Who is the someone else?
Ok; Heres an eg;
This case of the school boy who fell on a little piece of glass whilst playing on the school field, and he had a little cut on his knee. (bare in mind this is used as an eg)
The school was sued by the parents, because there should be no glass on the school field. (I meen like! erm the boy has not lost an eye here, and is the school to pay for a team of full time gardeners to comb the grass every day)
Who is suffering here?
You & I, this up's our tax to pay for it all.
The kids, who are no longer allowed to play on the school field.
All for what?, probably a few hundred quid for the parents and 2 grand for the lawyer?
Who is the winner? the kid who now also cant play on the field and now has no mates becasue of it? The parents who had a night out and bought that new micro wave? The lawyer? There are far more loosers than winners.
Its a pretty sad state of affairs, these people who look for a quick buck, and the lawyers who advertise and canvas for there business, and now advertise in AE I hear!
And if you have jumped into my boat we best make sure we are pulling in the right direction, or you'll be thrown to your mates!
First aid & Blood donations
Moderator: Club Moderators
-
colin keightley
- BHPA Club Coach
- Posts: 2492
- Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:22 pm
- Full Name: Colin Keightley
- Location: Stockton
- Contact:
I must admitt our company has only had three claims and they have all been dodgy claims as the person making the claim has nothing to loose.
We train the people we put guards on the machines there is full documentation of how to use the machine and their training we try to keep an eye on them and when your not looking they bypass the safety guard and have an accident it spends the next 12 months with the insurers who then eventually pay up as the solicitor is willing to take it all the way to court knowing that the insurer will settle as its cheaper to do so even if the the person looses at court of course the knock on effect is our premiums go up, where is the justice in free money for morons who are out for what they can get.
We train the people we put guards on the machines there is full documentation of how to use the machine and their training we try to keep an eye on them and when your not looking they bypass the safety guard and have an accident it spends the next 12 months with the insurers who then eventually pay up as the solicitor is willing to take it all the way to court knowing that the insurer will settle as its cheaper to do so even if the the person looses at court of course the knock on effect is our premiums go up, where is the justice in free money for morons who are out for what they can get.
If Acro was easy they'd call it Cross Country
07824 554735
Livetrack24: Colinkeightley
07824 554735
Livetrack24: Colinkeightley
But my mates wont eat me Steve!
Professional respect and all that. See previous post
I will give you a real life example Steve. A case I dealt with about 20 years ago.
Young lad, running on the playing field, exactly the same as your lad, but steps into a hole on the playing field, his leg goes down the hole about 12 inches, he carries on moving, and ends up with a very badly broken leg.
So can he Sue the local authority Steve? And if so why? In what way is this different from your scenario?
Are you saying that if the injury is only minor, the local authority should not pay up? So that even if the negligent act by the LA was immense, say leaving live wires exposed in the classroom, but Johnny only gets a minor jolt, he should not be able to claim?
Or if the negligence is minor, but the resulting injury major, then Johnny should be able to claim?
And even if you get as far as answering those questions, the law on negligence has not changed. You can trace the current basis on which claims are made back to Lord Aitken in Donoghue v Stevenson, which was 1932.
SO there is nothing in the past ten years which has changed the basis on which claims are made.
Professional respect and all that. See previous post
I will give you a real life example Steve. A case I dealt with about 20 years ago.
Young lad, running on the playing field, exactly the same as your lad, but steps into a hole on the playing field, his leg goes down the hole about 12 inches, he carries on moving, and ends up with a very badly broken leg.
So can he Sue the local authority Steve? And if so why? In what way is this different from your scenario?
Are you saying that if the injury is only minor, the local authority should not pay up? So that even if the negligent act by the LA was immense, say leaving live wires exposed in the classroom, but Johnny only gets a minor jolt, he should not be able to claim?
Or if the negligence is minor, but the resulting injury major, then Johnny should be able to claim?
And even if you get as far as answering those questions, the law on negligence has not changed. You can trace the current basis on which claims are made back to Lord Aitken in Donoghue v Stevenson, which was 1932.
SO there is nothing in the past ten years which has changed the basis on which claims are made.
