Claims Crisis - Major Insurer pulls out saying claims culture and awards a joke

jmreire

whisky_galore wrote: »

Here's the thing, it's Joe Public that's gaming the system for the quick buck. The legalese are just happy to play along too.

There are 5 component's to this racket. The fraudsters, The Legal Eagles, The Insurance Company's, The Medical Consultant's. and last but nor least, the Government, because they get their financial cut too in tax's. But even worse, is the Government's failure to rein in this monster, which is slowly but surely eating away Irish Society like a cancer. How many business's will be closed and how many jobs lost between now and Jan. 1st 2020? :mad:

whisky_galore

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

If only there was some group that put together laws to halt this practice.

Turkeys don't usually vote for Xmas, do they?

Plumbthedepths

whisky_galore wrote:

Turkeys don't usually vote for Xmas, do they?

Yeah but the 'Turkeys' told us they wanted to deal with this and lower insurance costs.

Damien360

mad muffin wrote: »

Here’s the real thing. The politicians are very quick to pass laws and create new taxes when it suite them. They could’ve overhauled the insurance segment, it it suited them not too. As we have seen.

It’s not the insurance sector that needs an overhaul, it’s the entire legal system. The bank bailout 10 years ago identified a major issue with costs in the legal sector. They advised change and the state refused to play ball. Judges are political appointees and they weren’t going to upset the gravy train.

mad muffin

Damien360 wrote: »

It’s not the insurance sector that needs an overhaul, it’s the entire legal system. The bank bailout 10 years ago identified a major issue with costs in the legal sector. They advised change and the state refused to play ball. Judges are political appointees and they weren’t going to upset the gravy train.

99% of these payouts are settlements. So it’s got nothing to do with judges.

The insurance companies are willing to settle out of court because they k ow that they can recoup the costs with rising premiums. Except now it’s coming back to bite them on the arse, because no one can afford the costs any,ore.

jmreire

Damien360 wrote: »

It’s not the insurance sector that needs an overhaul, it’s the entire legal system. The bank bailout 10 years ago identified a major issue with costs in the legal sector. They advised change and the state refused to play ball. Judges are political appointees and they weren’t going to upset the gravy train.

Nail on the head !!! But when it comes to following EU directives, the Govt is very selective. See what is happening now with Carbon issues....we HAVE to do it.... it's a EU Directive. But Law Reform?

Damien360

mad muffin wrote: »

99% of these payouts are settlements. So it’s got nothing to do with judges.

The insurance companies are willing to settle out of court because they k ow that they can recoup the costs with rising premiums. Except now it’s coming back to bite them on the arse, because no one can afford the costs any,ore.

They settle because the risk of a stupidly high payout in court is too high. 60k payout vs massive legal bills to both their own and other party legal team.

mad muffin

Damien360 wrote: »

They settle because the risk of a stupidly high payout in court is too high. 60k payout vs massive legal bills to both their own and other party legal team.

Still, it sits squarely in the governments lap. They could’ve done something about it but they didn’t.

sydthebeat

I will gladly vote for whatever party has a workable plan to get our insurance system closer to the EU standard.

The book of quantum needs to be scraped for non life affecting injuries. Claims need to be paid in health bill vouchers, or billed directly to the insurance company. Fraudulent or over stated claims need to have a legal deterrent. Soft tissue injuries which only require physio and soft medication should have a maximum claim limit for inconvenience. All claims paid out of court need to be published for public viewing, and the bills of the associated legal teams published as well. The 1% rule needs to be abolished. Much more substantial credence needs to be applied to personal negligence and the actions of the claimant. Judges should be made give a very detailed schedule of awards, ie how much for medical (past and future), how much for legal, how much for debilitating costs, how much for future loss of earns etc.... Therefore each judge can be assessed as their awards and the outliers put back into check. This schedule should be accessible for public viewing.

jmreire

sydthebeat wrote: »

I will gladly vote for whatever party has a workable plan to get our insurance system closer to the EU standard.

