Risk reward

Mad_maxx

While helping someone out in June of 2018, i injured my foot when a 25kg block fell four feet onto it, owner forgot it was propping up an oil tank we were removing from a shelf in his garage.

Anyway the pain stayed with me to this day, medical expenses are up on four grand at this stage and pain killers are fifty euro per month. It's likely a chronic pain situation as there is no longer any physiological evidence of injury

Went through the PIAB process but other side refused to engage on any level, they told me they had no public liability but that makes little sense, I've spoke to solicitors and several in the insurance sector, not one ever heard of having home insurance without also having public liability, i know this individual has home insurance as they told me so before they decided to cut ties and act in a Beligerent manner

Anyway, my solicitor tells me that if the other side continues to refuse to engage and we proceed to court, even he has a charge slapped on his house, it has a shelf life of twelve years.

Cost of a civil court action is circa twenty grand which would be forty if i lost, my sister is a solicitor but does not work in litigation, she knows a little about it however and is of the view I would be very likely to be able to prove liability based on the facts.

My own solicitor has not said either way whether he thinks it's worth pursuing, he said it's possible an insurance company will emerge if the threat of a court action becomes evident but that if no insurance cover really exists, the guy might offer twenty grand on the steps of the court.

My partner is very opposed to the idea pursuing it as she thinks it will create bad vibes in the community, this guy has lived in the area far longer than we have, personally I'm inclined to pursue, I've suffered a lot in the past eighteen months, can no longer go running or even walk more than a km without being in severe pain for days, I'm never without some form of discomfort and the flare ups every few months are incredibly painful.

I suppose I'm wondering if anyone else found a court action for personal injury worth it in the end?

Eggs For Dinner

Public liability insurance attached to a household policy will only provide cover for 'domestic activities '. If renovation work was being done on the house, it is unlikely to be classified as domestic. The extent of the project would be vital to classify it properly.

Regardless, to succeed in an action, you will have to prove a duty of care was owed to you and the accident was as a result of a breach of that duty.

Mad_maxx

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

Public liability insurance attached to a household policy will only provide cover for 'domestic activities '. If renovation work was being done on the house, it is unlikely to be classified as domestic. The extent of the project would be vital to classify it properly.

Regardless, to succeed in an action, you will have to prove a duty of care was owed to you and the accident was as a result of a breach of that duty.

I wasn't working for him, i might as well have been injured helping him empty the washing machine

Let me put it this way, if he had his washing machine in the garage and i was asked to help empty it and for whatever reason i ended up hurt due to him having forgotten about something loose and with the potential to inflict injury.

Would public liability attached to a household policy cover in that scenario?

Eggs For Dinner

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Would public liability attached to a household policy cover in that scenario?

You want me to provide you with a plausible scenario to support your claim?

Also, I never suggested you were working for him. I questioned whether the activity was domestic in nature or not

hullaballoo

OP, while the above interpretation of what would usually be covered under the public liability part of a house insurance policy may seem counterintuitive and unreasonable to you and me, it's something of a useful insight into the reasoning applied by insurance companies when they are trying to avoid their contractual obligations to pocket even more of our premiums.

It almost certainly does not reflect anything like what a reasonable judge or other tribunal might deem to be covered under standard home insurance policies but it's worth bearing in mind that the insurance company almost always holds all the cards. Such is life I'm afraid until the much needed reforms are brought to bear.

the14thwarrior

It would seem the idea of "an unfortunate accident" has not occurred to you and if I were the neighbour, I'd be worried too.
Did he offer to pay for any treatment at all?
You don't mention what injury occurred, bones broken, ligaments damaged, tendons torn?
If you spent that much money in a year you must have been going private, and with no insurance, why would someone do that if they thought at the begining they were not going to get anything out of it?
If you knew at the begining you were not going to sue, your expenses would not have been that high, especially if the injury was not that significant = physical, real damage.
I also feel a 25k would be so painful, I'm not saying it was not painful.
the longer you look for damages, the longer your pain will persist, and the longer it will take for you to heal.
I'm also concerned that your solicitor doesn't really know if he might win?
be careful, maybe you should just consider asking for your medical expenses, instead of a pay out

Eggs For Dinner

hullaballoo wrote: »

OP, while the above interpretation of what would usually be covered under the public liability part of a house insurance policy may seem counterintuitive and unreasonable to you and me, it's something of a useful insight into the reasoning applied by insurance companies when they are trying to avoid their contractual obligations to pocket even more of our premiums.

