Page 124 of 186

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 9:48 am
by Mullet 2
anonymous_joe wrote:Not really, it's been going this way for several decades.

Jury trials were abolished in the 80s.

PIAB was the next insurance gambit to try and take cases out of the courts.

That failed, so now the approach is to try and artificially lower damages by filling the media with misinformation about fraud.

The reality is that over the last five odd years there has been a huge increase in premia that bears no resemblance to any change in payouts. Coincidentally, profits have rocketed up too. The victims in this are the idiots who'll continue paying too much for insurance to these companies and thank them for it.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 10:00 am
by anonymous_joe
You're not stupid, Mullet, you know exactly what they wanted, and it was your lot who set it up for them.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 10:03 am
by Duff Paddy
PIAB was the next insurance gambit to try and take cases out of the courts.

That failed, so now the approach is to try and artificially lower damages by filling the media with misinformation about fraud.
The arch troll strikes again. “Artificially lower damages” :lol: that’s a beauty

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 10:17 am
by CM11
anonymous_joe wrote:You said whiplash is entirely fraudulent and hid it with some piss weak "some would say" deflection. Give it up.
So I didn't say all soft tissue injuries were made up then?

Thanks for clearing that up.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 10:18 am
by Mullet 2
You have to hand it to him.

That's a beauty

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 10:19 am
by CM11
Duff Paddy wrote:
PIAB was the next insurance gambit to try and take cases out of the courts.

That failed, so now the approach is to try and artificially lower damages by filling the media with misinformation about fraud.
The arch troll strikes again. “Artificially lower damages” :lol: that’s a beauty
The sad thing is, he's not trolling. He's no different to Bailey 'but I was injured, I'm not making it up, someone should pay' in his inability to see the wood from the trees. He's far too entrenched now to get an objective view.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 3:12 pm
by anonymous_joe
If somebody is negligent, and their negligence wounds another person, then they should compensate the victim.

PIAB was a massive mistake because it decoupled injuries from negligence, but that's what the insurance industry wanted, not the lawyers.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 3:19 pm
by sewa
Mullet 2 wrote:You have to hand it to him.

That's a beauty
I had to read it several times, I was sure I read it wrong :lol:

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 3:31 pm
by CM11
anonymous_joe wrote:If somebody is negligent, and their negligence wounds another person, then they should compensate the victim.

PIAB was a massive mistake because it decoupled injuries from negligence, but that's what the insurance industry wanted, not the lawyers.
It's the definition of negligence that we have a problem with.

It looks like it's now defined by the lowest common denominator. People have to actually think like the biggest idiot they can think of to protect their establishment from legal action.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 3:34 pm
by Mullet 2
anonymous_joe wrote:If somebody is negligent, and their negligence wounds another person, then they should compensate the victim.

PIAB was a massive mistake because it decoupled injuries from negligence, but that's what the insurance industry wanted, not the lawyers.

Cut the shit

You don't like the PIAB because it tried to end the fee gravy train.

Were the Troika in cahoots with big insurance too Gemma?

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 3:52 pm
by nardol
If compo for such things was 150 euro (medical cost primarily carried by the state so no compo for that) as it is in ALMIGHTY Holland solicitors and people with eggshell skulls wouldn't bother

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 6:50 pm
by anonymous_joe
CM11 wrote:
anonymous_joe wrote:If somebody is negligent, and their negligence wounds another person, then they should compensate the victim.

PIAB was a massive mistake because it decoupled injuries from negligence, but that's what the insurance industry wanted, not the lawyers.
It's the definition of negligence that we have a problem with.

It looks like it's now defined by the lowest common denominator. People have to actually think like the biggest idiot they can think of to protect their establishment from legal action.
:lol:

You do in my hoop have no more than a problem with the definition. Your issue is knackers getting money because you suspect they're up to something, same as Mullet, Duff and Cam.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 6:51 pm
by anonymous_joe
Mullet 2 wrote:
anonymous_joe wrote:If somebody is negligent, and their negligence wounds another person, then they should compensate the victim.

PIAB was a massive mistake because it decoupled injuries from negligence, but that's what the insurance industry wanted, not the lawyers.

Cut the shit

You don't like the PIAB because it tried to end the fee gravy train.