The book of quantum needs to be scraped for non life affecting injuries. Claims need to be paid in health bill vouchers, or billed directly to the insurance company. Fraudulent or over stated claims need to have a legal deterrent. Soft tissue injuries which only require physio and soft medication should have a maximum claim limit for inconvenience. All claims paid out of court need to be published for public viewing, and the bills of the associated legal teams published as well. The 1% rule needs to be abolished. Much more substantial credence needs to be applied to personal negligence and the actions of the claimant. Judges should be made give a very detailed schedule of awards, ie how much for medical (past and future), how much for legal, how much for debilitating costs, how much for future loss of earns etc.... Therefore each judge can be assessed as their awards and the outliers put back into check. This schedule should be accessible for public viewing.

+1......in spade's !!! :mad:

anacc

sydthebeat wrote: »

I will gladly vote for whatever party has a workable plan to get our insurance system closer to the EU standard.

The book of quantum needs to be scraped for non life affecting injuries. Claims need to be paid in health bill vouchers, or billed directly to the insurance company. Fraudulent or over stated claims need to have a legal deterrent. Soft tissue injuries which only require physio and soft medication should have a maximum claim limit for inconvenience. All claims paid out of court need to be published for public viewing, and the bills of the associated legal teams published as well. The 1% rule needs to be abolished. Much more substantial credence needs to be applied to personal negligence and the actions of the claimant. Judges should be made give a very detailed schedule of awards, ie how much for medical (past and future), how much for legal, how much for debilitating costs, how much for future loss of earns etc.... Therefore each judge can be assessed as their awards and the outliers put back into check. This schedule should be accessible for public viewing.

I broadly agree with your post but not with publishing all claims paid out of court for public viewing. You shouldn’t need to affect the privacy of decent people with genuine claims.

sydthebeat

anacc wrote: »

I broadly agree with your post but not with publishing all claims paid out of court for public viewing. You shouldn’t need to affect the privacy of decent people with genuine claims.

I would have the opinion that, as out of court insurance payouts affect EVERYONE ELSE'S premium payments, then your privacy is negated by this fact.

Genuine case or not.

anacc

sydthebeat wrote: »

I would have the opinion that, as out of court insurance payouts affect EVERYONE ELSE'S premium payments, then your privacy is negated by this fact.

Genuine case or not.

Neither publishing or not publishing the payout in a genuine case is not going to have a material impact on the price of an insurance premium so your point is invalid. And further, even if it somehow did impact the cost of the premium I would still argue that in a genuine case a person’s right to privacy is more important.

sydthebeat

anacc wrote: »

Neither publishing or not publishing the payout in a genuine case is not going to have a material impact on the price of an insurance premium so your point is invalid. And further, even if it somehow did impact the cost of the premium I would still argue that in a genuine case a person’s right to privacy is more important.

You're certainly allowed to argue that.... And I would certainly disagree.

Out of court settlements absolutely effect everyone's premium, and why should that be kept private? What would people be loosing by it being published?

Varik

As said pay for treatment of medical issues directly rather than payouts that instead of helping treat anything go on a holiday and new car.

Have solicitors sign a declaration for any other cost claims and if it's found that the little scratch on a car didn't amount to a total write off then strike them off the roll of solicitors, might be a bit more honest in coming up with numbers.

Not sure what you could do about those who claim inability to work or loss of income. What's to be done about someone who's happy to take a lifetimes worth of painkillers and physio sessions that they don't need if it means they can still claim disability off the goverment and loss of income from the insurers. Or even just for a while, paid sick leave on the insurers dime.

Jurgen The German

sydthebeat wrote: »

I will gladly vote for whatever party has a workable plan to get our insurance system closer to the EU standard.

The book of quantum needs to be scraped for non life affecting injuries. Claims need to be paid in health bill vouchers, or billed directly to the insurance company. Fraudulent or over stated claims need to have a legal deterrent. Soft tissue injuries which only require physio and soft medication should have a maximum claim limit for inconvenience. All claims paid out of court need to be published for public viewing, and the bills of the associated legal teams published as well. The 1% rule needs to be abolished. Much more substantial credence needs to be applied to personal negligence and the actions of the claimant. Judges should be made give a very detailed schedule of awards, ie how much for medical (past and future), how much for legal, how much for debilitating costs, how much for future loss of earns etc.... Therefore each judge can be assessed as their awards and the outliers put back into check. This schedule should be accessible for public viewing.

