the court until they're 18?

Oh that’s good at least so any parents who decide to sue over a graze can’t go on a spending spree!

Hannibal_Smith

Blaizes wrote: »

Oh that’s good at least so any parents who decide to sue over a graze can’t go on a spending spree!

They can withdraw some amounts but I think they have to make an application to the court for that

amber2

The whole compo culture is gone from a joke, so much so now that you would think twice about having your kids friends around.

We on the other hand as kids just soaked it up, if you got cut as a child you were usually to blame. I as a kid got stitches when I hit a pothole while out cycling, broken teeth and got 15 stitches also got a lash of stitches while running at a friends house, I’d be set up for life if it were nowadays.

jlm29

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

You should go down to the Four Courts with that

We've had accidents inside creche outside creche, in side school and outside school. Some required stitches some didn't and one was a fracture. No suing on any of them, they were all accidents.

But if my kid was in a creche and fractured a bone? That's x rays hospital visits, time off work. I'm clearly going against the grain here, but that's a bit more serious to me than just one of things.

If the bone is fractured as the result of an accident rather than negligence, I don’t see the difference tbh.
I must be going go different medical centres/hospitals to you, and I certainly must be in the wrong job, but I can’t equate an ED visit, a couple of x-rays and a few days off work to €40k. I see nothing wrong with being compensated for time missed from work and expenses incurred, but looking for a big payout smacks of profiteering from a child’s misfortune, which I consider a bit scummy.

Hannibal_Smith

jlm29 wrote: »

If the bone is fractured as the result of an accident rather than negligence, I don’t see the difference tbh.
I must be going go different medical centres/hospitals to you, and I certainly must be in the wrong job, but I can’t equate an ED visit, a couple of x-rays and a few days off work to €40k. I see nothing wrong with being compensated for time missed from work and expenses incurred, but looking for a big payout smacks of profiteering from a child’s misfortune, which I consider a bit scummy.

I didn't see the court documents and the full extent of the injuries. Did you? Either way I never stuck a price on anything. I said if my kid was injured in creche I'd think about suing.

I'm sure that doesn't earn me a scummy tag but so be it if it does. You don't have to tie yourself in knots about what I would or wouldn't think about

jlm29

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

I didn't see the court documents and the full extent of the injuries. Did you? Either way I never stuck a price on anything. I said if my kid was injured in creche I'd think about suing.

I'm sure that doesn't earn me a scummy tag but so be it if it does. You don't have to tie yourself in knots about what I would or wouldn't think about

It’s a discussion forum. People are discussing something. I didn’t say I was tied in a knot about anything.

Hannibal_Smith

jlm29 wrote: »

It’s a discussion forum. People are discussing something. I didn’t say I was tied in a knot about anything.

How is any of that discussing the topic?

moceri

€85K for a cup of Tea...
https://extra.ie/2019/07/02/news/irish-news/girl-starbucks-hot-tea-spill

Tigerandahalf

Politicians and businesses really need to sort out this.
Crazy payouts where if the same thing happened at their own home there would be no one to sue. It is just a crazy system. I don't understand why businesses don't just collectively close doors for a day in protest. Maybe when people don't get their coffee, dinner or whatever, attitudes will change.

When I was a kid a lad playing hurling with me was wearing a helmet with no visor. He got struck above the nose and received 10 stitches. He looked a state. He was taken to the hospital and got stitched up. When he went home his father was more pissed off that he couldn't hook the opposition player properly. No suing the club. This was a time before helmets were compulsory.

Who would bring a kid into their back yard now to play - one tumble off the trampoline and a claim could be made against your insurance.

By all means have a register of accidents and cover expenses.
But if we keep this up there won't be a ballpond or playground in the country.

Blaizes

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

Politicians and businesses really need to sort out this.
Crazy payouts where if the same thing happened at their own home there would be no one to sue. It is just a crazy system. I don't understand why businesses don't just collectively close doors for a day in protest. Maybe when people don't get their coffee, dinner or whatever, attitudes will change.

When I was a kid a lad playing hurling with me was wearing a helmet with no visor. He got struck above the nose and received 10 stitches. He looked a state. He was taken to the hospital and got stitched up. When he went home his father was more pissed off that he couldn't hook the opposition player properly. No suing the club. This was a time before helmets were compulsory.

Who would bring a kid into their back yard now to play - one tumble off the trampoline and a claim could be made against your insurance.

By all means have a register of accidents and cover expenses.
But if we keep this up there won't be a ballpond or playground in the country.

That’s where it’s at, a parent could sue another if a child fell at a birthday party for example. Heard another story recently where someone sued their friend when they tripped in their house. It’s gone too far. Pure greed of course