Were the Troika in cahoots with big insurance too Gemma?
I was in school when PIAB was implemented, so I'm not sure why I'd resent a "gravy train" that I was never on.

You didn't address my point about PIAB either, which says it all.

As for the Troika, there are plenty of reasons to say legal fees are too high, I've long said on here the easiest solution is more judges, given we've the lowest per capita in the OECD (even for common law nations) and a very low spend on judicial activity.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 7:32 pm
by CM11
anonymous_joe wrote:
CM11 wrote:
anonymous_joe wrote:If somebody is negligent, and their negligence wounds another person, then they should compensate the victim.

PIAB was a massive mistake because it decoupled injuries from negligence, but that's what the insurance industry wanted, not the lawyers.
It's the definition of negligence that we have a problem with.

It looks like it's now defined by the lowest common denominator. People have to actually think like the biggest idiot they can think of to protect their establishment from legal action.
:lol:

You do in my hoop have no more than a problem with the definition. Your issue is knackers getting money because you suspect they're up to something, same as Mullet, Duff and Cam.
No, my problem is that we've got to a stage that even after a week someone who was able to be elected to the Dail still thought she had a case. And more than that, she probably did still have a chance. (edit, as I reread I should correct that to 'still should have brought the incident to court').

My problem is also that anytime anyone has a tip, even if they didn't set out to cause it, the immediate reaction is that they must have whiplash and most manage to get a significant payout.

My problem is that there is no incentive or consequence for the legal profession to engage common sense and reduce the amount of ridiculous claims. Nor, if you're anything to go by, even a realisation of what the problem is.

You have your head in the sand because taking it out would mean accepting massive reform and a significant loss of revenue for the legal profession.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 10:47 pm
by Nolanator
AJ, not everyone who trips and twists their knee has life altering injuries and deserves money. Nor is it always someone else's fault that a mishap has taken place.

That's the issue most on this thread have.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 10:58 pm
by Duff Paddy
anonymous_joe wrote:
CM11 wrote:
anonymous_joe wrote:If somebody is negligent, and their negligence wounds another person, then they should compensate the victim.

PIAB was a massive mistake because it decoupled injuries from negligence, but that's what the insurance industry wanted, not the lawyers.
It's the definition of negligence that we have a problem with.

It looks like it's now defined by the lowest common denominator. People have to actually think like the biggest idiot they can think of to protect their establishment from legal action.
:lol:

You do in my hoop have no more than a problem with the definition. Your issue is knackers getting money because you suspect they're up to something, same as Mullet, Duff and Cam.
You’re clearly on a wind up. Is Maria Bailey a knacker now?

1. There is a serious problem with compo culture in this country:
-There is a serious problem with the size of the compensation awards
-There is a serious problem with people either fabricating or exaggerating their injuries
-There is a serious problem with expert witnesses, including medics, writing reports and giving testimony that knowingly facilitates either fabricated or exaggerated injuries
-There is a serious problem with judges being too credulous for obviously embellished or exaggerated claims
-There is a serious problem with the legal profession facilitating these dodgy claims
-There is a serious problem with the lack of Gardai activity in pursuing false or exaggerated claims and those solicitors who knowingly facilitate them
-There is a serious problem with insurance companies charging too much for premia

All of these issues need to be tackled. Now instead of focusing on just the final piece of the jigsaw try to look at the overall picture

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 11:08 pm
by CM11

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 11:13 pm
by nardol
O’Driscoll applied for Mackessy to pay Bus Eireann’s costs but after Mackessy withdrew a separate personal injury action against Bus Eireann concerning a different on bus incident, O’Driscoll told the court that Bus Eireann would not be pursuing Mr Mackessy for the costs of the first case.



FFS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 11:13 pm
by camroc1
And still the judge believes he is in pain, just that it was not caused by the bus scrape at 4 mph.

There are two others to add to your list CM

- the increasing tendency for judges to add special compensation on top of the already ludicrous amounts a la the book of quantum,

- and the also increasing tendency of judges not to allow costs, or to issue judgements suggesting costs aren't chased, againsts losing plaintiffs.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 11:14 pm
by Nolanator
At least the court system is working in that case. Still utterly ridiculous that someone would even chance that.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 11:23 pm
by camroc1
Nolanator wrote:
At least the court system is working in that case. Still utterly ridiculous that someone would even chance that.
But Aj assures us that solicitors don't bring "no hope" cases !