It almost certainly does not reflect anything like what a reasonable judge or other tribunal might deem to be covered under standard home insurance policies but it's worth bearing in mind that the insurance company almost always holds all the cards. Such is life I'm afraid until the much needed reforms are brought to bear.

It's not unreasonable for an insurer to restrict liability cover under a household policy to normal domestic activity. If you want a household policy to cover everything (construction, manufacture, sales etc) within the boundary of the property, be prepared to pay the appropriate premium to reflect the risk.The premium element of a household policy is miniscule and that's because standard household activity doesn't present much of a hazard.

It doesn't need reform, the cover is out there and available if you require it. Mates giving their neighbours a hand in activities for which they are untrained and unqualified is very high risk. You could say it is an accident waiting to happen.

On a final note, the existence, or not, of an insurance policy should not influence the OP from suing his neighbour for damages. If he has a solid case, he will succeed and the end cost can be pursued. Because a policy is in place is often seen as a 'free hit', win or lose and that's where reform is needed

Mad_maxx

the14thwarrior wrote: »

It would seem the idea of "an unfortunate accident" has not occurred to you and if I were the neighbour, I'd be worried too.
Did he offer to pay for any treatment at all?
You don't mention what injury occurred, bones broken, ligaments damaged, tendons torn?
If you spent that much money in a year you must have been going private, and with no insurance, why would someone do that if they thought at the begining they were not going to get anything out of it?
If you knew at the begining you were not going to sue, your expenses would not have been that high, especially if the injury was not that significant = physical, real damage.
I also feel a 25k would be so painful, I'm not saying it was not painful.
the longer you look for damages, the longer your pain will persist, and the longer it will take for you to heal.
I'm also concerned that your solicitor doesn't really know if he might win?
be careful, maybe you should just consider asking for your medical expenses, instead of a pay out

I've no health insurance, did you just imply i should have refrained from seeking treatment for fear the one responsible might not provide cover?, i was in severe pain, my priority was dealing with that pressing issue first and foremost

Visits to Orthopedic surgeons are 250 on day one and 150 thereafter, I've had six of those, ive also had two steroid injections costing 250 each and several scans in a private capacity , countless visits to my GP, 50 euro per month on pain medication, train journeys to Dublin to see foot specialist

Lost income from our Air B + B part time business

It really does not take long for a loss of several thousand to mount up

NUTLEY BOY

Apologies if I am in error but I seem to have read of and possibly posted to an identical scenario on boards.ie.
If so, could you reference the previous thread as there might be useful information on that too.

A few issues arise here on the general principles.

1. Did neighbour owe OP a duty of care ?

I would think that a duty of care was owed in accordance within the basic concepts of negligence including reasonable foreseeability and the "neighbour" principle of Donoghue v Stevenson 1932.

2. Was there a breach of that duty of care ?

Although not an employers' liability scenario the neighbour does seem to have organised matters poorly and to have made a mistake the direct consequence of which was his injury.
What has to be decided is if the mistake amounts to an act of negligence.
On the brief facts there is a proper case to argue that there was negligence.

3. Does OP's status as a "volunteer" negate any rights to succeed ?
I would not think so as being a volunteer does not automatically wipe out your rights or entitle another party to be careless about you.

4. If this was a domestic scenario the public liability section of a household insurance policy should cover this event.
The neighbour has no legal obligation to disclose details of the insurers.
In any event if the neighbour does not report the matter to his insurers - thus seeking indemnity - they will not be involved anyhow.
If the neighbour does report it eventually the insurers might repudiate the claim on grounds of breaching the contract condition about notification.

5. Issuing proceedings against the neighbour is a waste of time even if he has assets where you cannot liquidate those assets to satisfy a judgment and or where you convert that judgment in to a charge against the neighbour's property but it is never sold.