Well said, cannot disagree with anything here. On the claims settlements, the amounts paid out by insurers are readily available and have been for years. The central bank publish an annual report which is usually about 18 months behind and it details the income received and the amounts paid out in claims. It's not granular as in there is no break down of out of court and court settlements but total figures are available.

Beta Ray Bill

One of Dublin's most popular autumn attractions has been axed.

Oktoberfest was due to take place in the city centre later this year and was first held at George's Dock in 2008.

Despite attracting huge numbers every year since, this year's event has been cancelled.

It was due to take place in the IFSC from September 14, but organisers say there have been "unprecedented increases" in their insurance premium.

In a statement, they say rising insurance costs mean "fun events like ours find it hard to go ahead".

"As much as we love coming to Dublin and doing our event with you guys the 2019 event cannot go ahead due to unprecedented increases in our insurance premium."

They say, in Germany, they are "not used to the claim culture that has developed in Ireland and therefore we have decided to take a break this year."

The group said they plan on returning with the event in 2020, writing: "We would like to take this opportunity to thank all of our loyal patrons and Irish partners that have helped us with the event over the years and ask you to look forward to Oktoberfest 2020."

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/oktoberfest-dublin-cancelled-due-to-unprecedented-increases-in-insurance-premium-939184.html

My €0.02 on this:

This is a hugely popular event and attracts a hell of a lot of people.
It's not cheap either, they must make a fortune. Yet despite this they are pulling out because of Insurance/Claim Culture.

I knew the problem was bad, but I didn't think it was this bad.
I think this is the first time I've felt the hit of the insurance/claims issue in terms of stuff I like not being available anymore.

I take it that some years it was poorly organised and that going down on Friday/Sat night was a bit mental, but I enjoyed heading down after work (Or even at lunch time)
Crappy times ahead

99problems1

The group said they plan on returning with the event in 2020

Something fishy going on here.

Post entirely making excuse why they are not going ahead this year. Usually these groups only say "due to unforeseen circumstances" or something.

Jamie2k9

I don't buy it however good to increase the pressure on Government on compo culture.

cruizer101

And so it begins. With Leisure Insure pulling out of the market altogether (link) and significant increases in premiums elsewhere, occurrences like this are going to become more and more common.
And what has the government done to help so far, sweet feck all.

dudara

Merging 2nd Oktoberfest thread into Claims Crisis thread.

dudara

Kivaro

cruizer101 wrote: »

And so it begins. With Leisure Insure pulling out of the market altogether (link) and significant increases in premiums elsewhere, occurrences like this are going to become more and more common.
And what has the government done to help so far, sweet feck all.

That's not true. They were very vocal in their television appearances two years ago when they claimed that they were working to solve this problem.
And similarly last year, they were extremely adamant that they were making great progress with the ludicrous insurance situation in Ireland. They were doing such a great job that the EU had to send in a team to investigate the Insurance cartel that Fine Gael is allowing to operate with impunity in Ireland.

And of course, you will see Fine Gael's Minister of State with responsibility for insurance, Michael D'Arcy telling us this year, on a almost a monthly basis, of the great strides he is making in tackling the crippling insurance costs endured by most of us.

Not sure if this pic was taken before or after he was asked if Fine Gael were ever going to seriously tackle the claims culture crisis in this country:

meeeeh

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

I don't buy it however good to increase the pressure on Government on compo culture.

I buy it. Getting public liability insurance is harder and harder, premiums are higher, conditions are much stricter, excess is higher and so on. It's often not just the cost of policy but hhe conditions that are attached to it. Insurance cost might not be the only reason but I'm certain it is a big reason.

Beta Ray Bill

Just out of interest
What other insurance companies offer the same kind of products the LeisureInsure offered?

meeeeh

grahambo wrote: »

Just out of interest
What other insurance companies offer the same kind of products the LeisureInsure offered?

