Eligible for Personal Injury Claim?

[RedOnion]

Is this always the case? Surely lying in court would be enough to warrant action against these people.

Perjury isn't an offence here. Some discussion on the topic here:

Is there any sanction on people making unsuccessful personal injuries claims?

There have been a few cases in courts recently which the judge rejected 'You're lying through your teeth' - couple's €60k taxi injury claims hit dead end Mr English, who appeared for Allianz Insurance, told Ms Lawrence before she left the witness box that he would present proof she was not...

www.askaboutmoney.com

 

[DirectDevil]

There is a difference between making a personal injuries claim th

Not referring to anyone in particular..... But I've often wondered about all of these fabricated/exaggerated/dishonest cases that are thrown out of court.

If one was to steal a chocolate bar from a shop you might face sanction - Yet if you begin legal proceedings against a person or business etc. lying and exaggerating your claims in the hope of making a quick €50,000 & are found out you simply walk away scott free???

Is this always the case? Surely lying in court would be enough to warrant action against these people.

Also is it not the case that if the legal system did go after these people who are caught in the act of very clearly making inflated/vexatious or false claim then it would discourage others in future.

I wonder is a factor here that the legal profession makes so much hay in this arena they don't want to disrupt the status quo.....

Sometimes plaintiffs fail to discharge their obligation to reach the required standard of proof.
The required standard is the balance of probabilities i.e. at least 51% more likely than not.
In that event the correct procedure is for the judge to dismiss the action.
An application for costs will usually - but not always - follow from the defendant(s).
The judge has absolute discretion in relation to any costs order.

If a claim is grossly inflated / exaggerated and the defendant can establish this the action can be dismissed by the trial judge.

Walking away "Scot free" may well be the actual outcome in some cases.
If a defendant has an order for costs against a plaintiff it is practically pointless to pursue it if the plaintiff has no means.
That is the upside for a plaintiff of no means taking a blatantly speculative action.

The issue of "lying in court" is highly problematical.
Sometimes a plaintiff will tell the truth in accordance with they oath taken before giving evidence but they are simply wrong.
Sometimes a plaintiff will knowingly give deliberately false evidence.
The problem is to distinguish false evidence from erroneous evidence.

For the preceding reason it almost never happens that anyone is prosecuted for perjury in this context.
Remember that a prosecutor would have to prove perjury beyond reasonable doubt.
Perjury is still a common law offence and there seems to be no enthusiasm to prosecute it.
I think that perjury is going to be placed on a statutory footing which might bring clarity and prosecutions.

For clarity, I am making absolutely no reference to a recent and prominent case.
There have been many utterly uninformed, unfair and unreasonable assertions on social media about that matter and I will not join that circus.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

Take your case to the PIAB/IAB, they will decide if there is a case to answer. IMO there is, but I'm a lay-man.

Does PIAB decide if there is a case to answer?

I don't think so.

They just assess the damages and the parties have to decide if the company is liable for those damages.

I have just checked their website and I can't find whether they do or not.

Brendan

 

[Tenente]

Does PIAB decide if there is a case to answer?

I don't think so.

They just assess the damages and the parties have to decide if the company is liable for those damages.

I have just checked their website and I can't find whether they do or not.

Brendan

PIAB don’t decide if there is a case to answer or not and have no role in deciding liability. If there is any liability issue it must be decided in court.
Essentially a Claim is submitted to PIAB by the Claimant. PIAB then send a copy of it to the Respondent and their insurers ,if any. The Respondent or their insurers respond to PIAB indicating whether they consent to PIAB making an Assessment of Damages or not. If they consent PIAB then make an Assessment. If they do not consent PIAB inform the Claimant and issue him/her with an Authorisation to issue Court Proceedings to have their case heard in court if they wish to do so.

If the Respondent consents to PIAB making an assessment, PIAB will send the Claimant to a doctor of their own choosing or perhaps more than one doctor if injuries relate to a number of medical issues. They also request a list of out of pocket expenses for consideration. Once they have these items, they will an Assessment of Damages based on the medical reports and paperwork. The Assessment of Damages is then sent to both Claimant and Respondent for consideration. If both parties agree to the Assessment the matter settles for that amount. If either party disagrees with the Assessment and rejects it (e.g. a Claimant might think it is too low or a Respondent think it is too high or may have a rethink and wish to fight the case on liability grounds) then an Authorisation issues for the Claimant to issue Court Proceedings if they wish to do so.

 

[galway_blow_in]

PIAB don’t decide if there is a case to answer or not and have no role in deciding liability. If there is any liability issue it must be decided in court.
Essentially a Claim is submitted to PIAB by the Claimant. PIAB then send a copy of it to the Respondent and their insurers ,if any. The Respondent or their insurers respond to PIAB indicating whether they consent to PIAB making an Assessment of Damages or not. If they consent PIAB then make an Assessment. If they do not consent PIAB inform the Claimant and issue him/her with an Authorisation to issue Court Proceedings to have their case heard in court if they wish to do so.

If the Respondent consents to PIAB making an assessment, PIAB will send the Claimant to a doctor of their own choosing or perhaps more than one doctor if injuries relate to a number of medical issues. They also request a list of out of pocket expenses for consideration. Once they have these items, they will an Assessment of Damages based on the medical reports and paperwork. The Assessment of Damages is then sent to both Claimant and Respondent for consideration. If both parties agree to the Assessment the matter settles for that amount. If either party disagrees with the Assessment and rejects it (e.g. a Claimant might think it is too low or a Respondent think it is too high or may have a rethink and wish to fight the case on liability grounds) then an Authorisation issues for the Claimant to issue Court Proceedings if they wish to do so.