Against that you could always issue and serve proceedings on the neighbour.
If he deals with those in the same way as everything else (ignore it / head down / say nothing / it will all go away) you will have no problem marking a judgment against him by default.
That might give you some negotiating leverage to force him to a settlement.

listermint

Mad_maxx wrote: »

I've no health insurance, did you just imply i should have refrained from seeking treatment for fear the one responsible might not provide cover?, i was in severe pain, my priority was dealing with that pressing issue first and foremost

Visits to Orthopedic surgeons are 250 on day one and 150 thereafter, I've had six of those, ive also had two steroid injections costing 250 each and several scans in a private capacity , countless visits to my GP, 50 euro per month on pain medication, train journeys to Dublin to see foot specialist

Lost income from our Air B + B part time business

It really does not take long for a loss of several thousand to mount up

You lost income from your Air B n B because you hurt your foot ?

Sorry if i was the neighbour id cut all ties with you. This was an accident **** happens all the time like this where there is no one to go after. If you dropped a similar weight on your foot in your own utility room would you sue your wife?


I hate to see this sort of stuff tbh, and ive dropped various objects on myself over the years the pain of which goes away after a few weeks. never felt the need to pursue people.

the brain is a powerful thing and often the feeling of being wronged prolongs things....



And one final word on it, Its the likes of the OP that makes 100% sure people dont help each other out these days and similar for those in the thread that would make up reasons for litigation. Its absolutely murdering volunteer work of all kinds even if its just giving someone a dig out moving something Tragic. But sure people make a killing of it dont they........

UrbanVixen

Post #10 above from listermint.

It might be worth noting the basic tests to maintain an action in negligence ;

1. Defendant must owe plaintiff a duty of care,
2. Defendant must breach that duty of care,
3. Plaintiff must sustain injury and loss and
4. Defendant's breach of duty must be the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries and losses.

Mad_maxx

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

Apologies if I am in error but I seem to have read of and possibly posted to an identical scenario on boards.ie.
If so, could you reference the previous thread as there might be useful information on that too.

A few issues arise here on the general principles.

1. Did neighbour owe OP a duty of care ?

I would think that a duty of care was owed in accordance within the basic concepts of negligence including reasonable foreseeability and the "neighbour" principle of Donoghue v Stevenson 1932.

2. Was there a breach of that duty of care ?

Although not an employers' liability scenario the neighbour does seem to have organised matters poorly and to have made a mistake the direct consequence of which was his injury.
What has to be decided is if the mistake amounts to an act of negligence.
On the brief facts there is a proper case to argue that there was negligence.

3. Does OP's status as a "volunteer" negate any rights to succeed ?
I would not think so as being a volunteer does automatically wipe out your rights or entitle another party to be careless about you.

4. If this was a domestic scenario the public liability section of a household insurance policy should cover this event.
The neighbour has no legal obligation to disclose details of the insurers.
In any event if the neighbour does not report the matter to his insurers - thus seeking indemnity - they will not be involved anyhow.
If the neighbour does report it eventually the insurers might repudiate the claim on grounds of breaching the contract condition about notification.

5. Issuing proceedings against the neighbour is a waste of time even if he has assets where you cannot liquidate those assets to satisfy a judgment and or where you convert that judgment in to a charge against the neighbour's property but it is never sold.

Against that you could always issue and serve proceedings on the neighbour.
If he deals with those in the same way as everything else (ignore it / head down / say nothing / it will all go away) you will have no problem marking a judgment against him by default.
That might give you some negotiating leverage to force him to a settlement.

Thank you for that comprehensive analysis and detailed reply

Mad_maxx

listermint wrote: »

You lost income from your Air B n B because you hurt your foot ?

Sorry if i was the neighbour id cut all ties with you. This was an accident **** happens all the time like this where there is no one to go after. If you dropped a similar weight on your foot in your own utility room would you sue your wife?


I hate to see this sort of stuff tbh, and ive dropped various objects on myself over the years the pain of which goes away after a few weeks. never felt the need to pursue people.

the brain is a powerful thing and often the feeling of being wronged prolongs things....



And one final word on it, Its the likes of the OP that makes 100% sure people dont help each other out these days and similar for those in the thread that would make up reasons for litigation. Its absolutely murdering volunteer work of all kinds even if its just giving someone a dig out moving something Tragic. But sure people make a killing of it dont they........

