The compo thread


#241

Seems crazy alrighty. He has basically awarded her a lump sum to quit her job which I suspect she’ll probably do.


#242

He doubled it for tax reasons apparently!


#243

These judges seem to be pretty shonky on logic. The salary she’s being compensated for was going to be taxed also. Could he impose a penalty that involved paying her annually?

Anyway, she did in fact leave the defence forces:

This may be an accident of reporting, but if the judge said the following then I don’t know how he’s qualified to do so


#244

I think it’s because they have some kind of seniority-based promotion system still in place. But as a military man yourself you would know that :smiley:


#245

Courts report 15% increase in personal injury claims last year
Concerns surrounding insurance industry and rising premiums likely to heighten
irishtimes.com/business/fin … -1.3166499

I suppose with conveyancing down, they have to make their money somewhere


#246

Three payouts for man after cars driven by wife and sister rear-ended other vehicles
independent.ie/irish-news/co … 77212.html

Keep paying your insurance suckers, these people gotta live too


#247

Saw that earlier today and my blood boiled over…

Just look at the state of him for a start…

Why do the courts even entertain such wasters and how much do these people cost the State in handouts and the rest of us in compo claims? Him and his likes must be laughing their heads off at us for being so gullible…


#248

Who is “the rest of us” as distinct from the State? :laughing:
Unfortunately if you are a taxpayer who drives you are paying for both the handouts and the compo claims.
Interestingly, you are also paying the judges salary and this motorist and his family are keeping him and the rest of the legal profession in extremely lucrative employment so it all sort of makes sense when you think about it…


#249

Wouldn’t argue with any of that…


#250


#251

No real surprises here…

independent.ie/irish-news/u … 97370.html
*
A solicitor providing personal injury advice said that even if a claim is fraudulent, you won’t be pursued for costs. The advice was given during an undercover consultation with a firm that is advertising ‘no win, no fee’ legal representation - despite the Law Society having strict regulations against this.

The scenario presented to the solicitor was a slip and fall in a Dublin nightclub

…You are there to dance and have a few drinks and to have a good time. They are bringing you in and charging you for the drinks so on their back be it." The solicitor also told the reporter; “[you look injured] the way you are sitting” - despite the reporter having no actual injuries.*


#252

‘A fraud’: Judge rules woman deliberately set trap for other driver in insurance scam


#253

I would love for one or two of these fraudsters to be charged and convicted of either perjury and/or perverting the course of justice. But it would appear the DPP has little interest in it. Which is a shame.


#254

It’s going to require something like that to sort it out.


#255

#256

Tesco used to call this country Treasure Island. I imagine the Legal profession call it Utopia or Xanadau


#257

This would have opened all sorts of floodgates if he’d won

Keen soccer player who broke his ankle while playing on frosty pitch loses €60k damages claim
independent.ie/irish-news/c … 66637.html


#258

For every 1 good decision by a Judge, there’s 10 of these

Man who drank five pints before slipping on porch tiles at his council house awarded €105K damages
independent.ie/irish-news/c … 68125.html

Quite what the bit in bold is about is beyond me! Judges aren’t well in the head.

Anyways, this might partly explain why successive Govts decided to get out of the social housing game


#259

I’ve a rubber mat in my tiled porch. But for “social housing” tenants, it’s someone else’s job to to provide such patently obvious risk-reducing devices.

Let’s build more social housing - we’re being held up without a gun.


#260

I’d be more inclined to blame the law profession. Seriously a drunk bloke slips on wet tiles and the Council pays for it. The Council was neither responsible for the chap being drunk or the tiles being wet. Also, had anyone, particularly the claimant complained about the tiles being slippy when wet before? Like, come on explain how the Council was negligent here!

The judges are enriching their cronies in the law profession with this shite. This is the law professions NAMA.