bomb victim compensation
Discussion
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4363040.stm
Im no compensation culturist, but this is just unfair...
why are US citizens worth so much more than UK citizens?
Why hasnt Blair pulled his finger out on this issue?
Some people still havent been paid a penny. Why does the process take so long? And even when they do get paid, it'll be a relative pitance.
Im no compensation culturist, but this is just unfair...
why are US citizens worth so much more than UK citizens?
Why hasnt Blair pulled his finger out on this issue?
Some people still havent been paid a penny. Why does the process take so long? And even when they do get paid, it'll be a relative pitance.
I take a different view on this.
Why should they be entitled to massive compensation from the government? There is a 'woe is me' element to this.
While it is tragic that he has lost his leg, it doesn't prevent him from working eventually. Yes, he should get support until he is fit, but he shouldn't expect us to pay for him for life.
Life is sometimes crap and bad things happen. Accept it and move on. He should be thankful that he didn't die, and get on with enjoying his life.
I don't see how these people are different to anyone else affected by unexpected death or injury. The fact that it was a bomb that did it shouldn't make a difference.
Why should they be entitled to massive compensation from the government? There is a 'woe is me' element to this.
bloke in story said:
"No amount of money is going to give me back my leg so I cannot put a figure on compensation, but I am going to need financial security for the rest of my life."
While it is tragic that he has lost his leg, it doesn't prevent him from working eventually. Yes, he should get support until he is fit, but he shouldn't expect us to pay for him for life.
Life is sometimes crap and bad things happen. Accept it and move on. He should be thankful that he didn't die, and get on with enjoying his life.
I don't see how these people are different to anyone else affected by unexpected death or injury. The fact that it was a bomb that did it shouldn't make a difference.
Tank Slapper said:
I take a different view on this.
Why should they be entitled to massive compensation from the government? There is a 'woe is me' element to this.
bloke in story said:
"No amount of money is going to give me back my leg so I cannot put a figure on compensation, but I am going to need financial security for the rest of my life."
While it is tragic that he has lost his leg, it doesn't prevent him from working eventually. Yes, he should get support until he is fit, but he shouldn't expect us to pay for him for life.
Life is sometimes crap and bad things happen. Accept it and move on. He should be thankful that he didn't die, and get on with enjoying his life.
I don't see how these people are different to anyone else affected by unexpected death or injury. The fact that it was a bomb that did it shouldn't make a difference.
Jeeeeez - have a heart - I think the bomb victims do deserve pretty decent compensation. Yes the USA is a bit OTT in terms of $$ paid out - but £15k / victim is just a complete
joke alfaman said:
Jeeeeez - have a heart - I think the bomb victims do deserve pretty decent compensation. Yes the USA is a bit OTT in terms of $$ paid out - but £15k / victim is just a complete
OK, that did sound a bit harsher than I intended.
My point is, that how are the different to all the other people who are injured or killed from day to day?
Are the families of road crash victims less deserving?
Is it the 'terrorism' word that makes the difference - if so why?
I don't get it.
Tank Slapper said:
Jeeeeez - have a heart - I think the bomb victims do deserve pretty decent compensation. Yes the USA is a bit OTT in terms of $$ paid out - but £15k / victim is just a complete
OK, that did sound a bit harsher than I intended.
My point is, that how are the different to all the other people who are injured or killed from day to day?
Are the families of road crash victims less deserving?
Is it the 'terrorism' word that makes the difference - if so why?
I don't get it.
Snap, i'm just confused as to why they're getting compensation at all - it wasn't the govts fault was it? Don't get me wrong i sympathise whole heartilly but i just don't *understand*.
Cheers,
Rob.
Tank Slapper said:
I take a different view on this.
Why should they be entitled to massive compensation from the government? There is a 'woe is me' element to this.
bloke in story said:
"No amount of money is going to give me back my leg so I cannot put a figure on compensation, but I am going to need financial security for the rest of my life."
While it is tragic that he has lost his leg, it doesn't prevent him from working eventually. Yes, he should get support until he is fit, but he shouldn't expect us to pay for him for life.
Life is sometimes crap and bad things happen. Accept it and move on. He should be thankful that he didn't die, and get on with enjoying his life.
I don't see how these people are different to anyone else affected by unexpected death or injury. The fact that it was a bomb that did it shouldn't make a difference.
I see your point...but when you consider the payouts people get from whiplash injuries, medical negligence claims etc. £15k does seem rather low.
peterpeter said:
I see your point...but when you consider the payouts people get from whiplash injuries, medical negligence claims etc. £15k does seem rather low.
Yes, but that's only because an expectation has been allowed to arise. These days, it is almost possible to get compensation for smelling someones fart. It's ridiculous and needs addressing.
Part of the reason car insurance is so expensive is because every little prang results in 'whiplash' or some such nonsense. We have lost the ability to accept what comes our way, and are wholely poorer for it. People should learn to take responsibility for their own lives, rather than wait for someone to fix it for them.
In some cases compensation is fully justified, however it is usually paid by the party that has done the wrong. I fail to see how it is the responsibility of the government to fulfil that role in this case.
Tank Slapper said:
[quote=peterpeter]
Yes, but that's only because an expectation has been allowed to arise. These days, it is almost possible to get compensation for smelling someones fart.
.
Cripes - if someone smells my wifes farts they'll need an undertaker
But seriously - don't most insurance policies have exclusions for terrorist acts, and if so the compensation should be sufficient to enable the rest of the family to live a decent life following the loss of the breadwinner.