Going through this myself at the moment, PIAB application submitted in March, fully expect the other side to not support assessment but I thought that even this happens, you need to await a PIAB assessment before pursuing matters through the courts and that this assessment process takes a year

Hope I'm wrong as I've little interest in waiting until next year to begin court proceedings

 

[DirectDevil]

Does PIAB decide if there is a case to answer?

I don't think so.

They just assess the damages and the parties have to decide if the company is liable for those damages.

I have just checked their website and I can't find whether they do or not.

Brendan

That is correct.

PIAB only assess the quantum of damages.

PIAB have no jurisdiction in determining liability as that is a function of the courts.

 

[Purple]

Back to the OP. The stairs are wooden and varnished but not polished. The description in the OP is erroneous.

If nobody else fell down the stairs over the last 12 months then the Restaurant should not be held as liable.

I walked into one of those two step ladders that looks like a footstool in Supervalu on Tuesday. I hurt my back and have a bad cut on my shin (steri-strips but no stitched). Why should Supervalu be liable because I was an egit and not paying attention to what was in front of me?

This sort of case is crazy. The OP slipped and fell down a stairs. It was an unfortunate accident. Could happen to anyone. Sometimes bad things happen.
It was not the fault of the restaurant, the stairs, the people who made the stairs, the person who designed the stairs or the architect who specified the stairs.

End of story.

 

[mathepac]

That said because OP lives outside the jurisdiction they might face an application to a court for an order for security for costs.
This means that OP might be required to lodge a certain sum of money in court against the contingency that they might lose the action and the defendant may be awarded costs. As OP is outside the jurisdiction enforcement of a costs order would be problematical otherwise.

Where did you get that information from and why the inappropriate mention of "security for costs"?

The OP states clearly in the first post "I am UK citizen working in Dublin."

I'm having difficulty reconciling the levity in some posts with the fact that the OP suffered significant injury in the incident. "Blame" or responsibility for the incident is one thing; respect for the injured poster should be a given.

 

[MangoJoe]

Fortunately I know how to use stairs properly hence why I was holding the handrail concentrating on where I was going.

Here’s hoping you don’t slip down those stairs at work again because you were preoccupied with something else

Where did you get that information from and why the inappropriate mention of "security for costs"?

The OP states clearly in the first post "I am UK citizen working in Dublin."

I'm having difficulty reconciling the levity in some posts with the fact that the OP suffered significant injury in the incident. "Blame" or responsibility for the incident is one thing; respect for the injured poster should be a given.

Mathepac regarding your above post, you're clearly a nice and decent person - All credit to you.

I'd just point out that our aspirationally litigious friend wished a work accident upon me and I would also be of the opinion that sometimes our actions subsequent to an incident can eclipse the gravity of the original event itself thus preventing mass outpourings of sympathy…...

 

[mathepac]

Thanks for that. I'd hoped we'd gone past the "he said, she said" tit for tat stuff in here; complaining about it to the mods on boards.ie got me banned, "for consistently being a [diminutive of Richard]" to quote the mod. I don't miss them and I'm sure they don't miss me. If you believe a poster has slighted you here, just report the post.

 

[galway_blow_in]

Back to the OP. The stairs are wooden and varnished but not polished. The description in the OP is erroneous.

If nobody else fell down the stairs over the last 12 months then the Restaurant should not be held as liable.

I walked into one of those two step ladders that looks like a footstool in Supervalu on Tuesday. I hurt my back and have a bad cut on my shin (steri-strips but no stitched). Why should Supervalu be liable because I was an egit and not paying attention to what was in front of me?

This sort of case is crazy. The OP slipped and fell down a stairs. It was an unfortunate accident. Could happen to anyone. Sometimes bad things happen.
It was not the fault of the restaurant, the stairs, the people who made the stairs, the person who designed the stairs or the architect who specified the stairs.

End of story.

I'm curious to know how you " hurt your back" walking into a small knee high step ladder?

 

[galway_blow_in]

Where did you get that information from and why the inappropriate mention of "security for costs"?

The OP states clearly in the first post "I am UK citizen working in Dublin."

I'm having difficulty reconciling the levity in some posts with the fact that the OP suffered significant injury in the incident. "Blame" or responsibility for the incident is one thing; respect for the injured poster should be a given.

 

[Purple]

I'm curious to know how you " hurt your back" walking into a small knee high step ladder?

Kind of jarred it when I walked into the steps-thingy. Nothing too serious though. Just a little lower back pain. The cut on my leg is worse. I've no idea how I managed to cut it so badly. The bottom line is that it was my own fault. I take it as a lesson to be less careless.

 

[MangoJoe]

Thanks for that. I'd hoped we'd gone past the "he said, she said" tit for tat stuff in here; complaining about it to the mods on boards.ie got me banned, "for consistently being a [diminutive of Richard]" to quote the mod. I don't miss them and I'm sure they don't miss me. If you believe a poster has slighted you here, just report the post.

Oh I remember your Username from your days on boards.ie - Your coining of the excellent term "eejit-coloured glasses" was one that stuck in my mind.

And no, I'm actually more bothered that you'd think I'd be that easily upset..... I just wanted to point out that the much maligned OP had form that's all....

FWIW I too left Boards.ie due to their overall horrible moderation style - The impression I get now is that they lost a lot of their solid, established core membership through their own faults and now deeply regret it.

Back on topic I'm entirely in agreement with Purple here, I've no respect whatsoever for these people who would seek to sue the Supermarket, ladder manufacturer and the man that laid the floor the ladder stood on.....

Purple sorry to hear of your injuries, I hope you see daily improvements and are back in full form in the very short term.

 

[Purple]

Purple sorry to hear of your injuries, I hope you see daily improvements and are back in full form in the very short term.

Thanks. I've done worse to myself and most certainly will do so again in the not to distant future.