Talk

Advanced search

Drowned toddler's parents asked to give back compensation money

(40 Posts)
megapixels Tue 14-Jul-09 12:48:49

This one.

Do you think the right decision has been reached?

stitchtime Tue 14-Jul-09 12:51:53

on general principle i am against compensation of any kind.
how do you compensate a family for the loss of a child? you cant.its impossible. there is no way to put a price on a child. imo. so how the parents went ahead and sued for compensation is beyond my understanding. from the article you have linked to, i think thejudge made the right decision.

Bramshott Tue 14-Jul-09 12:53:14

O Lord, that's tricky. I think I agree that they probably shouldn't have been paid the compensation in the beginning, but what's the likelihood of them having a spare £40,000 hanging around now?!?

RenagadeMum Tue 14-Jul-09 12:53:44

So tragic, any little pond etc just gives me the eebie-jeebies.

But, saying that, I do worry that the side of common sense is swinging too far on the side that 'there should never be any accidents in this world'.

It is so sad that they lost their child but providing the site was signed etc then it is a tragic accident. I worry about all the people who could go out of business as they can no longer get insured for anything. Riding stables are having this exact problem.

LaDiDaDi Tue 14-Jul-09 12:54:13

I think it depends upon info not available in that report. If the parents knew of the existence of the pond or at least it was not concealed by bushes etc so that they could not have reasonably known of it or if it was further from the caravan than you might expect a 2 year old to be allowed to wander alone then the correct decision has now been made.

Tragic, tragic case though.

beatiebow Tue 14-Jul-09 12:54:54

The money had been put on hold by the lawyers (apparently they did this as soon as the decision was appealed) so the people haven't been spending it or anything.

megapixels Tue 14-Jul-09 12:55:01

Me too. At that age (2 and 16 months) children should be watched constantly as it is impossible in practical terms to make a place completely safe for them. I am surprised they got awarded compensation to begin with.

More trauma for the parents though - although I think the judge is prob. right. I should imagine when it happened they were so distraught they had to find someone else to blame. It's a strange road to go down but it would have given them a focus for their grief, rage and guilt to sue the company. What a horrific tragedy.

Greensleeves Tue 14-Jul-09 12:56:58

I don't think they should have to pay it back. If it was awarded erroneously that's not their fault. Landing them 40k in hock now is just plain cruel.

HecatesTwopenceworth Tue 14-Jul-09 12:57:51

It isn't about the money though, is it? Nobody would be wanting the CASH! My child is dead, give me some money I want a new car hmm

It is about saying it's your fault (and sometimes it's not MY fault!!) sue the holiday camp, holiday camp pays = it was their fault. you can blame them, be angry with them.

There will be people who feel that the holiday camp is at fault for having 18 inches of water and there will be people who feel that the parents are at fault for allowing their 2 yr old off unsupervised.

At the end of the day, the retrospectascope is a wonderful thing. Accidents happen. Terrible, tragic accidents.

mumblechum Tue 14-Jul-09 12:58:11

I think the compensation wasn't for the loss of the child per se but for psychological damage to the father.

Unless I'm reading it wrong.

2shoes Tue 14-Jul-09 12:58:52

poor parents
stitchtime your against compensation of any kind??

megapixels Tue 14-Jul-09 12:59:00

Good point LaDiDa.

I too feel really sorry for the parents having to find that amount if they've already spent it.

Tinker Tue 14-Jul-09 13:01:18

Was the compensation for loss of earnings due to not being able to work? I don't understand why you'd get compensation otherwise

norkmonster Tue 14-Jul-09 13:01:53

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Lizzylou Tue 14-Jul-09 13:04:39

I think if something like this happens some people naturally want to feel that someone has paid (financially or otherwise) for their loss. Sort of eye for an eye I suppose.

It is so tragic though and agree the award should never have been made.

AppleandMosesMummy Tue 14-Jul-09 18:52:53

I don't think they should have been compensated, what was a 2 year old and 16 month old doing unattended, the parents will have to live with that for the rest of their lives, £25k wasn't going to make anything better.

whatmaisieknew Tue 14-Jul-09 19:02:11

agree with gwynnie...

funtimewincies Tue 14-Jul-09 19:07:53

I live in Wales and the news reported that the father was also in the pool at the time. If that was the case, I'm presuming that it was decided that the father bore some responsibility in supervising the child as well as the holiday park.

funtimewincies Tue 14-Jul-09 19:10:02

ANd reported as a pool rather than a pond hmm.

nickschick Tue 14-Jul-09 19:14:38

It wasnt just the 2 yr old though was it? both the children were missing.

We holiday with 3 dc and its hard but you have to know where they are and be safety aware to a point where it is all consuming.

Anyone can have a child that gets lost momentarily god knows we have,this was an absolute tragedy but I can see that the compensation was awarded unfairly.

funtimewincies Tue 14-Jul-09 19:28:29

Oh dear, preggie brain at this end. This is the very sad story that I was confusing it with sad.

saintlydamemrsturnip Tue 14-Jul-09 19:38:29

Agree with hecates and greeny.

Don't know enough about the case but if the holiday park was at fault (that isn't clear from the news story, but I'm not sure how else they would have got compensation) then surely they should be entitled to compensation. And money does make companies think in a way that nothing else does.

If the company was at fault then surely it's like a birth injury - it happens, but if someone was at fault you can claim (theoretically- you won't manage it because your notes will have been 'lost' but that's another story).

callalilies Tue 14-Jul-09 19:45:43

The problem is going to be the legal bills isn't it? Even if they never actually got the £20k compensation because of the appeal, the other part of the award was to cover their legal costs, so they will now have to find that money themselves presumably.

PeachyTheRiverParrettHarlot Tue 14-Jul-09 19:58:47

I don't have an opinion in this case as I think it seems very 50 / 50 however stitch saying comp should never beawarded seems odd- know of parents with children injured by bad medical practice (improperly administered vaccination in case in mind) who finally got the money to ensure the child has care for life. When a child goes from nt to severe cp (can't even smile) as aresult of a cock up why would anyone be against that?

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now