>> Edited by Egbert Nobacon on Friday 21st October 19:37
The other day a gas company in UK got fined £1,000,000 because of an error which cost someone his life.
I cant recall what his relatives/dependants got, but not much.
So in this situation doesnt is sort of say, a life is worth £1,000,000 dont do it again, our whole system is cocked up.
The guy who has just come out of jail for a crime he didnt commit, if he had, he would be better looked after on his release, because the re-trial deemed in a nutshell, he was innocent, he gets diddly squat, got this whole money thingy scheeme is buggered up.....
I cant recall what his relatives/dependants got, but not much.
So in this situation doesnt is sort of say, a life is worth £1,000,000 dont do it again, our whole system is cocked up.
The guy who has just come out of jail for a crime he didnt commit, if he had, he would be better looked after on his release, because the re-trial deemed in a nutshell, he was innocent, he gets diddly squat, got this whole money thingy scheeme is buggered up.....
MrV said:
Slightly off this topic ,but still in the same vane if the max payout for the bereaved families is £11,000, far to low In my eyes,I will be interested to see what the Menendes(sic) family get awarded ,I have a sneaking suspicion they will end up with a tad more
Well from I'v read so far, I hope they sue the arse off the met for that one.
And lets face it, if it were your son, you'd want a darn site more than 11 thou?
Tank Slapper said:
I take a different view on this.
Why should they be entitled to massive compensation from the government? There is a 'woe is me' element to this.
bloke in story said:
"No amount of money is going to give me back my leg so I cannot put a figure on compensation, but I am going to need financial security for the rest of my life."
While it is tragic that he has lost his leg, it doesn't prevent him from working eventually. Yes, he should get support until he is fit, but he shouldn't expect us to pay for him for life.
Life is sometimes crap and bad things happen. Accept it and move on. He should be thankful that he didn't die, and get on with enjoying his life.
I don't see how these people are different to anyone else affected by unexpected death or injury. The fact that it was a bomb that did it shouldn't make a difference.
Well said
It is up to those with dependents to arrange proper life insurance for themselves.
AS for those who are injured a maximum of 500K seems a reasonable amount to pay to help support them.
Egbert Nobacon said:
[quote=peterpeter]
Yes, but that's only because an expectation has been allowed to arise. These days, it is almost possible to get compensation for smelling someones fart.
.
Cripes - if someone smells my wifes farts they'll need an undertaker
But seriously - don't most insurance policies have exclusions for terrorist acts, and if so the compensation should be sufficient to enable the rest of the family to live a decent life following the loss of the breadwinner.
>> Edited by Egbert Nobacon on Friday 21st October 19:37
if that is the case then greater compensation for the dependents of those who have died is justified.
JagLover said:
Tank Slapper said:
I take a different view on this.
Why should they be entitled to massive compensation from the government? There is a 'woe is me' element to this.
bloke in story said:
"No amount of money is going to give me back my leg so I cannot put a figure on compensation, but I am going to need financial security for the rest of my life."
While it is tragic that he has lost his leg, it doesn't prevent him from working eventually. Yes, he should get support until he is fit, but he shouldn't expect us to pay for him for life.
Life is sometimes crap and bad things happen. Accept it and move on. He should be thankful that he didn't die, and get on with enjoying his life.
I don't see how these people are different to anyone else affected by unexpected death or injury. The fact that it was a bomb that did it shouldn't make a difference.
Well said
It is up to those with dependents to arrange proper life insurance for themselves.
AS for those who are injured a maximum of 500K seems a reasonable amount to pay to help support them.
Sorry ..... I have to disagree with the £500k "max" for injuries .
Put it this way -(especially if you are relatively young and active )
........ would you accept an offer of £500k to have your arms or legs blown off !!! ???
- I wouldn't ..... it would mean I would be completely unable to do the things that I am passionate about and really matter to me ........... for the rest of my life.
>> Edited by alfaman on Saturday 22 October 10:41
JagLover said:
Well said
It is up to those with dependents to arrange proper life insurance for themselves.
AS for those who are injured a maximum of 500K seems a reasonable amount to pay to help support them.
Well, you could argue that this is compensation money paid by the government, to those victims, who were injured as a result of the governments foreign policy.......
968 said:
Well, you could argue that this is compensation money paid by the government, to those victims, who were injured as a result of the governments foreign policy.......
That post seems, thankfully, to be tongue in cheek 968. The government cannot allow it's foreign policy to be dictated by a handful of fanatics.
JagLover said:
........ would you accept an offer of £500k to have your arms or legs blown off !!! ???
- I wouldn't ..... it would mean I would be completely unable to do the things that I am passionate about and really matter to me ........... for the rest of my life.
>> Edited by alfaman on Saturday 22 October 10:41
The government didn't blow the legs and arms off.
thats NOT the point ...... its that £500k wouldnt compensate for loss of limbs ..... regardless of "fault"
themaskedavenger said:
Think the difference in values by US UK is down to the fact that the US has no support services where as in the UK we do.
So the US case thats it no more money in the UK they will get disability allowance (if appropriate) and other help to help with quality of life.
In the US you could get 10's of millions in compensation , rather than a few grand over here .
Difference perhaps is down to "punitive" damages being awarded in the States, and compensation perhaps in-line with that - IIRC punitive damages dont exist as a *concept* over here ..... and disability allowance is probably fook-all anyway
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff