Son - broke both his wrists first week in P1

[doolittle79]

Hello
My son broke both his wrists his first week at school falling from a climbing frame. I got nowhere with the school. Do I have a claim?

And I and I'm sure many others would have no disagreement with how you went about dealing with things with your DDs school (and I'm so sorry she was injured and it was preventable).

However, OPs situation appears to be different in 2 areas - she's not necessarily got very far with the school (although that's a bit unclear at the moment) and she also had the loss of income due to the secondary issues of the school not providing help for her DC after he was injured on their watch in what appears to be a preventable fashion.

I agree that the learning is incredibly important here, but if poor OP is really left out of pocket, that does need to be taken into consideration if she feels it's causing/caused her a problem.

I agree with what you are saying Doing
Loss of income for 8 weeks for a single parent can mean the difference between a roof over their head or losing their home.

I didn't mean to criticise if the OP's main motivation was financial, it's just in earlier posts financial motivations were further down the list than other 'stopping it from happening again' type reasons. If she is significantly out of pocket due to the school's negligence then she needs to weigh up the negatives of making a claim (impact on school and potential bad blood between her and school) and if not making a claim (getting into debt etc). If it was me I would probably want to get an idea of what sort of payout I could reasonably expect in order to make up my mind. I'm not sure if a no win no fee type company would be a reliable source of information on this though? CAB maybe?

london the majority of the responses are 'no, accidents happen'
i.e. there can never be a case because...accidents.
Its baffling.
So what if her motivation is financial?
If an institution/agency/business is negligent they deserve to be held accountable.

Whether you or I or anyone else would seek financial recompense in the same circumstances is irrelevant.

My DN had to sue her own mother. She didn't want to but she had no choice. She was dreadfully injured and no compensation processes would cover her unless she did so.
Its one of the reasons we have insurance.

I never understand the attitude of many people on MN to potential negligence claims. There seems to be a widespread misconception that you can only make a claim if you have actually suffered financial loss, whereas of course it has been established for decades that damages for pain and suffering are standard. In this case, if OP's son has a claim, he is looking at potential long term problems, particularly in the hand he uses most, which may affect him for the rest of his life.

The other one I don't understand is the "Accidents happen" mantra. Yes, they do, but if they were avoidable by taking normal precautions, why on earth should you just suck it up? Suppose, for the sake of argument, an accident like this happened as a result of which a child lost the use of an arm - should he and his parents simply accept that "accidents happen" and suck that up? If you were injured in a road accident that was wholly the other person's fault and suffered life-changing injuries that would leave you in pain for the rest of your life, would you really do nothing about it? I suspect the "accidents happen" merchants wouldn't actually hesitate to make a claim in those circumstances, but they never seem to be able to define where the dividing line is.

My dd fell and broke her wrist and hurt her back falling off monkey bars.

They cornered off the monkey bars while they checked their safety then they stopped dd from going on them. I told them not to be so ridiculous that it had been an accident and as long as it was supervised to let her on.

If the equipment was not to the correct standard, and there had been numerous other incidents, my child had been seriously injured and i had suffered lost wages i would absolutely instruct a solicitor to make a claim.

Everything that MrsDV and Gnu have posted. I detest these "get a grip/you're being greedy" responses. Really nasty, uncalled for and obviously from folk who have never suffered financial loss through negligence.

If they were negligent why "shouldn't" she be reimbursed for unpaid leave? Why "shouldn't" her son have something in place for potential future treatment costs?

No, it's much easier to automatically assume she is a money grabbing individual. FFS

greed is an easy thing to allege in other people isn't it? Much harder to detect in yourself I find.