Australian tourist who fell down stairs in National Museum awarded €67,000

Tweeter

Actually unbelievable, full story here

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

Can judges in this country actually understand logic?
Obviously not, the dumb cnuts. This shoyte is so fantastical it's actually blood boiling.

Quote from the judge,

Mr Baldwin's recollection of the cause and mechanics of his fall, while inconsistent with the accident report form he filled in, was not inconsistent with the description of his fall when admitted to hospital

So case closed as there's too many inconsistencies right? Wrong dumb cnut of a judge awards €66,989 anyway. She should be sacked immediately. Really not good enough in any way shape or form

Purple Mountain

I think you need to read the article again and stop sensationalising.

Wheety

Fell down 3 steps. Around 22,000 per step.

470,000 visitors a year and he's the only one who fell, yet it's the museum's fault?

bunderoon

Tweeter wrote: »

Actually unbelievable, full story here

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

Can judges in this country actually understand logic?
Obviously not, the dumb cnuts. This shoyte is so fantastical it's actually blood boiling.

Quote from the judge,

Mr Baldwin's recollection of the cause and mechanics of his fall, while inconsistent with the accident report form he filled in, was not inconsistent with the description of his fall when admitted to hospital

So case closed as there's too many inconsistencies right? Wrong dumb cnut of a judge awards €66,989 anyway. She should be sacked immediately. Really not good enough in any way shape or form

Anyone remember the movie 'Brewster's Millions' ?
You'd swear that the politicians and judges are in some kind of game where they have a certain amount of money to blow, but have to have legitimate ways in which to do it; in order to get some ultimate prize.

bunderoon

I wonder if he heard of the insanity that is going on in Ireland and said that while hes visiting, he'll cash in.

Wheety

Purple Mountain wrote: »

I think you need to read the article again and stop sensationalising.

Are you agreeing with the judge? Because the rail ends on the 3rd last step it's negligence? How come everyone else managed it?

Atlantic Dawn

Whoy if they are going to hand out Lotto wins to people do they not give them in vouchers to fix themselves up and not cold hard cash?

Sharp MZ700

Purple Mountain wrote: »

I think you need to read the article again and stop sensationalising.

Ooh look at me I can write long words!

Tweeter

Purple Mountain wrote: »

I think you need to read the article again and stop sensationalising.

Wow, sensationalising, can you elaborate on what I'm exactly sensationalising?

ILoveYourVibes

I am getting kind of sick of all these claims threads.

Gonad

All over town tomorrow

G’day mate you wouldn’t have directions to the natural museum would ya ?

Tweeter

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I am getting kind of sick of all these claims threads.

I can help you with that.
Don't post on anything that pisses you off. It's good for you and it's also good for us

Hobosan

I can see it coming - "Man awarded €100,000 due to cardiac arrest after judge awarded him €70,000 for falling down a stairs".

ToddyDoody

We're suckers for a sob story that's easily understanable.

Victor

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Whoy if they are going to hand out Lotto wins to people do they not give them in vouchers to fix themselves up and not cold hard cash?

Because insurers are remarkably slow payers and the money has been spent already.

Ave Sodalis

ILoveYourVibes wrote:

I am getting kind of sick of all these claims threads.

I am getting very sick of all these claims being successful. I would have thought, as a fellow horse person, that that would be your biggest concern too. Just given the massive issue the compo culture represents to all risk sports, and how there has been several successful claims already made by people for falling off.

Glass fused light

I hope it is appealed just like the hiker cuting her knee was.
It would close a lot of older buildings with preservation orders or force the owners to "adult" proof as if we are childern.

It would be interesting to know what the actual argument was about the CCTV not being preserved. Most public access properties will (should) now have a very clear policy of destroying CCTV footage with in a very short timeframe of recording. So what obligation is on a defendant to preserve data?

Victor

Glass fused light wrote: »

So what obligation is on a defendant to preserve data?

They knew, or ought to have known, there was a serious incident (someone was hospitalised) and evidence should have been preserved.

Glass fused light

Victor wrote: »

They knew, or ought to have known, there was a serious incident (someone was hospitalised) and evidence should have been preserved.