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 11:25 pm
by nardol
Nolanator wrote:
At least the court system is working in that case. Still utterly ridiculous that someone would even chance that.
sure whats the downside risk of losing your action?

Judge just waves away costs.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 7:36 am
by danthefan
So that guy is a complete liar. Would his representation have had access to the CCTV showing his claim the bus picked up speed and mounted the kerb was total bollocks?

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 8:25 am
by anonymous_joe
Nolanator wrote:AJ, not everyone who trips and twists their knee has life altering injuries and deserves money. Nor is it always someone else's fault that a mishap has taken place.

That's the issue most on this thread have.
It doesn't work that way. It's never worked that way.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 8:25 am
by Liathroidigloine
The more I’ve read about the murder in Lucan, the more I think there is no way those kids can be rehabilitated.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 8:26 am
by anonymous_joe
camroc1 wrote:
And still the judge believes he is in pain, just that it was not caused by the bus scrape at 4 mph.

There are two others to add to your list CM

- the increasing tendency for judges to add special compensation on top of the already ludicrous amounts a la the book of quantum,

- and the also increasing tendency of judges not to allow costs, or to issue judgements suggesting costs aren't chased, againsts losing plaintiffs.
Define an "increasing tendency."

Special damages are a concept that go back for decades.

Likewise, the issue of costs is discretionary.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 8:29 am
by anonymous_joe
Duff Paddy wrote:
anonymous_joe wrote:
CM11 wrote:
anonymous_joe wrote:If somebody is negligent, and their negligence wounds another person, then they should compensate the victim.

PIAB was a massive mistake because it decoupled injuries from negligence, but that's what the insurance industry wanted, not the lawyers.
It's the definition of negligence that we have a problem with.

It looks like it's now defined by the lowest common denominator. People have to actually think like the biggest idiot they can think of to protect their establishment from legal action.
:lol:

You do in my hoop have no more than a problem with the definition. Your issue is knackers getting money because you suspect they're up to something, same as Mullet, Duff and Cam.
You’re clearly on a wind up. Is Maria Bailey a knacker now?

1. There is a serious problem with compo culture in this country:
-There is a serious problem with the size of the compensation awards
-There is a serious problem with people either fabricating or exaggerating their injuries
-There is a serious problem with expert witnesses, including medics, writing reports and giving testimony that knowingly facilitates either fabricated or exaggerated injuries
-There is a serious problem with judges being too credulous for obviously embellished or exaggerated claims
-There is a serious problem with the legal profession facilitating these dodgy claims
-There is a serious problem with the lack of Gardai activity in pursuing false or exaggerated claims and those solicitors who knowingly facilitate them
-There is a serious problem with insurance companies charging too much for premia

All of these issues need to be tackled. Now instead of focusing on just the final piece of the jigsaw try to look at the overall picture
The problem there is that all of that is mere assertion without any attempt to quantify it.

The only figure we have regarding dodgy claims comes from insurers stating that €50 of each premium (average of which is €1000) is spent on fraud.

Everything else is based on opinion, and, given that none of you have presumably spent a day in either Court 28 or Court 2, I would presume you're arriving at your opinions based on the media.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 8:33 am
by CM11
So, are you telling us that it is incorrect of the media to claim that 80% of road traffic accident payouts are for whiplash in Ireland and only 3% in France?

And, if you agree that that is a fact, with a straight face, are you going to argue that we don't know what we're talking about and most of them are genuine?

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 8:36 am
by Duff Paddy
What about the Nicolas Kearns report

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 8:47 am
by Mullet 2
anonymous_joe wrote:
Mullet 2 wrote:
anonymous_joe wrote:If somebody is negligent, and their negligence wounds another person, then they should compensate the victim.

PIAB was a massive mistake because it decoupled injuries from negligence, but that's what the insurance industry wanted, not the lawyers.

Cut the shit

You don't like the PIAB because it tried to end the fee gravy train.

Were the Troika in cahoots with big insurance too Gemma?
I was in school when PIAB was implemented, so I'm not sure why I'd resent a "gravy train" that I was never on.

You didn't address my point about PIAB either, which says it all.

