Compensation for a child RTC

debtdebt

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

I can’t see that there is anything to claim for as in this case there are no financial losses. If her injuries were more severe then there might be e.g. someone having to take time off to look after her, or to private tutor if she was missing school.

Don't advise people when you clearly don't know what you're talking about.

General damages are awarded for pain, suffering and loss of amenity.

Special damages are awarded for financial costs ie private care, tutoring etc.

An individual can claim for any one, the other or both.

debtdebt

twhitehousescat wrote: »

where any puppies or kittens hurt?

Geographically?

phill99

If you were giving a lift home to one of your daughters friends and the same incidence occurred, you would rightly expect to receive a claim from her / her parents for injuries sustained, emotional anxiety , distress etc. If your daughter was in someone else's car and then same event happened you would be seeking compensation on you daughters behalf.


You need to take the emotion out of this situation and ignore the fact that she is related to you. IMO she is entitled to compensation for suffering, regardless of who caused it.

Marvel1

I wonder if get can get compo for a toothache I had 3 years ago, i suffered with pain :think:

debtdebt

Marvel1 wrote: »

I wonder if get can get compo for a toothache I had 3 years ago, i suffered with pain :think:

Depends if the toothache was down to a third party's negligence? In any event, the limitation period for general damages expires after three years.

nelliedean

In answer to nodding donkey - good question. No I wouldn't.
I have talked it over with her explaining what was offered and she declined saying 'what for?' so I feel happier and also happy that she agrees and didn't even consider.
I've been punched enough at work without going down the compensation pathway suggested at times so it's not a course I would ordinarily even consider.

mac.d

Why claim when there is no actual damage/loss. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should do it.

nelliedean wrote: »

I have talked it over with her explaining what was offered and she declined saying 'what for?' so I feel happier and also happy that she agrees and didn't even consider.

She sounds like a sensible lass

waamo

nelliedean wrote: »

I can't work out how to quote the first reply but this is a genuine question.
I automatically said no but, bearing in mind the accident was in no way my daughters fault, I was worried that I was saying no because it was my fault.
The insurance company are planning on calling me again today to ask me this question again, so I really did just want a few quick opinions. And as most of them mirror what I think I'll stick to my no answer.

You do actually seem to have answered my question, albeit in a roundabout way.

Both you and your daughter are currently putting a figure of nil on it so not worth a claim.

Nasqueron

diamond_dave wrote: »

Got knocked off my bike a few years ago by an old guy in a car who turned left across me. Bounced down the road, went to A and E, but nothing broken, just bruised and shaken. Went to see the man a week later, just to chat, thinking he would be apologetic, but all he said was " -you shouldn't have been on the road ". Didn't claim any compensation as I was just glad to be alive. Too much compensation culture nowadays.

I was knocked off by a car driving into me on a roundabout. Police and ambulance attended, week off work (could have been signed off for 2 but I chose not to), bruising that lasted 3 months and soft tissue damage that was present a year later. Absolutely I had a PI claim in as well as all the expenses

reeac

debtdebt wrote: »

Depends if the toothache was down to a third party's negligence? In any event, the limitation period for general damages expires after three years.

Of course it was. The toothpaste and toothbrush manufacturers were incompetent and as for the dentist. .... .