It is sad to measure your life in terms of hours flown...... but even sadder not to.........
If nothing has changed then whats this about, posted some time ago now.?
Until the late 1990s, anyone who wanted to make a claim relating to personal injury law in the UK either had to pay expensive legal fees or seek help through the means-tested Legal Aid (now Public Funding) system. The funding of Legal Aid, in turn, proved expensive for the government. With the advent of the Conditional Fee Agreement (CFA) in 1998 the law changed, allowing for claims on a ‘no win no fee’ basis. Under personal injury law in England and Wales, anyone eligible to claim compensation need no longer be deterred by the fear of legal fees associated with the claim. Scotland’s law differs although the ‘no win no fee’ concept is also practised there to some extent.
And no, people should not be cajoled, persuaded or pitched too, to sue for anything they can to make a quick buck.
If everything is fine and dandy in the world then what is your college Lord Justice Jackson up to? I would like to know what you think, but seem unwilling to offer comment.
Until the late 1990s, anyone who wanted to make a claim relating to personal injury law in the UK either had to pay expensive legal fees or seek help through the means-tested Legal Aid (now Public Funding) system. The funding of Legal Aid, in turn, proved expensive for the government. With the advent of the Conditional Fee Agreement (CFA) in 1998 the law changed, allowing for claims on a ‘no win no fee’ basis. Under personal injury law in England and Wales, anyone eligible to claim compensation need no longer be deterred by the fear of legal fees associated with the claim. Scotland’s law differs although the ‘no win no fee’ concept is also practised there to some extent.
And no, people should not be cajoled, persuaded or pitched too, to sue for anything they can to make a quick buck.
If everything is fine and dandy in the world then what is your college Lord Justice Jackson up to? I would like to know what you think, but seem unwilling to offer comment.
Everything in moderation, including moderation.
The basis on which a claim is made has not changed. The basic principles of negligence are still the same as laid down in the groundbreaking case of Donoghue v Stevenson.
All that has changed is the basis of funding.
Up until 1998, you either had to be very poor, and therefore able to qualify for legal aid, or very rich, and therefore able to fund legal fees privately, before you could bring a claim.
Lots of insurance companies placed reliance on this, knowing that there were very few people who could afford to go to court. Therefore they denied claims, thereby denying people access to justice.
I note that having given an example of what you consider to be the abuse of the system, you have been unable to answer any of my questions that were posed in my last post.
Is that because they are to difficult, or maybe that you dont like the answers you come up with?
Lets assume your Prime Miniser Steve, where are you going to draw the line on who can and who can not claim? And how do they pay for it? The government? Privately? Or should we just ban everybody from making claims against public bodies, like schools or hospitals?
All that has changed is the basis of funding.
Up until 1998, you either had to be very poor, and therefore able to qualify for legal aid, or very rich, and therefore able to fund legal fees privately, before you could bring a claim.
Lots of insurance companies placed reliance on this, knowing that there were very few people who could afford to go to court. Therefore they denied claims, thereby denying people access to justice.
I note that having given an example of what you consider to be the abuse of the system, you have been unable to answer any of my questions that were posed in my last post.
Is that because they are to difficult, or maybe that you dont like the answers you come up with?
Lets assume your Prime Miniser Steve, where are you going to draw the line on who can and who can not claim? And how do they pay for it? The government? Privately? Or should we just ban everybody from making claims against public bodies, like schools or hospitals?
It is sad to measure your life in terms of hours flown...... but even sadder not to.........
I thought I said;
no, people should not be cajoled, persuaded or pitched too, to sue for anything they can to make a quick buck.
Your not going to change my mind, nor am I interested in changing yours. Nor do we need to or be interested or waste our time trying to do so.
I am however quite interested in what you do think about what your college Lord Justice Jackson is up to, I have asked you three times now?
I am seriously interested in what a solicitor thinks about this guy, it is after all quite important for us all what this guy might do.
no, people should not be cajoled, persuaded or pitched too, to sue for anything they can to make a quick buck.
Your not going to change my mind, nor am I interested in changing yours. Nor do we need to or be interested or waste our time trying to do so.