As for the Troika, there are plenty of reasons to say legal fees are too high, I've long said on here the easiest solution is more judges, given we've the lowest per capita in the OECD (even for common law nations) and a very low spend on judicial activity.

Fees are high because there is not enough judges?

This is like the time AOC claimed US unemployment was low because everybody had two jobs. :lol:

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 8:50 am
by Mullet 2
CM11 wrote:So, are you telling us that it is incorrect of the media to claim that 80% of road traffic accident payouts are for whiplash in Ireland and only 3% in France?

And, if you agree that that is a fact, with a straight face, are you going to argue that we don't know what we're talking about and most of them are genuine?

The French must be the ones in crises Statto

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 9:23 am
by CM11
Onus on medical profession to stop supporting myth of whiplash
For 20 years I wrote medical reports which were economical with the truth
Mon, Apr 24, 2017, 01:00 Updated: Mon, Apr 24, 2017, 13:15
Dr Charlie Marks

Whiplash is one of a family of disorders which the medical profession created in the second half of the 20th century. The scientific or pathological evidence for the existence of any of these conditions is poor. But labelling people as suffering from whiplash or soft tissue injury provides them with secondary gain in the form of cash from compensation claims.

Whiplash helps to provide a good living for a large number of professional people. Among their number are physicians from many specialities, physiotherapists, chiropractors, osteopaths, spinal surgeons, dentists, psychiatrists, psychologists and, of course, lawyers. Whiplash in some affluent countries is big business, a multibillion dollar gravy train for the medical profession, victims and lawyers.

Curiously, Lithuanians, Greeks and demolition derby drivers appear to be immune to whiplash and recover from rear-end shunts and other minor road traffic accidents in a few days or weeks.
:lol: :lol:

In Lithuania, a Norwegian neurologist set up two studies of crash victims after discovering there was no epidemic of compensation claims after vehicle collisions there, unlike in Norway. He showed that Lithuanians had no awareness that whiplash could cause chronic pain and disability. Collision victims were simply not claiming compensation for neck and back pain precipitated by road traffic incidents. Chronic whiplash syndrome did not exist there. Doctors, insurance companies and lawyers did not acknowledge its existence.

In his first study none of 202 subjects involved in a rear-end shunt one to three years earlier had pain that could be linked to the collision. Thirty-one recalled acute neck pain. In 29 of them it lasted a week or less, while the remaining two had pain which lasted more than a month.

There were no differences between the 202 victims and a control group on symptoms such as neck pain, headache and cognitive dysfunction – which are all, seemingly, frequently caused by rear-end shunts in Ireland.


His second study, a prospective one, found that 47 per cent of 200 rear-end shunt victims had initial pain. The symptoms mainly disappeared in a few days and no one reported collision-associated pain three weeks later. After one year there was no difference in the incidence of headache or neck pain between collision victims and a control group.

Secondary gain
In Greece, 96 per cent of 130 people who had had a rear-end shunt recovered fully in four weeks ; the remainder recovered within three months. Greeks and Lithuanians had no expectation of secondary gain from whiplash.

Forty demolition derby drivers in North America who had taken part in an average of 30 events, with an average of 52 collisions per event, were interviewed in detail. Just two drivers reported that their worst episode of post-participation neck pain had lasted more than three months and in one it lasted more than a year.

Thirty-seven out of 40 reported no chronic neck pain at all, but a majority had had at least one bad episode of neck pain after an event, on average lasting less than three weeks. These guys had had an average of 1,500 collisions each over a couple of years.

In Ireland motor insurance premiums rose by an average of 32 per cent in the 12 months to March 2016. Neck, back and whiplash injuries account for over 80 per cent of all motor injury claims here.

The Irish boss of AIG (the world’s biggest insurer) pointed out that the average cost of motor insurance in France and Germany is less than €500 compared to €700 in Ireland and €600 in the UK. The average award for injury claims here is €15,000 compared with €2,000 to €3,000 in France and Germany or €5,000 to €6,000 in the UK.

Irish spines seem to be more fragile than those of our European neighbours.

Since 2004, all contested injury claims must go through the Injuries Board, although 40 per cent of these awards are appealed to the courts. Legal fees then account for 46 per cent of all claim costs.