You need to be reasonably fit and healthy to properly provide an Air B and B service, washing linen every day etc. i was unable to walk from the living room to the kitchen without being in terrible pain for nine months.

Paying guests don't want being met with a grimacing cripple

GreeBo

listermint wrote: »

You lost income from your Air B n B because you hurt your foot ?

Sorry if i was the neighbour id cut all ties with you. This was an accident **** happens all the time like this where there is no one to go after. If you dropped a similar weight on your foot in your own utility room would you sue your wife?


I hate to see this sort of stuff tbh, and ive dropped various objects on myself over the years the pain of which goes away after a few weeks. never felt the need to pursue people.

the brain is a powerful thing and often the feeling of being wronged prolongs things....



And one final word on it, Its the likes of the OP that makes 100% sure people dont help each other out these days and similar for those in the thread that would make up reasons for litigation. Its absolutely murdering volunteer work of all kinds even if its just giving someone a dig out moving something Tragic. But sure people make a killing of it dont they........

If you hurt your foot in your own house would you not use your insurance for the expenses?
Why is it different because its someone elses insurance?

Accidents happen, thats why we have insurance.

Mad_maxx

It's an easy case to prove, question is whether I'm likely to ever see any redress.

Im tempted to sue out of principal, guy's belligerence has been appalling

Alf Veedersane

listermint wrote: »

I hate to see this sort of stuff tbh, and ive dropped various objects on myself over the years the pain of which goes away after a few weeks. never felt the need to pursue people.........

Yeah. You dropped it on yourself. You're responsible for the injury you've caused yourself.

listermint wrote: »

And one final word on it, Its the likes of the OP that makes 100% sure people dont help each other out these days and similar for those in the thread that would make up reasons for litigation. Its absolutely murdering volunteer work of all kinds even if its just giving someone a dig out moving something Tragic. But sure people make a killing of it dont they........

The flipside of that is that people will think twice about helping others out in such a situation because if something goes wrong, they're left carrying the can.

the14thwarrior

Mad_maxx wrote: »

I've no health insurance, did you just imply i should have refrained from seeking treatment for fear the one responsible might not provide cover?, i was in severe pain, my priority was dealing with that pressing issue first and foremost

Visits to Orthopedic surgeons are 250 on day one and 150 thereafter, I've had six of those, ive also had two steroid injections costing 250 each and several scans in a private capacity , countless visits to my GP, 50 euro per month on pain medication, train journeys to Dublin to see foot specialist

Lost income from our Air B + B part time business

It really does not take long for a loss of several thousand to mount up

It really does not take long for a loss of several thousand to mount up if you choose to go private.............. and still we don't really know what is wrong........ because any public hospital and orthopaedic surgeon would be able to treat a serious injury for free..............sterioid injections and all...... ...... and claiming for loss of wages because you can't use your foot.... nonsense..... a claim for money will result in all sorts of perceived difficulties.
if you hurt your foot and it was your own fault, you'd make it your business to ensure you are still able to earn money as best you can.
of course maybe the neighbour did offer to pay for some costs but we don't know that.
go ahead and sue.
the only way you'll find out if you take it to court and see..........
why anyone of us would have anything other than basic home insurance is beyond me, so therefore go ahead and sue.
see if you can get your money.
at the end of the day, no one really knows until you go to court.

Mad_maxx

GreeBo wrote: »

If you hurt your foot in your own house would you not use your insurance for the expenses?
Why is it different because its someone elses insurance?

Accidents happen, thats why we have insurance.

I didn't dignify those parts of the post with a reply.

Those types like to admonish others for demanding mistakes are accounted for but would never be so forgiving themselves if badly injured through someone else's negligence

Mad_maxx

the14thwarrior wrote: »

It really does not take long for a loss of several thousand to mount up if you choose to go private.............. and still we don't really know what is wrong........ because any public hospital and orthopaedic surgeon would be able to treat a serious injury for free..............sterioid injections and all...... ...... and claiming for loss of wages because you can't use your foot.... nonsense..... a claim for money will result in all sorts of perceived difficulties.
if you hurt your foot and it was your own fault, you'd make it your business to ensure you are still able to earn money as best you can.
of course maybe the neighbour did offer to pay for some costs but we don't know that.
go ahead and sue.
the only way you'll find out if you take it to court and see..........
why anyone of us would have anything other than basic home insurance is beyond me, so therefore go ahead and sue.
see if you can get your money.
at the end of the day, no one really knows until you go to court.