I am however quite interested in what you do think about what your college Lord Justice Jackson is up to, I have asked you three times now?
I am seriously interested in what a solicitor thinks about this guy, it is after all quite important for us all what this guy might do.
Everything in moderation, including moderation.
Do you know what is the funniest thing Steve?
I am sure if you had a road traffic accident where someone ran in to the back of you, then you would be first in the queue for compensation.
As is so often the case, people have black and white views. You yourself admit that your view is not going to be changed. I am on the other hand happy to listen to reasoned logical argument. So far I have not heard any.
As for Lord Justice Jackson, who is no colleague of mine, but is in fact a relation of a former club member, his review on civil litigation is I believe excellent. I have not had a chance to read all 500 and odd pages yet, and presume you have not done so either Steve.
I am sure if you had a road traffic accident where someone ran in to the back of you, then you would be first in the queue for compensation.
As is so often the case, people have black and white views. You yourself admit that your view is not going to be changed. I am on the other hand happy to listen to reasoned logical argument. So far I have not heard any.
As for Lord Justice Jackson, who is no colleague of mine, but is in fact a relation of a former club member, his review on civil litigation is I believe excellent. I have not had a chance to read all 500 and odd pages yet, and presume you have not done so either Steve.
It is sad to measure your life in terms of hours flown...... but even sadder not to.........
No claim Mo money
A friend of mine was ran into by another car on the motorway in rush hour.
Less than 24hrs later he was getting calls from the other drivers representatives. They wanted to know if he was injured. He said I m ok but call me tomorrow. They called again and he said he was fine but if they wanted to be sure he would make an appointment with the doctors the next day.
Now here is the twist.....
Next thing he's being offered thousands in compensation for sustaining no injuries just because he said he might see his GP.
2 days later he's cashing a big fat cheque and buying a 52 inch HD Plasma telly and an XBox.
No lawyers no middleman no bother......
Less than 24hrs later he was getting calls from the other drivers representatives. They wanted to know if he was injured. He said I m ok but call me tomorrow. They called again and he said he was fine but if they wanted to be sure he would make an appointment with the doctors the next day.
Now here is the twist.....
Next thing he's being offered thousands in compensation for sustaining no injuries just because he said he might see his GP.
2 days later he's cashing a big fat cheque and buying a 52 inch HD Plasma telly and an XBox.
No lawyers no middleman no bother......
-
gary stenhouse
- Superstar
- Posts: 6288
- Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 7:21 pm
- Full Name: Gary Stenhouse
- Location: Company Director
This is all so interesting and all so complicated,
but here’s a good one, a pg pilot goes out to foreign country and gets the best guide available, on following instruction one of the pilots is seriously injured, if experts said that was a bad route to take would that leave the guide responsible.
another one that happened to me, going down the road on bike when a other bike smashes into the back of me sending me hurtling through the air landing on the other carriage way luckily no oncoming cars were coming, so pick myself up dusted myself down and think few no broken bones. Bike is smashed up only 400 miles on new blackbird. I never claimed as only bumps and bruises and in my terms uninjured. The way I lucked at it was I was lucky even though it was not my fault. I am sure i could of claimed yet did not. However if I had been seriously injured yes I would have, as I would of had no option.
We are all to blame if the truth was known as the so cold progress is not what it really is. People no longer take responsibility for anything and I no that by how much broken machinery that only no one done or used.
This is the world we now live in and there is no turning back the clocks as folks this is progress. Yet when the shit really hits the fan and I hope it is not in my lifetime the only thing you will need is food water and shelter again, as you can’t eat pc though can a lawyer ha ha :D
but here’s a good one, a pg pilot goes out to foreign country and gets the best guide available, on following instruction one of the pilots is seriously injured, if experts said that was a bad route to take would that leave the guide responsible.
another one that happened to me, going down the road on bike when a other bike smashes into the back of me sending me hurtling through the air landing on the other carriage way luckily no oncoming cars were coming, so pick myself up dusted myself down and think few no broken bones. Bike is smashed up only 400 miles on new blackbird. I never claimed as only bumps and bruises and in my terms uninjured. The way I lucked at it was I was lucky even though it was not my fault. I am sure i could of claimed yet did not. However if I had been seriously injured yes I would have, as I would of had no option.
