Leicester City crash victim's family sues owners for $10m

[Jon the Hat]

13 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

The issue I see is that you have an event which occurs on British soil subject to British law in terms of compliance ie. insurance but it is being pushed through the Thai courts. 

 

Either way the figure is absolutely unreal - the loss of earnings wouldn't compensate for £8 million. 

Thai employment contract probably.

 

[Foxxed]

If there's neglect it comes from the helicopter maintainers. But Ms Suknami's family have no contract with the helicopter maintainers. So they'll need to go through King Power. It sad for both parties but you can understand her family wanting to force an investigation into the possible neglect.

[urban fox]

1 minute ago, Foxxed said:

If there's neglect it comes from the helicopter maintainers. But Ms Suknami's family have no contract with the helicopter maintainers. So they'll need to go through King Power. It sad for both parties but you can understand her family wanting to force an investigation into the possible neglect.

A somewhat simplistic approach. Negligence law is a minefield. For example, if King power cannot demonstrate that they did everything reasonably practicable to ensure the helicopter was in perfect working order they would be liable. In such cases to simply state that it was brand new/under a maintenance contract will not satisfy the courts. If they can show for eg that they audited the maintainers, checking their competencies and record keeping and had satisfied themselves that all the appropriate servicing had been carried out then they would be squeaky clean. If the investigation eventually determines that there was an inherent fault which would not be detected by routine servicing/inspection again there would be no fault attached.

 

In such cases, it is down to the defendant to prove that they were not negligent rather than the other way round. (the helicopter crashed, ergo something went wrong so prove you did everything in your power to prevent it. If you cannot do this to the satisfaction of the court you are negligent and therefore liable).

 

However, you are correct in your summation that the claimant had no contract with nor control over the helicopter company and so their initial claim would be through King Power (who would then look to offset)

[LinekersLugs]

2 hours ago, StanSP said:

Why would the family compensate them, out of interest? 

 

The family and/or business weren't responsible for the deaths? 

Civil liability is a tricky thing and if she was an employee and the maintenance was in-house and identified as a failure Of process then by proxy her employers could be responsible 

 

they will get a big out of court settlement as Top won’t want the laundry washed in court. 
 

and this Could cause his mum embarrassment , they will settle 

[urban fox]

3 minutes ago, LinekersLugs said:

Civil liability is a tricky thing and if she was an employee and the maintenance was in-house and identified as a failure Of process then by proxy her employers could be responsible 

 

they will get a big out of court settlement as Top won’t want the laundry washed in court. 
 

and this Could cause his mum embarrassment , they will settle 

As mentioned earlier any decision to settle or otherwise is in the hands of the insurers, not Top or King Power.  It is not uncommon for the insurers to go entirely against the wishes of the company, as it is their money and not the company's that is at stake. I have seen companies reputations severely damaged as a result of insurers digging their heels in and going to court rather than settling as the company wanted.  Any direct payment by King Power at this stage would nullify their contract with the insurers and leave them wide open.

[LinekersLugs]

23 minutes ago, urban fox said:

As mentioned earlier any decision to settle or otherwise is in the hands of the insurers, not Top or King Power.  It is not uncommon for the insurers to go entirely against the wishes of the company, as it is their money and not the company's that is at stake. I have seen companies reputations severely damaged as a result of insurers digging their heels in and going to court rather than settling as the company wanted.  Any direct payment by King Power at this stage would nullify their contract with the insurers and leave them wide open.

There is NO way they let this reach an open court , one way or another they are going to get a settlement 

[urban fox]

44 minutes ago, LinekersLugs said:

There is NO way they let this reach an open court , one way or another they are going to get a settlement 

I tend to agree. I was only pointing out what the actual processes involved were. 75% of all civil injury claims never get as far as court. There will be lots of negotiations and finger pointing between the various parties behind the scenes, which will result in a "full and final settlement" with no admittance of liability from any party (UNLESS the final AAIB investigation squarely identifies a design or manufacturing fault with the helicopter, and then it is open season on them). Once that is done, I have faith that Top and Co may well go above and beyond any agreed legal settlement, but to do so, or admit any liability before that would be extremely dangerous.