No idea what to make of that dogs dinner of a post

What difference does my having gone private for much of my treatment make?

A 25kg block fell four feet onto my foot while i was wearing runners, that's a massive impact, the pain has not gone away so chronic pain is very likely to be the issue

No bones were broken but a scan showed a bone bruise, pre existing arthritis also showed up, Orthopedic surgeon explained that what was benign was made significant by the injury, arthritis lying dormant but brought to the surface by injury

1st TMT joint fusion in my foot might be required down the road according to my Orthopedic surgeon

Eggs For Dinner

Mad_maxx wrote: »

A 25kg block fell four feet onto my foot while i was wearing runners, that's a massive impact, n

Well there's an issue for you to begin with. Wearing inappropriate PPE for the task involved. That indicates that you were not suitably qualified/experienced to perform the task required. As your neighbour was not your employer, you cannot assert you were instructed to carry out the task.

Mad_maxx

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

Well there's an issue for you to begin with. Wearing inappropriate PPE for the task involved. That indicates that you were not suitably qualified/experienced to perform the task required. As your neighbour was not your employer, you cannot assert you were instructed to carry out the task.

i was asked at a minutes notice to help out

the_pen_turner

where was the block and how did it end up on your foot

Eggs For Dinner

Mad_maxx wrote: »

i was asked at a minutes notice to help out

Not relevant. You could have said no. You were under no obligation to undertake the task.

Don't get me wrong, you may well have a decent case. It's hard to give a reasonable opinion on the scant facts you have provided. Your assertion that it's an easy one to prove now seems unlikely. Your original query regarding risk/reward is edging towards risk IMO

Mad_maxx

the_pen_turner wrote: »

where was the block and how did it end up on your foot

Sitting under the back of the tank, as the tank was slid out, the loose block fell

Mad_maxx

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

Not relevant. You could have said no. You were under no obligation to undertake the task.

Don't get me wrong, you may well have a decent case. It's hard to give a reasonable opinion on the scant facts you have provided. Your assertion that it's an easy one to prove now seems unlikely. Your original query regarding risk/reward is edging towards risk IMO

I think it would be easy to prove negligence but probably difficult to ever collect any compensation

the14thwarrior

Mad_maxx wrote: »

No idea what to make of that dogs dinner of a post

What difference does my having gone private for much of my treatment make?

A 25kg block fell four feet onto my foot while i was wearing runners, that's a massive impact, the pain has not gone away so chronic pain is very likely to be the issue

No bones were broken but a scan showed a bone bruise, pre existing arthritis also showed up, Orthopedic surgeon explained that what was benign was made significant by the injury, arthritis lying dormant but brought to the surface by injury

1st TMT joint fusion in my foot might be required down the road according to my Orthopedic surgeon

its not a dogs dinner of a post, just an observation of how much this cost you, and the choices made. And now you want your money back. A bone bruise is very painful indeed. but less traumatic than a bone fracture, and in terms of payouts, thats something to consider.
nearly everyone over the age of 30 has pre-existing arthritis, but unless it was diagnosed beforehand, it doesn't really mean anything but the medical report you will pay for will say it.
i will say in my experience, and i have quite a lot in this area just so you know I'm not talking out of my ar&e, bone bruises can take forever to heal but objectively not half as bad as a fracture. objectively speaking.

Mad_maxx

the14thwarrior wrote: »

its not a dogs dinner of a post, just an observation of how much this cost you, and the choices made. And now you want your money back. A bone bruise is very painful indeed. but less traumatic than a bone fracture, and in terms of payouts, thats something to consider.
nearly everyone over the age of 30 has pre-existing arthritis, but unless it was diagnosed beforehand, it doesn't really mean anything but the medical report you will pay for will say it.
i will say in my experience, and i have quite a lot in this area just so you know I'm not talking out of my ar&e, bone bruises can take forever to heal but objectively not half as bad as a fracture. objectively speaking.

Are you a doctor?

