Injury claims not what they used to beWhen the sudden surge, and public acceptance of, injury compensation claims took off back in the late 90's it started off quite simple. You had an injury, you got medical evidence from a G.P. or the Accident and Emergency unit and you claimed for compensation based on the level of injury you sustained. A bit of whiplash got you roughly £1500 and the loss of a limb anything from £10,000 to £500,000.
But as compensation claims became an acceptable past time, it has turned more in to a way to earn a living.
Compensation claims are not taxed. If you are on benefits and you are awarded a few thousand for slipping on a grape in Asda (whether you put the grape their yourself or not) your benefits are not affected and you end up better off than most people who have slogged their guts out working 9-5 that year.
Now, it's getting just plain silly.
A large portion of compensation claims coming through the system now are for "mental anguish". Not from an accident they themselves endured, but for witnessing and accident or even a near-miss accident.
For example, a recent claim involved someone looking for compensation for nearly being given the wrong medication. They were in the pharmacy and the pharmacist gave them the wrong medication. As it was a refill, the patient knew it was wrong and complained. Being "traumatised" by this event led them to believe that they should receive money.
Another more common example is people seeking compensation for witnessing horrific events. Of course, a large number of claims we saw coming through were people looking for compensation for being scared after the London bombings ... these were people living in the North of Britain who saw the events reported on TV and honestly thought they should get compensation for it being scary.
OTHER RELATED ARTICLES:
|