Can I just say I agree with toys 19
Chat Forum
Why can't some folk take responsibility for their own actions....
-
Posted 9 months ago #
-
I cannot accept that it is fraud to admit liability, or admit that you do not know who is liable, no matter what the circumstance.
I'm not saying that admitting liability is fraud!
My point was straigtforward. You should not accept liability, irrespective of whether you think you are liable or not. Encouraging someone to make a claim isn't fraud either, but i would very much doubt that anyone would recommend doing that, per your scenario above.
Posted 9 months ago # -
You should not accept liability
bollocks, if you think you're liable admit it. If you aren't your insurance will fight itPosted 9 months ago # -
davidrussell - apologies, I you were saying that I was suggesting insurance fraud.
Posted 9 months ago # -
j_me - Member
You should not accept liability
bollocks, if you think you're liable admit it....and watch your incurer decline to cover you due to that breach of your policy.
Posted 9 months ago # -
Show me?
Posted 9 months ago # -
yeah, thats what i thought ^. You can't admit liability on behalf of your insurer.
@toys - no worries
Posted 9 months ago # -
paragraph 9 on that page - commercial insurance but i think it serves to prove the point.
Posted 9 months ago # -
also slightly more relevant (in the sense that it is PL insurance)
2nd last para page 4
Posted 9 months ago # -
...and watch your incurer decline to cover you due to that breach of your policy.
[conjecture]Hence a possible change in the Dads attitude from maybe we should help this girls, to blimey the insurance is going to pull the rug out unless we are all on the same team..[/conjecture]
Posted 9 months ago # -
Fair cop. I'm not admitting liability for any erroneous posts though
Posted 9 months ago # -
edit - actually scrap that. There's not enough time in the day to argue on the internet.
Posted 9 months ago # -
@pjt - its all about time management, if you ignore important things you can have all day to argue.
Posted 9 months ago # -
who was it who raised the circle of concern/circle of influence?
Posted 9 months ago # -
Crikey, haven't read all the posts but as a "responsible adult" with responsibilities both business and family, I have taken out insurance to make sure that if any misfortune befalls me then I will be ably taken care of, as will my dependants and employees. Given that I enjoy sports like cycling I think its only prudent. Hence, I don't have as much sympathy for those that cartwheel themselves down a mountain, then claim recompense for pain / suffering et all from whoever is nearby.
What does annoy me though, is that as the owner of a small business I am forced to carry a minimum of 10 million public liability insurance, no doubt for such haphazard people as the claimant in the original case.
So, in answer to the original thread, individuals should take responsibility to provide for themselves, not me !
I do like the NewZealand way of doing things, were a government body "The Accident Compensation Corporation" takes care of all accidental injuries, there is no (well very very little at least) sue them mentality.
Theres basically a shopping list of injuries and subsequent payouts. Only downside is when the economy takes a downturn ... theres always a spike in "Damn shot myself in the foot" incidents.
Posted 9 months ago # -
Rather debunks the covertly mutually consensual insurance claim angle...
Earlier, the judge was told Miss Grimes £6m damages claim was far in excess of Mr Hawkins' insurance cover and, had she won the case, he would have faced bankruptcy.
Toys - still happy with your "good on her" angle if she had won the full £6M?
Does not sound like the defendant's witnesses covered themselves in glory though.
Posted 9 months ago # -
Toys - still happy with your "good on her" angle if she had won the full £6M?
You like putting words in my mouth. I never said "good on her". But yes I think going over his insurance max is not nice.
Posted 9 months ago # -
They would never have got or expected £6M, the amount sued for is always well overstated in these situations.
Posted 9 months ago # -
Ah so she sued for more so that she would get his insurance max.
Posted 9 months ago # -
You like putting words in my mouth. I never said "good on her".
You're are right, not "good on her" verbatum but
If she had won and got 6 million and lived the life of riley ..... I would have had a little cheer
Sorry, insurance claim angle does not wash for me (obviously conjecture, but so is your position) - why would the owner's daughter make claims about her not beig invited/sanciton her to go swimming only to get found out in court (she lent her swimming kit) unless she was trying to save her father?
Posted 9 months ago # -
Ahh yes but you have conveniently forgotten that I qualified it several times with his insurance maximum, and I stand by it.
Posted 9 months ago # -
I knew I shouldn't have opened this thread but I did. I may or may not have been drinking.
Who do I sue for my facepalm injuries? Either of you have STW 3rd-party liability insurance?
Posted 9 months ago # -
So just to claify, it was "distastful" for me to comment on her legal actions provided it was effectively against "the machine" AKA an insurance company; but it would be "not nice" for her to make the same legal action if it was directed financially at another single person?
I hope you havn't been all "Daily Mail" and jumped to a conclusion based on a hunch and an assumption - then you'd be as bad as me!
Posted 9 months ago # -
yes schnullelieber you are ultra funny. well done.
And convert, no it was still distasteful of you.
Posted 9 months ago # -
And it was it not distastful of you to say going over his limit was "not nice"? After all she's got to look after number one, unless you have been in her position how do you know what you might do?
I'd be having a long hard look at yourself.
That'll do on this, I'm even boring myself now and I've got a frame to weld.
Posted 9 months ago # -
because there is a difference between needing help and being selfish. But as Al said, she probs only asked for more to ensure she got his insurance max.
She has a right to test the law, she possibly might have asked for too much, other than that everything I said still stands, especially the bit about your actions earlier being distasteful.Posted 9 months ago # -
If the insurers pay out, insurance goes up and while many of us on here can probably afford to pay more, there are plenty of people in the country that can't.
Posted 9 months ago # -
If the insurers pay out, insurance goes up and while many of us on here can probably afford to pay more, there are plenty of people in the country that can't.
I certainly can't, which is why I'm perfectly happy to side with convert on this. Toys, you're being a sanctimonious ass.Posted 9 months ago # -
CZ +1
possibly the most futile pathetic argument I have seen on the internet for a while.
convert no point in arguing here - you ain't going to change his mind - and he doesn't even seem to understand way insurance works and how we all get screwed if such claims go through.
Posted 9 months ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
