Is This Why Insurance Premiums Are So High

molerat

http://www.shetlandtimes.co.uk/2011/02/01/father-sues-own-firm-for-100000-over-death-of-his-son-in-building-accident

I am confused as to the reasoning. In a way he is saying he is responsible for the death but is going to financially benefit from it.

vaio

The limited company the father owns and works for was also the son’s employer. They are completely separate legally.

It does seem strange when it’s small companies but think big companies, if they both worked for BP and same happened then the fact that the father was also one of the owners of BP (by virtue of having a couple of hundred shares) doesn’t remove his right to be compensated for the death of his son.

In any event, the father won’t get much, the son’s widow & kids will be the main beneficiaries and rightly so.

geri1965_2

That is a strange case. I deal with liability claims but the law is slightly different in Scotland (and they get higher levels of damages). Never heard of "loss of society" before. I assume it means he no longer has the benefit of his company on social occasions.

molerat

A small shareholder in a giant such as BP is very different to a company that may have just 2 or 3 shareholders. The father is going for the payout and not the wife so it is not money to replace the breadwinner. Seems similar to the Nimrod crash where the mother and sister, who again were not financially reliant on the deceased, got £100K. One of my mates was wiped out on his motorbike by a numpty in a car, perhaps I should sue?

vaio

molerat wrote: »

A small shareholder in a giant such as BP is very different to a company that may have just 2 or 3 shareholders.....

Legally it’s exactly the same, if it’s then not the outcome would be that his son’s death wouldn’t be compensated but someone else’s son killed in same incident would be which is obviously nonsense.

molerat wrote: »

......The father is going for the payout and not the wife so it is not money to replace the breadwinner. Seems similar to the Nimrod crash where the mother and sister, who again were not financially reliant on the deceased, got £100K. One of my mates was wiped out on his motorbike by a numpty in a car, perhaps I should sue?

Whether you would get paid out for your mate depends on the circumstances, if you were riding behind him and witnessed the sad event and suffered mental health issues as a result then you probably would, and if he was your son then you almost certainly would.

Compensation doesn’t only get paid for financial harm, other sorts of harm are eligible too.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-11537773 covers the nimrod case and give the reasons for the compensation. All seems reasonable to me.

Maybe any anger about that case would be better directed at the MOD/BAE bean counters who took the decision to save a few quid by not doing the modifications that would have prevented the deaths in the first place despite numerous warnings over many years.

In my world they would be in jail rather than still employed/enjoying retirement

forgotmyname

How can the building company be liable if a can of expanding foam exploded?

Shame there are no more details. Dread to think what it would be like losing anyone close never mind a son/daughter.

vaio

Don't know the details but liability has been accepted and the question now is the amount of damages.

from the fatal enquiry......

"A BUILDER died instantly when a can of foam filler he held in his hands exploded and ruptured his heart, a fatal accident inquiry heard yesterday.

James Thomson, 26, was working on a building site at Upperton, in Levenwick, Shetland, when the accident happened.

It is thought he was using a fan heater to warm up a batch of 15 canisters of foam filler shortly before one of them exploded. The canister that exploded was beyond its use-by date by two months."

Just seen the update, the father got £90k