Sponsored Ad

Dismiss Notice
For fuller site visibility and advert-free browsing, simply log-in or register.

Manchester bombing compensation

Discussion in 'Jollies Bar' started by Surfbum, May 17, 2019.

  1. Surfbum

    Surfbum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2018
    Posts:
    121
    App Stage:
    Passed PRMC
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-48306372

    What are the thoughts on this? Multiple things spring to mind but with the risk of sounding morbid, I'll keep some at bay.

    I personally think that 11k is acceptable simply because the loss of a loved one cannot be replaced by any figure. Not sure how the government respond to terrorist attacks as far as compensation is concerned and if it's on a individual basis . Not sure if I would feel guilty by accusing the government of not paying out more when it's effectively a "good will gesture"
     
  2. rkec

    rkec Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2008
    Posts:
    254
    It's a complete joke from start to finish. The bomber shouldn't have even been in this country and politicians should be accountable for all of that.

    According to a solicitors site for compensation, this is what you can claim for:

    After someone you love has been the victim of murder or manslaughter, then you may find your compensation payout includes the following types of compensation.

    General – This is meant to compensate for suffering/pain your loved one went through, as well as familial income loss.

    Adverse effects – Long Term – As well as financial losses, the loss of care and protection or future inheritance can be compensated for.

    Emotional pain/mental suffering – This compensates for torment that those left behind experience

    Funeral Costs – This is likely to include the cost of caskets, cremations, ministers, the wake, and transport. It may also include the cost of flowers.

    Medical Costs – Your loved one may have incurred costs for medical treatments before they succumbed to their injuries. This type of cost can be compensated for.

    Bereavement – An award that is supposed to be compensation for suffering/pain of the family of the victim

    Loss of Earnings – Whether pension payments, disability payments or wages are lost because of the loved one’s murder.

    Future Loss of Earnings – Takes into account the potential income the loved one would have contributed to the family and includes considerations regarding pay rises that may have occurred should they not have been taken from you.

    In this context, 11k is a dam insult.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Chelonian

    Chelonian Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Posts:
    8,067
    But there is also an issue of dependency. Being a very young child Saffie Roussos had nobody dependent on her potential loss of income and so no financial loss would occur.

    Such cases are a devolved matter and handled less bluntly and with more compassion in Scotland.
     
  4. rkec

    rkec Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2008
    Posts:
    254
    Sorry my error, meant to highlight the paragraph below that one,

    "Future Loss of Earnings – Takes into account the potential income the loved one would have contributed to the family and includes considerations regarding pay rises that may have occurred should they not have been taken from you."


     
  5. Chelonian

    Chelonian Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Posts:
    8,067
    @rkec I believe that the same fundamental rule applies though.
    How can one assess the future earning potential of a child? Brutally the mantra 'no financial damage = no financial damages' often applies.
    Arguably a child might eventually support parents financially some forty years later. But the parents would have to prove that they were relying on that future support.

    The Scotland policy places more emphasis on personal loss, grief and bereavement and compensation for these factors is considerably higher.

    But... how can anyone be financially compensated for the loss of their child?
    The problem here is that the child's worth has been denigrated by the payment of a paltry sum. The whole compensation structure needs to be reviewed.
     
  6. Surfbum

    Surfbum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2018
    Posts:
    121
    App Stage:
    Passed PRMC
    How on earth does one measure that and translate that into pounds.

    I can see now why 11k is unreasonable based on those facts alone but still feel that I would be upset by laws that don't effectively need to be there.
     
  7. rkec

    rkec Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2008
    Posts:
    254
    The first time I had heard of it being used was by that traveler kid who was shot by the farmer Tony Martin in 2000'ish. The family tried to claim for loss of future earnings, which is hilarious because they basically wanted to claim for the money he wasn't able to steal off people in the future on the account that he was now brown bread.

    I'm not sure how they would calculate it to be honest but could be just an average income, average life expectancy. Maybe it's a claim if the perpetrators estate has money rather than from the criminal injuries compensation scheme.
     
  8. Chelonian

    Chelonian Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Posts:
    8,067
    It's more to do with the way the calculations are made. Bluntly; putting a fair value on bereavement and grief and disregarding notional stuff (in the case of a child) of the loss of potential earnings.

    Happy to be corrected but I think that several elements are considered to determine compensation specifically associated with loss of earnings. A child will most likely have no income (taxable or otherwise) and almost certainly no dependents on which a calculation could be made.

    As the child has no dependents, should parents be awarded compensation within that category anyway? Should parents be compensated for the loss of a child's lifetime earning potential? For sure parents, grandparents, uncles, aunts and friends suffer a very real loss in human terms but that loss should be properly recognised by other elements of the compensation calculation as it is in Scotland. Arguably the protocol in England and Wales remains stuck in the nineteenth century.

    On the topic of Fred Barras, the lad shot by Tony Martin:

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...rt-life-and-crimes-of-fred-barras-281634.html
     
  9. rkec

    rkec Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2008
    Posts:
    254
    Honestly not sure mate. I think them being awarded just £11,000 might come as a surprise to sum and I think this might lead to a change in the law.

    Is there a case to be had that Children provide valuable social care for the parents in elder age? I certainly think that could be justified for some cases. I'm not sure that's common in English society but certainly is in the Chinese community where they look on and gasp as we put our parents and grand parents into care homes.

    So whilst parents are dependents of children yet, they maybe in the future?
     
  10. Chelonian

    Chelonian Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Posts:
    8,067
    If the legal jurisdiction had been Scotland the award for grief and bereavement in this case could perhaps have exceeded £100,000. But the numbers for potential loss of earnings might well have been similar to the England and Wales calculation.
    My comment is based on a conversation with someone who works in that field. And as every case is individually assessed it's impossible to be certain.

    In India today the answer is a resounding yes. If the child is a boy the compensatory value will be greater. India has its own cultural values.

    I reckon that as the UK has an ageing demographic the law will inevitably change to reflect circumstances. Can't see it happening anytime soon though.