Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • S1446591
    • By S1446591 14th Feb 17, 3:58 PM
    • 14Posts
    • 21Thanks
    S1446591
    Holiday accident compensation
    • #1
    • 14th Feb 17, 3:58 PM
    Holiday accident compensation 14th Feb 17 at 3:58 PM
    Hi all

    We saved for ages to go on a 'holiday of a lifetime' to Mexico in September. The hotel was booked through Hayes and Jarvis, but via Thomson.

    The hotel had a kids club which we used a couple of times. Once a week the kids club would join in on a Disney themed show with professional dancers as part of the entertainment program. My daughter was at the kids clubs for rehearsals with her 6yo sister, when she was involved in an accident. The air hockey table in the kids club had its maintenance panel missing, and her hand got caught in the fan belt of the motor.

    She took the tip, pad, and half of her nail off. The nail grew back but the rest didn't. The tendons were shredded too meaning she has what's known as a mallet finger, meaning it's permanently bent. She was sedated and her finger cleaned at hospital in Mexico then daily dressing changes and checks.

    We lost the last 5 days of the holiday (14 days total stayed) because we were in an eco resort with lots of animals and she couldn't get stitches because the skin was gone.

    I've submitted the complaint to Thomsons early October and their legal team is dealing with it.


    My question is - should they come back with an offer, what should I consider a reasonable amount?

    Total holiday cost was £8998

    Thank you for any help
Page 3
    • S1446591
    • By S1446591 20th Mar 17, 8:14 AM
    • 14 Posts
    • 21 Thanks
    S1446591
    No, I'm no further forward yet. Will update when I hear anything back.

    No, because if I'm honest I want them to admit liability so my insurance won't achieve that. We tried to claim early curtailment too and they rejected that too. My insurance company are rubbish and needless to say, have been binned.
    • ThumbRemote
    • By ThumbRemote 20th Mar 17, 9:54 AM
    • 3,738 Posts
    • 4,731 Thanks
    ThumbRemote
    Indeed I may be but as entitled to my opinion as others are to theirs. The child, whilst unsupervised, carried out an action that led to the injury and based on the schedules previously shared the OP has been offered above the suggested rate for 'amputation of tip of the middle or ring fingers' yet is still pushing for more.
    Originally posted by k3lvc
    Why have you quoted that about 'middle or ring fingers'? It was their index finger - see post 2. Have you just made it up to try and make the OP look bad, or have you decided to criticise them without even reading the thread?
    • TBagpuss
    • By TBagpuss 20th Mar 17, 10:39 AM
    • 5,407 Posts
    • 7,089 Thanks
    TBagpuss
    OP, although you were advised to cliam via thompson I think you would be wise to go back to a solicitor to get some proper advice about the appropriate level of damges here,. This may mean that the lawyer will need to see mediacal evidence of the likely long termefects for your daughter.

    in terms of compensation the issue is then:

    - how much should your daughter reeived for pain & suffering and loss of amentiy in the future
    - how much should you receive for the curtailment and disruption of your holiday
    - what out-of-pockt expenses have you had and are you / your daughter likely to have, moving forward.

    For the finger, one issue would be whether this is likely to continue to be vuilnerable moving forward, is she likely to need further medical treatment etc.
    • takman
    • By takman 20th Mar 17, 3:48 PM
    • 2,072 Posts
    • 1,688 Thanks
    takman
    I *did*. It was rejected and I was told (by my lawyer) to claim directly from thomsons insurers.
    Originally posted by S1446591


    Is the hotel owned by Thomson? because as far as i'm aware they don't own any. If not i'm just curious why you wouldn't claim against the hotel directly because they are the ones who have been negligent?.


    A missing panel that covers moving parts on a device designed to be used by children is obviously unacceptable. But it is the hotel owners who are liable for this and not Thomson.


    Have you asked the Travel Insurance company if they will claim directly from the hotel?
    • S1446591
    • By S1446591 20th Mar 17, 10:22 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 21 Thanks
    S1446591
    Is the hotel owned by Thomson? because as far as i'm aware they don't own any. If not i'm just curious why you wouldn't claim against the hotel directly because they are the ones who have been negligent?.


    A missing panel that covers moving parts on a device designed to be used by children is obviously unacceptable. But it is the hotel owners who are liable for this and not Thomson.


    Have you asked the Travel Insurance company if they will claim directly from the hotel?
    Originally posted by takman
    Because, quite simply, the travel agent (as the seller) has a duty of care under the package holiday regulations 1992, to ensure the hotel is safe and secure, and fit for purpose. And, as I understand it, Thomson have taken so long as they are negotiating withthe hotel's insurers. It's not a small hotel either, it's a big chain.

    I have not asked this directly, but I guess this could be another option. I did ask if I could use the legal cover for advice on doing so and they said no because it was a package holiday (clause in there that I can't sue travel agents).
    • Manxman in exile
    • By Manxman in exile 24th Mar 17, 4:08 PM
    • 407 Posts
    • 243 Thanks
    Manxman in exile
    I've followed this thread on and off since it started. And I'm really confused by one aspect of it. That may be due to my general ignorance of travel insurance so I'd be grateful if others could enlighten me.


    Why is the OP suing the travel agent rather than simply claiming from their travel insurance? Especially when that travel insurance doesn't provide legal cover to sue travel agents?


    If I were going to somewhere like Mexico I would want my travel insurance to cover me for things like personal injury caused by a third party's negligence. That's because I'd want my insurers to deal with it without me having to bother with suing the third party (or travel agent?) myself.


    Is this because travel insurance doesn't cover this sort of risk? Isn't this what insurance is for? I'd always assumed so.


    Or is it because any pay out under the policy would be significantly lower than the OP could recover by suing?


    I'm genuinely intrigued to know why it's better to go to the trouble of suing the travel agent rather than claiming under the policy. (My apologies if I've missed something so obvious that I must be blind).
    • peachyprice
    • By peachyprice 24th Mar 17, 4:19 PM
    • 17,908 Posts
    • 40,782 Thanks
    peachyprice
    I've followed this thread on and off since it started. And I'm really confused by one aspect of it. That may be due to my general ignorance of travel insurance so I'd be grateful if others could enlighten me.


    Why is the OP suing the travel agent rather than simply claiming from their travel insurance? Especially when that travel insurance doesn't provide legal cover to sue travel agents?


    If I were going to somewhere like Mexico I would want my travel insurance to cover me for things like personal injury caused by a third party's negligence. That's because I'd want my insurers to deal with it without me having to bother with suing the third party (or travel agent?) myself.


    Is this because travel insurance doesn't cover this sort of risk? Isn't this what insurance is for? I'd always assumed so.


    Or is it because any pay out under the policy would be significantly lower than the OP could recover by suing?


    I'm genuinely intrigued to know why it's better to go to the trouble of suing the travel agent rather than claiming under the policy. (My apologies if I've missed something so obvious that I must be blind).
    Originally posted by Manxman in exile
    Yes, you did miss something

    I understand that you want the best for your daughter and that she does deserve monetary compensation for the permanent loss of her fingertip, BUT, why didn't you claim for that on the personal injury section of your travel insurance? It would have been easier and quicker and you could have put the whole sorry mess behind yourselves much quicker than attempting to drag it out with TUI.
    Originally posted by peachyprice

    I *did*. It was rejected and I was told (by my lawyer) to claim directly from thomsons insurers.
    Originally posted by S1446591
    No, I'm no further forward yet. Will update when I hear anything back.

    No, because if I'm honest I want them to admit liability so my insurance won't achieve that. We tried to claim early curtailment too and they rejected that too. My insurance company are rubbish and needless to say, have been binned.
    Originally posted by S1446591
    Accept your past without regret, handle your present with confidence and face your future without fear
    • Manxman in exile
    • By Manxman in exile 24th Mar 17, 4:56 PM
    • 407 Posts
    • 243 Thanks
    Manxman in exile
    Thank you peachyprice.


    So, and I'm sorry if I've missed this as well, do we know why the insurance claim was rejected? Does the policy explicitly include personal injury claims or what?


    Shouldn't the OP be complaining to the insurance company and then following it up with the ombudsman or something?


    I'm genuinely confused why OP is in this position.
    • Manxman in exile
    • By Manxman in exile 24th Mar 17, 7:16 PM
    • 407 Posts
    • 243 Thanks
    Manxman in exile
    The more I think about this the more I think the OP is going down the wrong route.


    If I'd been the OP I'd have challenged the insurers as to what policy exclusion they were relying on to evade liability. I'm assuming personal injury was covered by the policy but I've not seen the T&Cs or exclusions.


    I would then have made a formal complaint and exhausted that process (or time limits if applicable) before referring the complaint to the ombudsman. Only if I had then failed to get a satisfactory result would I have resorted to suing the travel agent. That's because when you get to the stage of suing people you don't know what the outcome will be unless you have a cast iron case. The travel agent may have a statutory duty to provide a safe environment, but can the OP be sure that the travel agent cannot demonstrate that they've met this duty?


    The OP says that they've "binned" the insurers because they're "useless". I'd go back to the insurers and complain as above because I think that might be the best way of getting this sorted without all of the stress and hassle of suing Thompsons.


    I'm not trying to hijack this thread but I think the OP is going down the wrong route.


    (Edit: If I were the OP I'd consider posting on the insurance board. There may be posters there with more relevant knowledge who do not stray onto the consumer board.)
    Last edited by Manxman in exile; 24-03-2017 at 7:48 PM. Reason: Addition
    • peachyprice
    • By peachyprice 25th Mar 17, 9:38 AM
    • 17,908 Posts
    • 40,782 Thanks
    peachyprice
    Thank you peachyprice.


    So, and I'm sorry if I've missed this as well, do we know why the insurance claim was rejected? Does the policy explicitly include personal injury claims or what?


    Shouldn't the OP be complaining to the insurance company and then following it up with the ombudsman or something?


    I'm genuinely confused why OP is in this position.
    Originally posted by Manxman in exile
    Yes, that's what I though, and even suggested earlier. Maybe OP was under-insured, or didn't have personal accident. Does seem strange that they rejected a clear cut claim.

    And I'm guessing the amount OP has been offered by the tour operator is the equivalent of a standard insurance pay out if the claim had been successful, which would be why they won't move on it, and why OP would be unlikely to get any more in court.

    Edit:
    Just checked an annual policy I have running at the moment, if you only have the economy cover max payout for bodily injury/loss of limb is £5k.
    Last edited by peachyprice; 25-03-2017 at 9:50 AM.
    Accept your past without regret, handle your present with confidence and face your future without fear
    • ThumbRemote
    • By ThumbRemote 25th Mar 17, 12:16 PM
    • 3,738 Posts
    • 4,731 Thanks
    ThumbRemote
    And I'm guessing the amount OP has been offered by the tour operator is the equivalent of a standard insurance pay out if the claim had been successful, which would be why they won't move on it, and why OP would be unlikely to get any more in court.
    Originally posted by peachyprice
    I don't think this would be the case. I can't see that the tour operator / hotel could limit their own liability based on insurance that one of their customers may or may not have had. For starters, there's no such thing as a standard industry pay out (different policies will have different levels), and it would also mean your level of compensation would depend purely on your level of cover, not on the magnitude of the injury - which goes against the whole point of financial compensation for bodily injury.
    • S1446591
    • By S1446591 25th Mar 17, 1:00 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 21 Thanks
    S1446591
    Resolution (of sorts)
    Hi all. I received a letter this morning, their "final attempt to resolve the matter" doubling the previous offer, still denying liability.

    I have accepted £12,000 on my daughter's behalf and at the advice of my lawyer.

    Thanks everyone for the suggestions/support/opinions.
    • happyandcontented
    • By happyandcontented 25th Mar 17, 4:51 PM
    • 575 Posts
    • 1,119 Thanks
    happyandcontented
    A good outcome I think, but they still attempt to wriggle out of liability. Who else could be liable though? If they are contending it is the hotel who is ultimately at fault they are still responsible because your contract is with them.
    • lincroft1710
    • By lincroft1710 25th Mar 17, 6:01 PM
    • 9,073 Posts
    • 6,900 Thanks
    lincroft1710
    I think you have done the right thing OP. Clearly your lawyer sees the amount offered as reasonable, with little expectation of a court substantially increasing this amount.

    Given the nature of the incident it is understandable that they dispute liability.
    • Manxman in exile
    • By Manxman in exile 26th Mar 17, 10:59 AM
    • 407 Posts
    • 243 Thanks
    Manxman in exile
    Given your lawyer's advice that seems like a pretty good result.


    Well done for pursuing it
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

281Posts Today

1,937Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @EmmaDark30: @MartinSLewis off on holiday next month all paid for with free cash for switching bank accounts! Thank you!

  • MSE weekly email: Big Energy Switch 7, £5 Next/Zara etc, buy euros now?, 10xNectar, 2for1 gardens, urgent easyjet https://t.co/bS4J70hBbx

  • Today's Twitter poll 2: following on, which of these professions would you trust least if you were using their services?

  • Follow Martin