We are all to blame if the truth was known as the so cold progress is not what it really is. People no longer take responsibility for anything and I no that by how much broken machinery that only no one done or used.
This is the world we now live in and there is no turning back the clocks as folks this is progress. Yet when the shit really hits the fan and I hope it is not in my lifetime the only thing you will need is food water and shelter again, as you can’t eat pc though can a lawyer ha ha :D
Flying
if there is no flying weather soon I'm going to sue my paraglider manufacturer for not telling me about the near suicidal depression I would feel if I didn't go flying for months at a time. I feel it's theirs a d the bhpa s duty to inform of this. When they said paragliding is a dangerous sport I did not entirely realise what they meant so I will sue them for that aswell.
Plus I ve had to buy one of them paragliding babygrows which makes my bum look big so I ll sue them for that and all.
And those paramotor companies and magazines always show happy pilots zooming over sunny mountains but that is just not true. They never show freezing ice covered fields and broken props on the 4 days a year you can fly a ppg. I m thinking of suing for that but I ve not made my mind up.
Anyone know a half decent lawyer?
Plus I ve had to buy one of them paragliding babygrows which makes my bum look big so I ll sue them for that and all.
And those paramotor companies and magazines always show happy pilots zooming over sunny mountains but that is just not true. They never show freezing ice covered fields and broken props on the 4 days a year you can fly a ppg. I m thinking of suing for that but I ve not made my mind up.
Anyone know a half decent lawyer?
Why are bikes dangerous
You were lucky you walked away Gary. Most motorcyclists end up leaving the scene of an accident with the blue lights flashing.
Do you know what is the funniest thing Steve?
I am sure if you had a road traffic accident where someone ran in to the back of you, then you would be first in the queue for compensation.
If I ever do so, you can be first in line to rub my nose in it.
As is so often the case, people have black and white views. You yourself admit that your view is not going to be changed.
Its a shity business, and these people who chase AE are pond scum, simple as that.
I am on the other hand happy to listen to reasoned logical argument. So far I have not heard any.
? the boat is either sinking, or it is not.
As for Lord Justice Jackson, who is no colleague of mine, but is in fact a relation of a former club member, his review on civil litigation is I believe excellent. I have not had a chance to read all 500 and odd pages yet, and presume you have not done so either Steve.
Having only just discovered this guy, I have only seen the bullit points of what he is saying, I am over joyed that he echos my thoughts.
Eventualy you reveal that you agree with the guy. Is this how you spend so much time in court? pissing about going around and around building a smoke screen of argumentative bollocks before your eventualy forced to give the answer that was put to you 5 days ago? Give me a silly wig and put me in the ring, I would piss on the lot of yas and make a fortune defending the people getting sued by the idiot who has shoved a fridge up his arse and it said nothing in the instruction not to be such a tit.!
I am sure if you had a road traffic accident where someone ran in to the back of you, then you would be first in the queue for compensation.
If I ever do so, you can be first in line to rub my nose in it.
As is so often the case, people have black and white views. You yourself admit that your view is not going to be changed.
Its a shity business, and these people who chase AE are pond scum, simple as that.
I am on the other hand happy to listen to reasoned logical argument. So far I have not heard any.
? the boat is either sinking, or it is not.
As for Lord Justice Jackson, who is no colleague of mine, but is in fact a relation of a former club member, his review on civil litigation is I believe excellent. I have not had a chance to read all 500 and odd pages yet, and presume you have not done so either Steve.
Having only just discovered this guy, I have only seen the bullit points of what he is saying, I am over joyed that he echos my thoughts.
Eventualy you reveal that you agree with the guy. Is this how you spend so much time in court? pissing about going around and around building a smoke screen of argumentative bollocks before your eventualy forced to give the answer that was put to you 5 days ago? Give me a silly wig and put me in the ring, I would piss on the lot of yas and make a fortune defending the people getting sued by the idiot who has shoved a fridge up his arse and it said nothing in the instruction not to be such a tit.!
Everything in moderation, including moderation.