My Orthopedic said a bone bruise is worse than a fracture, my GP said the same , even the term "bone bruise" is far too benign, it's really a bone crush

My choosing to go private for most of my treatment is utterly irrelevant, no idea why you keep referring to it

NUTLEY BOY

I should have said that being a volunteer does not automatically alienate your rights :rolleyes: Post #9 corrected.....

NUTLEY BOY

BTW the OP's medical history raises a further legal issue of causation and reasonable foreseeability.

Generally, a culpable defendant is liable for those injuries that come within the scope of what was reasonably foreseeable.
One of the classical exceptions to that is the so-called "eggshell skull" case as per Smith v Leech Brain & Co [1962] 2 QB 405.

If a plaintiff has a symptomatically quiescent pre-disposition to a problem and that is "lighted up" by a defendant's negligent act that may well survive the conventional reasonable foreseeability restriction in terms of extent of financial liability. Much would actually turn on the specifics of the medical evidence.

In the alternative, if a plaintiff has a symptomatically active underlying condition a negligent defendant will only be expected to compensate for additional injury imposed on top of that.

the14thwarrior

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Are you a doctor?

My Orthopedic said a bone bruise is worse than a fracture, my GP said the same , even the term "bone bruise" is far too benign, it's really a bone crush

My choosing to go private for most of my treatment is utterly irrelevant, no idea why you keep referring to it

i'm glad you at least have good doctors. yes, most doctors pass off or miss a bone bruise. and they can last for a very long time. and deceptively hard to treat, as no treatment really works.

i wish you well. really do.
i just can't agree with suing your neighbour for something that was not intentional, not foreseen and the whole concept leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

randomrb

Considering that at one stage you were obviously on relatively good terms with this person I would suggest that you talk to him and propose mediation to try and sort this out with as little pain as possible.

Tell him that you don't want to be in this position but that this has cost you a lot of money and you can't afford it. You don't want to have to bring a case against him as it will cost both of you a lot of money time and energy and that you hope that they will sit down with you and a mediator to try and sort this out.

Mad_maxx

the14thwarrior wrote: »

i'm glad you at least have good doctors. yes, most doctors pass off or miss a bone bruise. and they can last for a very long time. and deceptively hard to treat, as no treatment really works.

i wish you well. really do.
i just can't agree with suing your neighbour for something that was not intentional, not foreseen and the whole concept leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Countless traffic accidents are accidental yet if an innocent party ends up with permanent injuries, they rarely take a philosophical view and choose not to pursue for damages, i doubt you would either, doubt you would be so foolish

Mad_maxx

randomrb wrote: »

Considering that at one stage you were obviously on relatively good terms with this person I would suggest that you talk to him and propose mediation to try and sort this out with as little pain as possible.

Tell him that you don't want to be in this position but that this has cost you a lot of money and you can't afford it. You don't want to have to bring a case against him as it will cost both of you a lot of money time and energy and that you hope that they will sit down with you and a mediator to try and sort this out.

Tried that early on, asked him not to make things difficult, he replied that he would make it difficult, that was after the very first letter notifying him of my intention to claim

Thick as pig sh1t, he is affronted at the idea of someone claiming against his home

Eggs For Dinner

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Countless traffic accidents are accidental yet if an innocent party ends up with permanent injuries, they rarely take a philosophical view and choose not to pursue for damages, i doubt you would either, doubt you would be so foolish

You are right. However, in my experience, it is becoming less and less frequent that the injured party accepts that they were a major contributor to their own misfortune

BattleCorp

There's absolutely no point proceeding with the claim unless you are sure that the incident in question is covered by your neighbour's insurance.

You may have some chance of getting money off the insurance company but no chance of getting money from your neighbour as he sounds like he has feckall assets given that you said that there's a charge against his house.

Mad_maxx

BattleCorp wrote: »

There's absolutely no point proceeding with the claim unless you are sure that the incident in question is covered by your neighbour's insurance.

You may have some chance of getting money off the insurance company but no chance of getting money from your neighbour as he sounds like he has feckall assets given that you said that there's a charge against his house.

