http://www.iomtoday.co.im/article.cfm?id...hyear=2020

Sadly we've developed an American style compensation culture over the last 15 years with all the "where there's blame, there's a claim" nonsense. It's why it's become so expensive to get insurance for anything and I can only see it getting worse over time.

This is what has caused so many problems for a lot of the roads events, you often hear reference to "prohibitive insurance costs" sadly it is increasingly the world we live in.

Whether or not those involved actually wanted to claim in this case, the 'no win no fee' brigade would soon talk them round.

I come across this mentality all the time with my Facilities work in commercial/office properties - people these days are led to believe that every single little daily risk / issue will have been pre - thought / managed / actioned for them and they wander around in a little myopic bubble much of the time with absolutely no self awareness or responsibilties and should something rare and untoward happen by their own direction it cannot possibly be their fault .... I totally fail to see how you can spectate where they were and not expect anything like that to happen, it shows a total lack of understanding of bike / speed physics and risk management. I suspect some ambulance chasing lawyer has crept out from under a stone and got involved now that after this amount of time they think they can prove the injuries are not going to improve in the future.

I spend some of my professional time fighting the 'no win no fee' brigade in relation to industrial injury, they are a time consuming nightmare, but every now and then I manage to succeed in fighting them off which is very rewarding.

is there not a 3 year limit to place a personal injury claim

(26-05-2020, 04:21 PM)scaramanga Wrote: is there not a 3 year limit to place a personal injury claim

As always scara, poor reporting.

This isn't a new case. It was brought several years back. The Court halted the proceedings to allow for long term medical evaluation to take place. The claimants instead of asking the Court to reactivate the case (which was the proper way to do things) they asked for the defence to be dismissed by default and the report in the link is simply referring to this dismissal request.

The judge threw out their request and awarded costs to the other side - just in relation to the dismissal request.

The case itself remains ongoing and thiis was no more than a side skirmish.