I know that they should have done.
But is it that the court take the view that it would have bee retained if it it was good for the defendant, and distroyed as it was of benefit to the litigant?

Boggles

Destroying evidence and not producing witnesses will always annoy a Judge.

Mr.Crinklewood

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I am getting kind of sick of all these claims threads.

Sick...I hear.

I reckon you could bring a case against Boards, the OP and Robert E. Kahn.

Purple Mountain

Tweeter wrote: »

Purple Mountain wrote: »

I think you need to read the article again and stop sensationalising.

Wow, sensationalising, can you elaborate on what I'm exactly sensationalising?

You are drawing attention to the inconsistencies angle.
The man gave a statement after the fall and his account matched his injuries etc.
I get that you are unhappy with the award given. So then use that as your argument.
I opened the link expecting to see something entirely different, because you focused on one angle.

ILoveYourVibes

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I am getting kind of sick of all these claims threads.

And you are forced to read them?

is_that_so

Wheety wrote: »

Are you agreeing with the judge? Because the rail ends on the 3rd last step it's negligence? How come everyone else managed it?

Why stop at the last three? I have an issue with the amount but he did suffer a real injury. Unless he "rigged it" it is going to be negligence every time.

nthclare

Wheety wrote: »

Fell down 3 steps. Around 22,000 per step.

470,000 visitors a year and he's the only one who fell, yet it's the museum's fault?

As long as the steps have a 7 inch rise and 11 inch run then everyone should be responsible for their own step's.

is_that_so

nthclare wrote: »

As long as the steps have a 7 inch rise and 11 inch run then everyone should be responsible for their own step's.

There's a building I go into every so often with ice rink marble on the floor. It looks fabulous and in dry weather not a problem. However any amount of liquid on it and you're skating down the corridor. When you mention it to staff all they say is yeah it's a bit slippy!

biko

Maybe they shouldn't allow weak people into public places.

is_that_so

biko wrote: »

Maybe they shouldn't allow weak people into public places.

Put 'em in a cage at the entrance to be collected on the way out?

Boggles

nthclare wrote: »

As long as the steps have a 7 inch rise and 11 inch run then everyone should be responsible for their own step's.

The steps date back to 1890

.

mad muffin

As an Aussie I’m proud of his gumption

As an Irish resident I’m furious at the judges causing my premiums to skyrocket

Boggles

mad muffin wrote: »

As an Irish resident I’m furious at the judges causing my premiums to skyrocket

Don't be.

The number of personal injury cases taken in the State was down slightly last year while the average award made at High Court level dropped by 29 per cent, according to figures in the latest annual report from the Courts Service

Wheety

is_that_so wrote: »

Why stop at the last three? I have an issue with the amount but he did suffer a real injury. Unless he "rigged it" it is going to be negligence every time.

I'm sure the rail is there a long time. It'd an old building.

In know he was injured so why not just cover his medical bills? These 'wins' that people are getting are ridiculous.

Boggles

Wheety wrote: »

In know he was injured so why not just cover his medical bills?

So if you were personally injured through negligence, you would be quite happy with just having your medical bills covered?

Tzardine

The interesting thing is that it will not be the insurers that pay. The Museum will have to foot the full bill.

I imagine the Museum is operating under the State Claims Agency.

If this is the case, the SCA represents the Museum in court. They then pass the full cost of the claim back to the Museum.

JPCN1

Boggles wrote: »

So if you were personally injured through negligence, you would be quite happy with just having your medical bills covered?

Negligence... If you cant walk down a flight of steps you shouldn't be let out on your own.

theoneeyedman

bunderoon wrote: »

I wonder if he heard of the insanity that is going on in Ireland and said that while hes visiting, he'll cash in.

More like the lawyers here chased the ambulance (metephorically anyway) and they used him to cash in.

Boggles

JPCN1 wrote: »

Negligence... If you cant walk down a flight of steps you shouldn't be let out on your own.

Fair play to you.

But nothing to do with my question.

Wheety

Boggles wrote: »

So if you were personally injured through negligence, you would be quite happy with just having your medical bills covered?

Depends on the level of negligence. If the step was broken or the rail collapsed because it hadn't been maintained then maybe I'd be expecting more.