It doesn't seem any do for Irish market at the moment. We got insurance (we are in completely different sector) but our previous insurer informed us three days before the renewal date that they are pulling out of the market. Now they gave us months extension to find another and we did but they are all UK insurers.

sydthebeat

There is only one underwriter providing combined insurance for sports clubs. This company is English based.

If they pull out, sports clubs across the country will close.

Kermit.de.frog

67k for falling down stairs at national museum.

An unfortunate accident 470,000 other people successfully managed to avoid.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/australian-tourist-who-fell-down-stairs-in-national-museum-awarded-67000-by-high-court-38349448.html

ChikiChiki

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

67k for falling down stairs at national museum.

An unfortunate accident 470,000 other people successfully managed to avoid.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/australian-tourist-who-fell-down-stairs-in-national-museum-awarded-67000-by-high-court-38349448.html

Even the tourists are getting involved now. Perhaps they heard of this little goldmine out in the Atlantic that rewards stupidity.

sydthebeat

no wonder he flew back from australia......

i can think of 66,989 reasons.....

marvin80

sydthebeat wrote: »

no wonder he flew back from australia......

i can think of 66,989 reasons.....

Seems happy with the outcome anyway.

This is another good one - woman sprays flammable substance from can close to a naked flame and gets burnt. What did she expect to happen?
People need to take some responsibility for their daftness.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/nurse-who-claimed-dry-shampoo-aerosol-turned-into-flame-thrower-in-nightclub-bathroom-settles-action-38349060.html

jackofalltrades

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

67k for falling down stairs at national museum.

An unfortunate accident 470,000 other people successfully managed to avoid.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/australian-tourist-who-fell-down-stairs-in-national-museum-awarded-67000-by-high-court-38349448.html

There needs to be reform, but businesses need to up their game.

The museum failed in its duty to take reasonable care to ensure his safety, she said.

CCTV footage of the stairway and fall, the judge said, should have been preserved.

A museum employee who viewed that footage should also have been made available to give evidence.

They're not even doing the absolute minimum.

Also get rid of candles from pubs and nightclubs, they're asking for trouble.

ChikiChiki

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

67k for falling down stairs at national museum.

An unfortunate accident 470,000 other people successfully managed to avoid.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/australian-tourist-who-fell-down-stairs-in-national-museum-awarded-67000-by-high-court-38349448.html

There needs to be reform, but businesses need to up their game.

The museum failed in its duty to take reasonable care to ensure his safety, she said.

CCTV footage of the stairway and fall, the judge said, should have been preserved.

A museum employee who viewed that footage should also have been made available to give evidence.

They're not even doing the absolute minimum.

Also get rid of candles from pubs and nightclubs, they're asking for trouble.

And swings, and high stools, and chairs and tables. May as well replace the glasses with plastic ones too while we are at it. Perhaps some cushioning on the walls to mitigate the risk of inebriated clientele falling against it. Carpet instead of tiles to remove slip hazards. Sure get rid of the drink too for water only and the loud music. Could do damage to some ears.

Should be a safe enough nightclub then for all these poor unfortunates who are unable to perform a duty of care for themselves.

Gatling

ChikiChiki wrote: »

And swings, and high stools, and chairs and tables. May as well replace the glasses with plastic ones too while we are at it.

I was in a bar stateside that only served drinks in plastic and the tables and were physically bolted into the floor for different reasons but you can see it actually happening here .

Here's an article on Oktoberfest pulling out
Oktoberfest was due to be held in the capital for its 11th year but the plug was pulled, with Ireland's claim culture being cited as a factor.

Speaking to the Irish Independent, Charlie Egan, one of the project managers for the event, said previous claims had "started to catch up on them".

"He revealed how a woman received €16,000 after a plastic flag with a beer logo fell on her shoulder and another woman received €36,000 after she twisted her ankle while walking."


https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/people-twisted-their-ankles-dancing-and-it-was-somehow-deemed-our-fault-oktoberfest-boss-slams-compo-culture-38347992.html

Jurgen The German

Gatling wrote: »

Speaking to the Irish Independent, Charlie Egan, one of the project managers for the event, said previous claims had "started to catch up on them".