[baldeagle]

While I’ll agree its very sad she’s lost her life it’s stuff like this really gets my goat . People always looking for someone to blame and always looking for compensation. When she took the job she knew what it entailed and part of that would have been flying all over the world whilst  earning very good money,  no flight is without risks . It’s clear it was a complete accident and it’s either down to a fault with the manufactures , the people who maintained it or the owners if they skipped or ignored maintenance . Now the latter I just can’t see our owners doing with how thorough they are in all aspects .So it’s got to be down to one of the other two , add to this they will be fully insured,  I’d be astounded if they weren’t . And last but not least we all know how our owners like to look after employees  plus plowing god knows how much into the community and charities I just can’t see them offering no money at all . Unfortunately its just greed and trying to cash in on a horrible situation. 

[Ric Flair]

7 minutes ago, baldeagle said:

While I’ll agree its very sad she’s lost her life it’s stuff like this really gets my goat . People always looking for someone to blame and always looking for compensation. When she took the job she knew what it entailed and part of that would have been flying all over the world whilst  earning very good money,  no flight is without risks . It’s clear it was a complete accident and it’s either down to a fault with the manufactures , the people who maintained it or the owners if they skipped or ignored maintenance . Now the latter I just can’t see our owners doing with how thorough they are in all aspects .So it’s got to be down to one of the other two , add to this they will be fully insured,  I’d be astounded if they weren’t . And last but not least we all know how our owners like to look after employees  plus plowing god knows how much into the community and charities I just can’t see them offering no money at all . Unfortunately its just greed and trying to cash in on a horrible situation. 

I think you'll be surprised (certainly in clinical negligence) that the amount of compensation paid for the actual negligence isn't what it's perceived, the real money comes from loss of earnings or the care costs that might be required for the rest of that persons life. I know this isn't clinical negligence but employer liability but it certainly shocked me when I found out in the line of work I'm in. There is a litigation culture now around the world but defence lawyers earn their coin every bit as claimants who hop on the bandwagon of trying to get compensation for things.

[Izzy]

14 minutes ago, baldeagle said:

While I’ll agree its very sad she’s lost her life it’s stuff like this really gets my goat . People always looking for someone to blame and always looking for compensation. When she took the job she knew what it entailed and part of that would have been flying all over the world whilst  earning very good money,  no flight is without risks . It’s clear it was a complete accident and it’s either down to a fault with the manufactures , the people who maintained it or the owners if they skipped or ignored maintenance . Now the latter I just can’t see our owners doing with how thorough they are in all aspects .So it’s got to be down to one of the other two , add to this they will be fully insured,  I’d be astounded if they weren’t . And last but not least we all know how our owners like to look after employees  plus plowing god knows how much into the community and charities I just can’t see them offering no money at all . Unfortunately its just greed and trying to cash in on a horrible situation. 

If it were my daughter involved I'm not even sure it'd cross my mind about claiming compensation.

 

I'd have thought it was just an 'act of god' or bad luck or whatever and just put it down to being a freak accident.

 

Not sure I'd be interested in placing blame or finding fault. It's not going to bring her back.

 

Maybe I'm just naive.

[ThaiFox]

1 minute ago, Izzy said:

If it were my daughter involved I'm not even sure it'd cross my mind about claiming compensation.

 

I'd have thought it was just an 'act of god' or bad luck or whatever and just put it down to being a freak accident.

 

Not sure I'd be interested in placing blame or finding fault. It's not going to bring her back.

 

Maybe I'm just naive.

Thailand has a totally different culture. A family are often dependent on one family member, especially if they are in a well paid, high profile job. It is seen as a sign of wealth and others look up to a family in that situation.

 

It's not uncommon over here for one person to take responsibility for the entire family. And the compensation rules over here are nothing like the UK, which has become a sue crazy society, much like the USA. Personal responsibility for injury to another is taken very seriously.

