To be rather surprised at my parents with hindsight?

[ImaBridKid]

In 1990 I was 17 and was knocked off my bike by a motorist. It was low speed collision on a roundabout, I wasn't seriously injured not enough for a hospital appointment. However, I was shaken up with a painful bruised backside and had to have 2 days off work. The lady who knocked me over seemed a decent type, was also shaken up and had to have the day off work due to shock.
What surprises me is this - my parents were both university graduates with 'Top executive' level jobs. My mum was an abusive, alcoholic narcissist and my Dad her enabler.
I'm surprised that neither of them encouraged or helped me to put in a claim for compensation. After all, I was hurt although not really seriously and psychologically shaken up. I didn't know the first thing about claims when I was 17.
Maybe the claims culture wasn't so much a thing in 1990.Any opinions?

I also don't think parents of that age (early Boomers?) were as precious with their DC. I think it would have been a case of 'pull yourself together and get on with it' - that was just normal for the generation who had lived through real trauma and hardship.

Agree this lockdown has caused a lot of dwelling on the past. It's not healthy.

I would judge someone who tried to claim compensation for a bruised arse and two days off work. It was 30 years ago and you weren't actually injured?

In 1990 it was a different culture

In 1986 I sustained life changing injuries from a restaurant. Fully investigated by authorities (at least 1 the person was also affected plus at least 1 of their staff), no suggestion of claim was ever made by anyone. Just glad to be alive really.

I think I might have been entitled to compensation as a victim? I don’t know. I’ve never pursued it and I’m n/c with my parents and sister anyway,. I’m just saying that I got a life changing injury which nearly blinded me and required 38 stitches and nothing happened as a consequence.

A certain kind of person would certainly try to claim for an incident like that today, but that doesn’t mean they should or that they’d be successful. Unless they lied their bruised asses off it wouldn’t be worth the time regardless.

Ha ha ha ha ha!

You think they should have encouraged you to claim compensation (and pay legal fees - no No Win No Fee stuff then) for a bruise on your arse and a bit of a fright?

If this is one of your examples of your parents' unacceptable behaviour, I wonder how much else of your past is seen through a very skewed perspective

Is this really all you have to worry about ?

Are you autistic

cultkid, is there any background to that question or are you just using autism as an insult to ridicule the OP there?

I am not ridiculing I just don't think that she understands and then I would expect us all to give different responses to her
Because she seems literal and that would resonate more possibly with all of us

That it was an accident (and not negligence) doesn't mean the victim cannot claim compensation. But yours happened 30 years ago, so it would be have lapsed by now.

Don't worry, OP. You wouldn't have knowledge of changes prior to your career. Try to ignore the abuse and to the extent you can, put into perspective the events of your childhood and family environment, both those that feel completely wrong and any, like this, where there might be external circumstances that changed.

Good luck.

It wouldn’t even cross my mind to put in a claim for compensation.
And for what exactly? It was an accident. Accidents happen and the consequence was two days off work. You can bruise your back by having a bad fall of your bike all on your own. A 17 years old’s wages for two days are peanuts compared to the cost of processing a pointless claims. It makes no sense to me.
I’m pleased it wasn’t a severe accident. Regardless of how you characterise your parents, this one lack of initiative on their part (due to mental sanity, common sense or laziness) sounds very sensible to me.

Were you a 17yo supermodel earning £10,000 a day? If not, I cannot see how pursuing the poor contrite driver for compo would have been reasonable or constructive. Unless your point is that your parents were generally entitled grabby arseholes so you're surprised they didn't behave that way in this instance.

My last firm started out as personal injury only and they were established in the 70s. Was definitely a “thing” then and by the 90s, but maybe not so widely known for your folks to have suggested it. I can’t say with certainty, but perhaps no win no fee agreements weren’t as common then and the initial costs would have been high too.

You would only have been able to claim for the mental harm if you were diagnosed by a psychiatrist as having a recognised psychiatric condition as a result of the accident e.g. PTSD. You cannot claim for being shaken up, a bit shocked, upset etc all of which are perfectly expected after what you went through.

As such there may not have been much in it had you claimed anyway.

I'm a lawyer and you wouldn't have had a hope in hell of getting any money from this. There's a small chance that you might have got a pittance to cover your two days wages if you weren't entitled to sick pay but that would've been completely outweighed by the court costs. You got bruised and can't even prove that the driver did something wrong.

I could have misinterpreted but I don't think the OP was looking for advice concerning the likelihood or otherwise of a successful claim, rather I think they've been evaluating their family history and wanted some advice to help them interpret or re-consider what they felt about how their parents acted in this instance.

@ BumpBundle I’m not sure where you practice where the losing party doesn’t pay court costs.

The driver rear-ended a cyclist. That’s fairly cut and dry on liability.