If I fell down some steps which have been there over 100 years and 470,000 other people managed it without falling that year, I wouldn't think it was the museum's fault.

It goes back to cases like Maria Bailey. I still fail how to see anyone thought that was the hotel's fault. Even Leo saying the claims were exaggerated rather than saying it was her own fault.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

I wouldn't mind a nice new car, just one step would do it for me.

Just thinking back on times where I should have hired lawyer and put in a claim, i'd be sorted now. I'll be more vigilant in future.

TimeToShine

At 70 years of age a ruptured leg tendon can quite literally ruin the rest of your life. It's very hard to fully recover from such injuries at that age. It's one thing having young chancers coming over faking whiplash and various other injuries for a fat payout but in this specific case I'd argue that the system did its job, a once off case assessed on its merits and compensation awarded accordingly. Realistically speaking €70k for an injury that'll affect his ability to walk, jog, climb steps, and will probably lead to a walking frame 5/10 years earlier than usual is chump change.

Omackeral

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I am getting kind of sick of all these claims threads.

Don't click into them then. Or better yet, don't post in them then. You're not required to post in every single thread made on boards but you seem to think you are.

ChikiChiki

Claims tourism can be added to the list of soft touch Ireland.

Josepha Madigan and her advice to Maria Bailey epitomises everything that is wrong with the legal profession. It is staring us in the face.

MissDisaster

He’s an idiot taking advantage. End of.

skooterblue2

Mr Baldwin, its because you there are instructions written on bottles of shampoo.

Sonny noggs

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I am getting kind of sick of all these claims threads.

Noted.

ChikiChiki

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I am getting kind of sick of all these claims threads.

"Nothing to see here. I'm happy in my little bubble. You're all so negative. Positivity yo" :rolleyes:

In my opinion any new thread created is justified. Highlighting this nonsense serves a purpose. A lot of people unfortunatly fail to correlate how this affects them in their day to day lives.

hmmm

Glass fused light wrote: »

It would close a lot of older buildings with preservation orders or force the owners to "adult" proof as if we are childern.

I came through Dublin airport recently after being away for a while, and on one of the first set of steps there was a recorded voice telling people to hold the handrail being played repeatedly. It's an embarrassment, and sad for the country, that someone felt this was necessary.

This has to stop.

hmmm

TimeToShine wrote: »

Realistically speaking €70k for an injury that'll affect his ability to walk, jog, climb steps, and will probably lead to a walking frame 5/10 years earlier than usual is chump change.

You're missing the point that people are making about this or the Bailey case. No-one is saying they weren't injured, the question is whether it is appropriate to pay out large amounts of money to an adult who falls off a swing or down a flight of stairs.

Other countries don't try and pretend there is zero risk to going out and living life, they have a much stronger culture of personal responsibility.

Lots of people in France die doing things like base-jumping, and the French attitude is to shrug and say "it was their choice". Over here we'd look to sue whoever didn't put up a fence.

We were very lucky that hiker had her case rejected, or there wouldn't be a countryside walk or national park open to any of us as a consequence. We need legislation.

recedite

Here's the bit I find strange...

The judge accepted the contention that because the railing stopped before the end of the staircase there was a tendency for people to move towards the centre section.

Why would you have to move sideways on the third last step?

I'd say it was designed like that so normal people could take a short cut at the bottom of the staircase, like when getting on or off it. While still preventing anyone from falling over the side above the 3rd step height.
Seems like a good design to me. I must have an 1890's brain.

recedite

Does anybody have Mr. Baldwin's exact address?
I want to go over to Australia and fall on his porch.

green123

Boggles wrote: »

So if you were personally injured through negligence, you would be quite happy with just having your medical bills covered?

You are missing the point completely, as usual.

Just because someone gets hurt somewhere doesnt and shouldn't automatically mean compensation.

Most of the time it is their own fault and their own personal responsibility.

Of course if you are injured through negligence then compensation is due but the point here is that there was no negligence in this case.

Half a million people managed to use the steps that year without a problem.

So the steps were tested half a million times and passed the test half a million times that year.

So that proves that the steps are fine.

That is the only logical conclusion and any other conclusion is a very strange way of looking at things