Government prosecutes itself (Again). Taxpayers lose, Lawyers win

[Orionaut]

Consider this..

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...lost-baby-tree-branch-smashed-windscreen.html

Now, this is clearly a sad case. But what exactly is the point of all this?

Who does it benefit? Who does it punish?

The "Payment" of £150,000 in this case is not a compensation order. (I imagine that there will be a separate compensation payment being made via the LA's insurers or whatever)

It is a combination of fine and legal costs order.

IE £100,000 of Wirral's ratepayers money has been paid to the treasury and a further £50,000 has been funnelled into the pockets of the various Lawyers involved in the case.

As for Wirral council. I doubt very much if any individual has suffered any personal consequences.

The only people who will have been punished will be the Wirral ratepayers who will face higher taxes/charges next year, reduced services, or both!

And their only crime is that there is only one BC and they do not have the option of taking their business elsewhere or refusing to pay if they are unhappy with it.

 

[peterwalkley]

Its got to be a freak accident that someone is driving underneath at exactly the time the branch comes down, although not unheard of. I'm sure someone posted a video in motors a while back where a branch trashed his car, fortunately no injuries on that one.

As for blame, it doesn't make it clear who owns the land the tree is growing on. The picture shows a stone wall at the location and the tree behind it. I always thought the landowner had to ensure safety.

From a brief look at HSE's own procedures: https://www.hse.gov.uk/foi/internalops/og/ogprocedures/prosecutions/index.htm it would seem that as the incident resulted in a fatality and hence prosecution. HSE have to be impartial: the state doesn't get a free pass. If a death is a company's fault, you can be sure the Daily hate will be screaming for prosecution.

 

[[FnG]magnolia]

There'll be actual lawyers and actual accountants on this forum wondering why they wasted years of their lives being educated who then pinch themselves and realise that things aren't so bad after all.

 

[LeMson]

£150k for a baby, hurm

 

[Orionaut]

£150k for a baby, hurm

Its not compensation. This is not a payment made to the Mother. It is a fine paid to the treasury and costs going into Lawyers pocketses.

As a separate issue.

The matter of compensation is an interesting one. The main point of compensation is to attempt to put the injured party (As far as possible) into a position where they would have been had the injury not occurred (this of course includes covering ongoing costs as a result of any injury that cannot be physically fully restored)

Life is priceless because it cannot be bought. Its "Pricelessness" means that "Life" on its own, actually has no monitory value.

Indeed, Although the Mother was close to term. There are those (A small but not insignificant minority) that wouldn't even consider the Fetus to be legally alive (The people who support abortion right up till birth)

So if she did receive compensation. What exactly is she being compensated for and how much should it reasonably be?

 

[randomshenans]

So if she did receive compensation. What exactly is she being compensated for and how much should it reasonably be?

Loss of her unborn child due to negligence on the part of the council not tending to their trees regularly? The stress and trauma of losing an unborn child? I don't know...

 

[garak112]

Whilst the government have been saying they want to plant trees and it's a vital part of the carbon reduction targets my local council has been going round chopping healthy trees down because they want to avoid situations like this and it's cheaper than having to repeatedly prune them.

My neighbour spoke to the council and they told her there was a scheme where if she could get 10 houses to subscribe with £40 a year then we could keep a tree. So that was £400 a tree and no surprises that didn't happen.

 

[Orionaut]

Loss of her unborn child due to negligence on the part of the council not tending to their trees regularly? The stress and trauma of losing an unborn child? I don't know...

All of which are non-quantifiable and cannot be technically compensated for with any amount of money. (Arguably medical fees as a consequence can be, but not the events themselves)

Whilst the government have been saying they want to plant trees and it's a vital part of the carbon reduction targets my local council has been going round chopping healthy trees down because they want to avoid situations like this and it's cheaper than having to repeatedly prune them.

My neighbour spoke to the council and they told her there was a scheme where if she could get 10 houses to subscribe with £40 a year then we could keep a tree. So that was £400 a tree and no surprises that didn't happen.

And that is the other big problem.

Expect to see urban street trees destroyed across the country in vast numbers. It is like the destruction of Cemetery's because of the very small risk that an old gravestone might fall over just as a child is passing.

 

[randomshenans]

All of which are non-quantifiable and cannot be technically compensated for with any amount of money. (Arguably medical fees as a consequence can be, but not the events themselves)

You could say that about any trauma though. It is impossible to put a value on something, but what do you think life insurance does? If I die, my wife gets X amount of money. That's put a value on something non quantifiable.

 

[Surveyor]

You could say that about any trauma though. It is impossible to put a value on something, but what do you think life insurance does? If I die, my wife gets X amount of money. That's put a value on something non quantifiable.

With life insurance the only one putting a value on your life, if you want to phrase it that way, is you.

No one says your life is worth X therefore you can only insure yourself for X.

 

[Pipe & Slippers]

You could say that about any trauma though. It is impossible to put a value on something, but what do you think life insurance does? If I die, my wife gets X amount of money. That's put a value on something non quantifiable.