Thats the biggy here. These claims usually take a minimum of 18 to 24 months to settle. Given the statute of limitations to make an injury claim stands currently at two years (basically a person has up to 2 years to make an injury claim from the date of incident), it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if some of these claims materialise long after the incident as they can be sure that any CCTV footage would be long gone and the staff / witnesses would likely be extremely difficult to locate.

is_that_so

Another piece on the insurance saga but interesting last line to it.

It is understood that the possibility of a crash-out Brexit has made many insurers in the UK review operations in the Irish market.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/diving-companies-face-brexit-chaos-over-insurance-renewals-1.3968767

is_that_so

is_that_so wrote: »

Another piece on the insurance saga but interesting last line to it.



https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/diving-companies-face-brexit-chaos-over-insurance-renewals-1.3968767

So too Drone insurance companies

eagle eye

ChikiChiki wrote:

Should be a safe enough nightclub then for all these poor unfortunates who are unable to perform a duty of care for themselves.

If you are going to serve alcohol to already inebriated people you have a duty of care to them.

eagle eye

Gatling wrote:

"He revealed how a woman received €16,000 after a plastic flag with a beer logo fell on her shoulder and another woman received €36,000 after she twisted her ankle while walking."

He is giving you his side of what happened. It's entirely possible that these two incidents were not the fault of the claimants and that injury did occur. There are loads of bogus claims and ridiculous claims too but I wouldn't be just taking the word of one man suggesting what happened to these two claimants was bogus.

AndrewJRenko

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

67k for falling down stairs at national museum.

An unfortunate accident 470,000 other people successfully managed to avoid.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/australian-tourist-who-fell-down-stairs-in-national-museum-awarded-67000-by-high-court-38349448.html

Did you miss the bit about the shiny step surface and the lack of a handrail?

Franz Von Peppercorn II

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Did you miss the bit about the shiny step surface and the lack of a handrail?

Its an old building, it has Portland stone and a railing that goes most of the way.

AndrewJRenko

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Its an old building, it has Portland stone and a railing that goes most of the way.

Both of which contributed to creating an unsafe environment for the public, especially older people.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Both of which contributed to creating an unsafe environment for the public, especially older people.

Which can only be solved by removing the ancient stone or adding a new railing not in keeping with the old one if that is even possible in a protected building. Or closing the building.

We should probably close all public buildings and museums, and that maybe where we are heading.

jmreire

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Both of which contributed to creating an unsafe environment for the public, especially older people.

Yet up to that point, 470'000 people (and presumably a fair % of them elderly..) managed to negotiate these step's without incident???

Franz Von Peppercorn II

eagle eye wrote: »

If you are going to serve alcohol to already inebriated people you have a duty of care to them.

Since the bars can hardly have people everywhere and the person being drunk is not a valid excuse for the premise the only solution here is to stop serving people after a fairly limited number of drinks or, again, closing the business.

Jurgen The German wrote: »

Thats the biggy here. These claims usually take a minimum of 18 to 24 months to settle. Given the statute of limitations to make an injury claim stands currently at two years (basically a person has up to 2 years to make an injury claim from the date of incident), it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if some of these claims materialise long after the incident as they can be sure that any CCTV footage would be long gone and the staff / witnesses would likely be extremely difficult to locate.

That’s interesting. People sitting on claims for two years seems co-ordinated either by themselves or by their solicitors.

jmreire

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Since the bars can hardly have people everywhere and the person being drunk is not a valid excuse for the premise the only solution here is to stop serving people after a fairly limited number of drinks or, again, closing the business.



That’s interesting. People sitting on claims for two years seems co-ordinated either by themselves or by their solicitors.

Well, recently we are seeing a few ( too few, unfortunately !!! ) very much publicized compo case's being kicked out by Judges, with believe it or not, several being referred to the Guard's for prosecution for fraud. It will be interesting to see what ( if any) effect this will have on any pending case's......might even give the insurance company's an extra bit of muscle when defending cases ???

lalababa

jmreire wrote: »

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Since the bars can hardly have people everywhere and the person being drunk is not a valid excuse for the premise the only solution here is to stop serving people after a fairly limited number of drinks or, again, closing the business.