I never said there was " a charge against his house", someone may have a charge on it, i don't know, i don't however

Add to that he told me he had house insurance but that he wasn't covered for what happened, that isn't possible according to my solicitor and four people involved in the insurance sector whom i spoke to off the record

He may however have left it too long to notify his insurance company, that is a real possibility knowing his style

NUTLEY BOY

Mad_maxx wrote: »

I never said there was " a charge against his house", someone may have a charge on it, i don't know, i don't however

Add to that he told me he had house insurance but that he wasn't covered for what happened, that isn't possible according to my solicitor and four people involved in the insurance sector whom i spoke to off the record

He may however have left it too long to notify his insurance company, that is a real possibility knowing his style

A civilian's interpretation of an insurance policy is not always reliable.
It could also be self-serving i.e. I have no insurance cover so it is not worth suing me so please go away.
He would need to explain that one properly.

In relation to yourself keep an eye on time limits for initiating proceedings.

the_pen_turner

I'm not sure that you are not at least partially responsible yourself for your own injury.
You could see the block and presumably you were on that end lifting so it's your own movement that moved it
You undertook a dangerous job of lifting a heavy object without the proper ppe

I would guess that if it went to court you would be partially responsible

It's easy be wise in hindsight though

Eggs For Dinner

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Add to that he told me he had house insurance but that he wasn't covered for what happened, that isn't possible according to my solicitor and four people involved in the insurance sector whom i spoke to off the record

e

It is very possible. As I explained previously, if the activity that caused the accident was not "domestic" in nature, then the public liability section of his household insurance policy will not provide cover.

BattleCorp

Mad_maxx wrote: »

I never said there was " a charge against his house", someone may have a charge on it, i don't know, i don't however

Your quote below made me think that there was a charge on the house. I now see that the word 'if' may have been left out of that sentence or maybe I'm just thick.

Anyway, my solicitor tells me that if the other side continues to refuse to engage and we proceed to court, even (if) he has a charge slapped on his house, it has a shelf life of twelve years.

Mad_maxx

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

A civilian's interpretation of an insurance policy is not always reliable.
It could also be self-serving i.e. I have no insurance cover so it is not worth suing me so please go away.
He would need to explain that one properly.

In relation to yourself keep an eye on time limits for initiating proceedings.

The insurance company probably tried to weasel out of their responsibility and this guy was more than happy to report he wasn't covered

He is covered, public liability is standard with a home insurance policy

Eggs For Dinner

Mad_maxx wrote: »

The insurance company probably tried to weasel out of their responsibility and this guy was more than happy to report he wasn't covered

He is covered, public liability is standard with a home insurance policy

Youre very selective in the contributions here that you respond to. How about telling us exactly what work was being done on the house, not just the fact that a block fell while moving a tank

Mad_maxx

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

Youre very selective in the contributions here that you respond to. How about telling us exactly what work was being done on the house, not just the fact that a block fell while moving a tank

I wasn't involved in any work being done on this individuals house.nor have i ever been, I showed up at the house having phoned in advance as i was borrowing a saw, my own was blunt and hardware stores closed, upon arrival, i was asked to help with the removal of a tank

Perhaps you are confused and thinking of another thread?

Anything else you need clarification on?

Eggs For Dinner

Mad_maxx wrote: »

I wasn't involved in any work being done on this individuals house.nor have i ever been, I showed up at the house having phoned in advance as i was borrowing a saw, my own was blunt and hardware stores closed, upon arrival, i was asked to help with the removal of a tank

Perhaps you are confused and thinking of another thread?

Anything else you need clarification on?

Was your neighbour renovating any part of his dwelling????

Mad_maxx

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

Was your neighbour renovating any part of his dwelling????

No and why you presumed so is a mystery to me

Eggs For Dinner

Mad_maxx wrote: »

No and why you presumed so is a mystery to me

Because you were both removing an oil tank!!!

My experience with people who drip feed the facts is that not all is as being portrayed. I'll leave you to it and wish you the best with your injury

the14thwarrior

I hope that the saw he loaned you was not too blunt and you did not cut your finger on it. could have two lawsuits going on.

Mad_maxx

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

Because you were both removing an oil tank!!!

My experience with people who drip feed the facts is that not all is as being portrayed. I'll leave you to it and wish you the best with your injury

So removing an oil tank = carrying out work on a house?

You presume a lot based on nothing
I'd call it a chore that takes a minute or two.