You've put your own value on your life, and that could be any number. It's different to assessing the financial impact of a trauma on someone else

lol - beaten to it

 

[Orionaut]

You could say that about any trauma though. It is impossible to put a value on something, but what do you think life insurance does? If I die, my wife gets X amount of money. That's put a value on something non quantifiable.

No, a lot of that is quantifiable.

Injury/death of an adult is assessed, in part, over such matters as loss of income, loss of future earnings. Costs of support for irrecoverable injuries and so on.

Most people anyway, do not take out life insurance so their other half can go out and have a holiday or buy a new car if they croak. They do so to make sure the mortgage is settled and the bills can be paid.

The "You have had an distressing time, here's £XX,xxx to kiss it better" is purely arbitrary and is not based on any quantifiable assessment

 

[Dis86]

No one says your life is worth X therefore you can only insure yourself for X.

That's precisely what insurance actuarys will do.
I saw some data previously which gives the exact breakdown for various injuries from loss of a finger through to complete vegetative state.

 

[Surveyor]

That's precisely what insurance actuarys will do.
I saw some data previously which gives the exact breakdown for various injuries from loss of a finger through to complete vegetative state.

Such things exist but for life insurance you pick your own number.

 

[PlacidCasual]

It is entirely reasonable that the HSE prosecutes local government in the same way it would businesses. They all have the same duties under law and the consequences of non compliance can be the same public or private offender.

That local government doesn’t have the money to fulfil all its duties is a problem but doesn’t obviate the need to keep the public safe.

 

[Orionaut]

It is entirely reasonable that the HSE prosecutes local government in the same way it would businesses. They all have the same duties under law and the consequences of non compliance can be the same public or private offender.

That local government doesn’t have the money to fulfil all its duties is a problem but doesn’t obviate the need to keep the public safe.

Except Local Government is not a business is it?

It is not like a BC has any shareholders or customers to account too. One has no choice as to who ones BC is and no option other than to pay them whatever they demand of you.

And how does shuffling money between different government departments and making Lawyers fat "Keep the Public safe" anyway?

It would be different if somebody actually lost their job or ended up in prison when something like this happens.

But all that is likely to happen is that there will be some sort of internal investigation where "Lessons will be learned", a bit of retraining maybe, and come the next budget review, the BC will close a library or stick a bit on the parking charges to cover the bill and the only people who will suffer any real consequences will be the totally blameless Wirral residents.

And the only people who will have been benefited from all of this will be the respective legal teams.

 

[Eurofighter]

If it was the councils fault then fair enough. How would you feel if it happened to you?

 

[PlacidCasual]

Except it wasn’t litigation it was criminal law. Are you suggesting we shouldn’t apply criminal law to local authorities? Had the crime been sufficient or the guilt clear enough jail time would have ensued. Once again I presume we’re not excusing local authorities from that sanction.

 

[Rroff]

Except it wasn’t litigation it was criminal law. Are you suggesting we shouldn’t apply criminal law to local authorities? Had the crime been sufficient or the guilt clear enough jail time would have ensued. Once again I presume we’re not excusing local authorities from that sanction.

It doesn't make good reading - there is no excuse for whatever local authority is responsible for leaving it 13 years without surveying stuff like this - accidents happen and sometimes they can't possibly be avoided but situations like this should not happen and there should be hard questions being asked and potentially looked at as a crime:

"Wirral Borough Council had not inspected the tree on Arrowe Park Road for at least 13 years and had failed to implement an inspection system despite a similar incident on the same road in January 2015."

On a related note it is starting to annoy me that my local council isn't being held responsible for the state of road repairs - they've obviously been going lowest bidder with the result that surfaces on the main road are barely lasting 18 months never mind the 10 odd years they used to last before they are in a dangerous condition and needing urgent work causing massive disruption which must be costing far more in the long run than the short term savings of not spending out on the work that would last a decade.

 

[Werewolf]

It doesn't make good reading - there is no excuse for whatever local authority is responsible for leaving it 13 years without surveying stuff like this - accidents happen and sometimes they can't possibly be avoided but situations like this should not happen and there should be hard questions being asked and potentially looked at as a crime:

"Wirral Borough Council had not inspected the tree on Arrowe Park Road for at least 13 years and had failed to implement an inspection system despite a similar incident on the same road in January 2015."

That bit about not inspecting it despite a similar incident will have been what done it for the court...

Although if they're like my local council they probably don't know whose responsibility it is, or had not communicated it clearly with their contractors.
We've had some fun with a bit of land the is next to our house that belongs to the council, including with them writing to tell us that they would cut the shrubs on it and bill us unless we kept our garden under control...the letter back was fairly short*.
They were also quite happy to allow around the top 2-3 foot of an eight foot high (with more ready to fall), eight foot long wall sitting resting on those same shrubs until we pointed out that it was on the route primary and pre-school kids took to the nearest school.

I suspect a lot of councils no longer have enough staff/money to do inspections like this properly, and may not have full lists of their assets.


*In 30 odd years they've only cut the shrubs maybe four or five times, they miss them every time the do the ones on the other side of the road (two of three times a year).