The Injuries Board has a Book of Quantum applied to whiplash claims. “Minor whiplash” is worth up to €14,400. “Moderate whiplash” (substantially recovered within 24 months) is worth €11,500 to €17,400. Severe, serious and permanent whiplash injuries will receive €59,000 to €78,000.

Non-existent
If we believe the Lithuanian studies, all whiplash is minor. Moderate or permanent whiplash is simply non-existent.

A tiny proportion of collision victims may sustain a slipped disc in the spine as a result of their jolting injury, but the two Lithuanian studies found no long-term sufferers among their subjects, suggesting that slipped discs occur in fewer than one in 400 cases.

The whipping boys who are held responsible for this state of affairs are the lawyers. We accuse them of encouraging the public to make dishonest claims, particularly because both solicitor and barrister numbers have doubled in the past 20 years.

But there are others equally or more to blame. The motor insurance industry often seems to be colluding in the rise and rise of compensation culture. The logical response to the huge increase in compensation claims after collisions should be the funding of high-powered studies to prove that chronic whiplash syndrome does not exist. No moves have been made in this direction to my knowledge.

The insurers are also guilty of making unsolicited offers of compensation for whiplash before any medical examination records have been provided. It is cheaper to offer small sums to settle claims rather than face long legal battles.

Which brings me to those most responsible for the smooth operation of the whiplash gravy train: the medical professionals who write the reports detailing the mainly non-existent injuries.


Moving with the herd
In my first 20 years as a consultant I wrote many reports which were economical with the truth – the truth being that there was very little wrong with the vast majority of compensation claimants that I saw. I was moving with the herd.

But then in 2010 I read a superb book, Whiplash and Other Useful Illnesses, by Dr Andrew Malleson, published in 2003. It was the big game-changer for me. He blew away the fog of mystery surrounding these soft-tissue injuries and chronic whiplash syndromes.

I suddenly realised that the emperor had no clothes, and that whiplash and soft-tissue injury is a myth. I was almost 40 years in medicine before I appreciated this.

Like many doctors before me, I was not good at remaining vigilant. As a profession we ask too few questions, and too often follow the herd in our thinking.
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/onus ... -1.3058290

Not sure if this was done at the time. But sure what would we know.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 9:26 am
by CM11
And from a Guardian article that primarily used Marks' article but also added:
But one (British) consultant in Ireland is barely sufficient evidence. So I spoke to another whiplash expert, Dr Stuart Matthews, consultant surgeon in major orthopaedic trauma at the Leeds Teaching Hospitals. He sounded even more dismissive than Dr Marks. “There is not a single test that shows abnormality directly attributable to this condition. Diagnoses are purely on the say-so of the person involved. Many orthopaedic surgeons do not believe it is a genuine condition.”

He says early research that provided medical endorsement for whiplash claims has subsequently been rejected. “It’s the emperor’s new clothes. People just go along with it, there is a bandwagon.”

Neck sprain is genuine, he says, but recovery is relatively quick with little evidence of significant physical injury.
https://www.theguardian.com/money/blog/ ... speaks-out

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 9:29 am
by Duff Paddy
Curiously, Lithuanians, Greeks and demolition derby drivers appear to be immune to whiplash and recover from rear-end shunts and other minor road traffic accidents in a few days or weeks.
Stay down AJ :lol:


Whiplash is a great name. It’s all scary like vulture funds. It sounds so much more dramatic and violent than a sore neck. I believe the term should be banned as it’s not a medical diagnosis.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 9:31 am
by Duff Paddy
The Injuries Board has a Book of Quantum applied to whiplash claims. “Minor whiplash” is worth up to €14,400. “Moderate whiplash” (substantially recovered within 24 months) is worth €11,500 to €17,400. Severe, serious and permanent whiplash injuries will receive €59,000 to €78,000.
:lol: the book of quantum making up medical diagnoses

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 9:59 am
by Mullet 2
Duff Paddy wrote:
The Injuries Board has a Book of Quantum applied to whiplash claims. “Minor whiplash” is worth up to €14,400. “Moderate whiplash” (substantially recovered within 24 months) is worth €11,500 to €17,400. Severe, serious and permanent whiplash injuries will receive €59,000 to €78,000.
:lol: the book of quantum making up medical diagnoses
:lol: :lol:

