|
winglessangel
Mar 22, 2007, 8:32 PM
Post #26 of 33
(1569 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 29, 2004
Posts: 459
|
hummm, interesting, yeah. we should all be well informed about things we say.
guess she did have a good case.
anyway. that just adds more to my point. WE were not in the guy's gym at the time. We don't know exactly whatever happened. We are like me talking about the coffee case.
and, as Thomas and cracklover just pointed, we don't know what other related issues are.
let's just say I do think people should take responsability for their own action, some people don't and there are stupid lawsuits out there, but there are, also, some well built cases and sometimes other people are more then guilty. We just don't have enouth background to talk about this particular case.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Mar 22, 2007, 8:57 PM
Post #27 of 33
(1553 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
crimpandgo wrote: I dont think your example is the same situation. I dont blame the insurance company. the accident was caused by the driver. the driver should be held accountable. In the gym case, the accident was caused by the climber.......
I agree that from where we sit, the situation appears different in terms of culpability. But my point is not about culpability. Even if it was 95% the boulderer's fault, if there's an insurance company that thinks it's worth rolling the dice for that 5% chance a jury might agree with them, the poor paralyzed guy is in absolutely no position to say no. His choices in that position are - either go with the flow and let the insurance company represent him, or die in the gutter. And don't think that a bureaucrocy wouldn't put someone in that position.
But let's say there is no insurance company. Now how about the grieving family members. Monstrous bills in their mailbox, and they probably all have ambulance chasers pounding on their doors telling them that it wasn't the guy's fault at all - the gym was at fault, and if you hire me, I'll make the gym pay. They don't know anything about climbing. They believe the lawyer. And in their grief and rage, they'll reach out to anyone with answers for how and why this senseless act could have happened to them. How 'bout it, all you "personal responsibility" people. You willing to buy a plane ticket to England to sit in a courtroom and testify that the lawyers are misleading them, that this was a freak accident? Go ahead, put your own time and money on the line. Take that personal responsibility you admire! Assuming any of you have the guts, I bet you'll find it a little harder once you're face-to-face with the family.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
dharmasoldat
Mar 23, 2007, 11:29 PM
Post #28 of 33
(1498 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 24, 2005
Posts: 33
|
Lessons will be learned, sufferings will be suffered, but at the end of the day what's done is done. Everyone has to live with it because we cannot change the past.
Perhaps this will give those who would bite off more than they can chew, second thoughts - and those of us who know better to appreciate further the risks we take and what we've walked away from moderately unscathed.
It is a shame it had to be learned at the expense of someone else's health, regardless of their competency or lack thereof, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
keithlester
Deleted
Mar 25, 2007, 1:08 PM
Post #29 of 33
(1461 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
cracklover wrote: crimpandgo wrote: I dont think your example is the same situation. I dont blame the insurance company. the accident was caused by the driver. the driver should be held accountable. In the gym case, the accident was caused by the climber....... I agree that from where we sit, the situation appears different in terms of culpability. But my point is not about culpability. Even if it was 95% the boulderer's fault, if there's an insurance company that thinks it's worth rolling the dice for that 5% chance a jury might agree with them, the poor paralyzed guy is in absolutely no position to say no. His choices in that position are - either go with the flow and let the insurance company represent him, or die in the gutter. And don't think that a bureaucrocy wouldn't put someone in that position. But let's say there is no insurance company. Now how about the grieving family members. Monstrous bills in their mailbox, and they probably all have ambulance chasers pounding on their doors telling them that it wasn't the guy's fault at all - the gym was at fault, and if you hire me, I'll make the gym pay. They don't know anything about climbing. They believe the lawyer. And in their grief and rage, they'll reach out to anyone with answers for how and why this senseless act could have happened to them. How 'bout it, all you "personal responsibility" people. You willing to buy a plane ticket to England to sit in a courtroom and testify that the lawyers are misleading them, that this was a freak accident? Go ahead, put your own time and money on the line. Take that personal responsibility you admire! Assuming any of you have the guts, I bet you'll find it a little harder once you're face-to-face with the family. GO
This happened in UK
He will NOT be obliged to pay for carers for the rest of his life. The state will care for this poor unfortunate retard, who didn't like to obey simple rules, cos he was not about to be told what to do by anybody. Did I say the state would pay? Silly me! That means I am going to pay for his care, with my taxes. And I wasn't even there! How can it be my fault?
|
|
|
|
|
bbirtle
Mar 26, 2007, 3:33 PM
Post #30 of 33
(1424 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 28, 2007
Posts: 102
|
It's an unfortunate situation and you'd have to know the details to see if anybody was at fault.
Generally speaking, places of business need to adaquately warn of possible danger as well as ensure their facilities make activities as safe as possible.
Beyond that, shit happens and you can't pass off fault to somebody else for not stopping you from hurting yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
skurdeycat
Mar 26, 2007, 4:04 PM
Post #31 of 33
(1413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 29, 2004
Posts: 45
|
cracklover wrote: Excellent point. Insurance changes things. GO
There's probably no insurance issue here, the guy was in the UK. There's a national health system. Americans may think its the next thing to communism, and the Brits bitch about how bad it is but it still works.
Pain and suffering and a lifetime loss of earnings maybe, but no significant medical costs.
Skurdey
|
|
|
|
|
tomcat
Mar 26, 2007, 7:43 PM
Post #32 of 33
(1381 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 15, 2006
Posts: 325
|
I wonder what kind of information a gym could have given to prevent an injury like this.Tell people if they fall they could be hurt?
Things are not really so bad here in the states mate.If this happened to me I'd get about 2300 month in SOCIAL SECURITY.My dependant kids would each get about 655 month until 21.
Hospitals here do not turn away the indigent,they are treated just like everyone else.Advanced therapy might be another story,but in socialised medicine countries it's typically the same due to costs.
I'm self employed and can not afford the same WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION I provide my employees because it costs me 110 a week per man,so I have DISABILITY insurance,it comes in two tiers,one immeadiate and one after six months,1800 each,per month costs me 1.17 per day,combined.That's a cup of coffee.
I also have and provide HEALTH INSURANCE.Single guys about thirty insure for about 320 month.Barring that there is always TIM GREENE ready to take up a collection for you or him...lol!
INSURANCE is expensive because so many young healthy fit single people think they will do without it.
Good thing this didn't happen in the GUNKS.
|
|
|
|
|
stymingersfink
Mar 27, 2007, 2:33 AM
Post #33 of 33
(1358 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250
|
pupjr wrote: He's suing to survive, imagine the cost of all medical bills, now until he finally dies and all the caregiving he needs. Rember, can't feed himself, can't dress himself, can't even wipe his own butt. It's going to be astronomical.
Um, not really. If he can't feed himself, he won't need to wipe his own butt. Should only be a matter of weeks till his medical needs are resolved by the undertaker.
Remember that old saying about "my mother didn't raise any fools.... that lived." Looks like it's back on his parents to raise that fool. If i were a jurist in that one I'd have a hard time making any awards for the plaintiff. Sympathy, sure, but transferring of responsibility for his own actions to another party? Don't think so.
Now, if the wall had fallen on him it'd be another story, but it didn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