That’s interesting. People sitting on claims for two years seems co-ordinated either by themselves or by their solicitors.

Well, recently we are seeing a few ( too few, unfortunately !!! ) very much publicized compo case's being kicked out by Judges, with believe it or not, several being referred to the Guard's for prosecution for fraud. It will be interesting to see what ( if any) effect this will have on any pending case's......might even give the insurance company's an extra bit of muscle when defending cases ???

Unfortunately I wouldn't hold my breath.

AndrewJRenko

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Since the bars can hardly have people everywhere and the person being drunk is not a valid excuse for the premise the only solution here is to stop serving people after a fairly limited number of drinks or, again, closing the business.

Or we could just move to a European type model where people don't get so drunk that they're falling over regularly.

jmreire wrote: »

Yet up to that point, 470'000 people (and presumably a fair % of them elderly..) managed to negotiate these step's without incident???

Yes, indeed - given the nature of human ability, there will be a particular set of conditions involving the ability or disability of the person, the weather conditions (possibility of rain making it slippy), the lighting, the noise level (that may distract the person) - all of which are generally predictable - that will combine to create a situation where a person slips and gets injured.

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Which can only be solved by removing the ancient stone or adding a new railing not in keeping with the old one if that is even possible in a protected building. Or closing the building.

We should probably close all public buildings and museums, and that maybe where we are heading.

Probably no need for the dramatic closing - there are solutions like metal studs or bars to provide grip on steps, and hand rails fitted to the centre of the staircase to ensure they work for everyone, rather than just one side

jmreire

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Or we could just move to a European type model where people don't get so drunk that they're falling over regularly.


Yes, indeed - given the nature of human ability, there will be a particular set of conditions involving the ability or disability of the person, the weather conditions (possibility of rain making it slippy), the lighting, the noise level (that may distract the person) - all of which are generally predictable - that will combine to create a situation where a person slips and gets injured.


Probably no need for the dramatic closing - there are solutions like metal studs or bars to provide grip on steps, and hand rails fitted to the centre of the staircase to ensure they work for everyone, rather than just one side

Well, assuming that by now remedial work will have been carried out, with more safety features installed, we will see if ( or when) another "accident" happens there. And if there is another claim or claim's, how long before the insurance costs become impossible to support? ( As this is state property, the state will just absorb the additional costs ) But how many business's who don't have this luxury, will close this year due to unaffordable insurance cost's? And the next, unless something is done ?

jmreire

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Or we could just move to a European type model where people don't get so drunk that they're falling over regularly.


Believe me, Europeans can and do drink as much as the Irish..and in some case's, even more..try matching a Pole or a German, drink for drink, and see who will be standing... But any sign of drunkenness in the bar, and you are out. And if you do have a drink induced accident / incident, forget about mega claim payout's. That's the difference between Ireland and the rest of the EU.

meeeeh

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Or we could just move to a European type model where people don't get so drunk that they're falling over regularly.


Yes, indeed - given the nature of human ability, there will be a particular set of conditions involving the ability or disability of the person, the weather conditions (possibility of rain making it slippy), the lighting, the noise level (that may distract the person) - all of which are generally predictable - that will combine to create a situation where a person slips and gets injured.


Probably no need for the dramatic closing - there are solutions like metal studs or bars to provide grip on steps, and hand rails fitted to the centre of the staircase to ensure they work for everyone, rather than just one side

I was watching Gardeners World yesterday (yeah I know I'm sad and old) and they showed the park in Germany in disused foundry. Families were walking around the buildings, even climbing into the towers, there was a rock clibing wall on one of the towers and so on. First thing that struck me is that would never work in Ireland because people would be falling all over the place and suing. Anyone who visited old churches and climbed on top would know that narrow pretty scary staircases and lack of railings is a norm. Vatican would be probably bankrupt by now if they were paying off Irish type claims to people visiting St Peter's basilica.

You are suggesting we should move to European type model. I agree we should move to European type model of a lot smaller or no awards.

Edit: just to add. Last time I was to Oktoberfest was probably 20 years ago. There was a nice big grassy area at the side full of sleeping and resting 'moderate' drinkers.