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 10:59 am
by danthefan
Mullet 2 wrote:
Duff Paddy wrote:
The Injuries Board has a Book of Quantum applied to whiplash claims. “Minor whiplash” is worth up to €14,400. “Moderate whiplash” (substantially recovered within 24 months) is worth €11,500 to €17,400. Severe, serious and permanent whiplash injuries will receive €59,000 to €78,000.
:lol: the book of quantum making up medical diagnoses
:lol: :lol:
You two just don't understand.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 12:48 pm
by redderneck
Can't link but some mí-ádh of a (prior election) failed FG candidate, Stephanie Regan, says we should leave Bailey alone cos we ALL know someone who has fiddled the compo system ( my words). Indo article.

F.
F.
S.

Someone in FG needs to be given the simple task of making a call on their failed pols post election. Rehab or cull.

And then get it done.

Edit add - she's an ex FG head following a dispute with party! Ah well. Sort of culled I guess.

Bury them deeper you soft bastards!!!

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 1:14 pm
by The Prophet Zarquon
anonymous_joe wrote:Soft tissue injuries aren't real? On a rugby forum?

Insurers themselves claim that only 5% of the coats of insurance relate to fraudulent cases.

You really are naive.
Fraud comes in 2 forms:

There is the fraud that claims there has been an accident that eitehr didnt occur or was staged. That is the tip of the iceberg that insurers try to put a figure on.

Then there's the kind of opportunistic exaggeration fraud that is endemic in the system enabled by medical and legal professions, and up to recently not pushed back against hard enough by insurers, that is incapable of measurement as it occurs in almost every claim. Since we have a study that shows 97% of people start treatment for "whippies" but drop the treatment once they get the cash, I'm going to call that 97% of exaggeration fraud.

Re: Glorious examples of the calibre of the Irish Judiciary

Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 1:47 pm
by The Prophet Zarquon
anonymous_joe wrote:Not really, it's been going this way for several decades.

Jury trials were abolished in the 80s.

PIAB was the next insurance gambit to try and take cases out of the courts.

That failed, so now the approach is to try and artificially lower damages by filling the media with misinformation about fraud.

The reality is that over the last five odd years there has been a huge increase in premia that bears no resemblance to any change in payouts. Coincidentally, profits have rocketed up too. The victims in this are the idiots who'll continue paying too much for insurance to these companies and thank them for it.
Jury awards were ridiculous, it was hoped judges would be more reasonable. Turned out judges just kept awarding what juries used to award. so yes, that failed.

PIAB was set up to deliberately keep lawyers away from cases with no long term injuries where liability wasn't an issue, so yes it deliberatly decoupled liability from quantum. It was originally supposed to be a lawyer free zone completely but they managed to insert themselves in the process. The book of quantum was developed and actually designed to increase the awards to avoid rejection by plaintiffs beign persuaded that court would be a better option. Overall it was successful in keeping a lid on overall cost (because fees were at a set level) and the result of that and other things like better roads was a 40%+ REDUCTION in premiums for motor in the noughties and into the teens.

The very big increases in premium are over the last 3 years, not 5, and the last year of that they've gone down not up. The increases were responding to near wiping out of the market for motor, stuff you don't hear about because all insurers bar FBD have big parents that can quiently drop in more capital to keep them afloat. The ones you did hear about were FBD - massive rescue package from the US - RSA, UK parent had to put in so much capital it caused stock exchange issues in the UK and nearly brought down the entire business, Setanta - bust like you wouldn't believe, and since then some smaller ones. I am absolutely sure many others had capital issues quietly resolved by their global parents. What caused that wiping out was a: premiums too low as insurers chased revenue targets over profit, b: awards in court (not PIAB) sprialling up because of the experience of High Court judges and jurisdictional changes (giving Circuit Court judges a €60k limit was just giving a shopaholic a bigger limit on their credit card) and c: a surge in frequency as the number of actual claimants in purportion to policies rose rapidly- check out the numbers of claims dealt with by PIAB, not matched by increases in motor fuel consumption or vehicles on the road.

Insurer profits and losses are a combination of many lines of business. Motor is big, but anyone with a property portfolio will have done well as there hasn't been much really bad weather since 2012. Liability is still on a knife edge, but most of all insurers need to make a profit - and a big one to replace that burnt capital - over the next few years.