[baldeagle]

20 minutes ago, Izzy said:

If it were my daughter involved I'm not even sure it'd cross my mind about claiming compensation.

 

I'd have thought it was just an 'act of god' or bad luck or whatever and just put it down to being a freak accident.

 

Not sure I'd be interested in placing blame or finding fault. It's not going to bring her back.

 

Maybe I'm just naive.

This is my point exactly . Don’t get me wrong if there is complete negligence then yes by all means make whoever  was negligent pay be that in monetary terms or punishment but unfortunately accidents happen 

[Ian Nacho]

Surely the helicopter manufacturer would be the liable party.

[baldeagle]

16 minutes ago, ThaiFox said:

Thailand has a totally different culture. A family are often dependent on one family member, especially if they are in a well paid, high profile job. It is seen as a sign of wealth and others look up to a family in that situation.

 

It's not uncommon over here for one person to take responsibility for the entire family. And the compensation rules over here are nothing like the UK, which has become a sue crazy society, much like the USA. Personal responsibility for injury to another is taken very seriously.

Then surely that is the families fault for being dependent on one bread winner rather than getting jobs themselves . Is it our owners fault that they are dependent on the person who is working for them? All sounds very strange 

[ThaiFox]

Just now, baldeagle said:

Then surely that is the families fault for being dependent on one bread winner rather than getting jobs themselves . Is it our owners fault that they are dependent on the person who is working for them? All sounds very strange 

It's a culture thing.

 

Thai's love it when someone in their family do very well and have money, either job wise, or a daughter marrying a rich foreigner, or a new car, or gold. It elevates them to a different level and it gains them respect from other people.

 

To boast to someone that your daughter has a fantastic job, and is wealthy and keeping the family puts them on a completely different level to the majority of Thai people.

 

If you watch Thai TV dramas, they live in superb houses, all wear gold, all drive brand new SUV or saloon cars (never pick-ups), and all dress very well. Otherwise Thai's wouldn't watch the programme. 

 

You have to experience it out here to understand how it works!

 

It's nothing like the family cultures we have in the UK. Families take responsibility for families. The old look after the young, the young look after the old. There are no social services, no pensions, no child benefits, and poor health care.

[Jimmy]

this will lead to King Power suing the company that maintained the Helicopter to reclaim any compensation they have to pay

[baldeagle]

1 hour ago, ThaiFox said:

It's a culture thing.

 

Thai's love it when someone in their family do very well and have money, either job wise, or a daughter marrying a rich foreigner, or a new car, or gold. It elevates them to a different level and it gains them respect from other people.

 

To boast to someone that your daughter has a fantastic job, and is wealthy and keeping the family puts them on a completely different level to the majority of Thai people.

 

If you watch Thai TV dramas, they live in superb houses, all wear gold, all drive brand new SUV or saloon cars (never pick-ups), and all dress very well. Otherwise Thai's wouldn't watch the programme. 

 

You have to experience it out here to understand how it works!

 

It's nothing like the family cultures we have in the UK. Families take responsibility for families. The old look after the young, the young look after the old. There are no social services, no pensions, no child benefits, and poor health care.

I get the family looking after each other thing as that what families should do . But expecting one person to look after the whole family while the rest of them sit on their arse is a totally alien concept to me . I come from a family of grafters had my first job at 12 and have been  always worked . My dad often had 2-3 jobs and earned good money,  I would never have sat back and expect him to pay for everything and vice versus . Don’t get me wrong if I’d have become a millionaire then my family wouldn’t have to work but they wouldn’t expect it . I know cultures are different but it just odd to me expecting someone to pay your way . 

[LinekersLugs]

Looking at the $10m makes you wonder what this lady was being paid 

 

Dan Roan made some comments about her relationship with Khun Vichai and if true and if she was employed you can imagine she was well looked after maybe even 7 figures a year ... the boss was an extremely generous man 

 

it’s not too hard to imagine the sort of cash needed to have a Thai beauty queen on the “paid staff” rota 

 

murky business for us westerners , for example if I was snuffed out I’d hate my wife to find out about the girl at work who irons my socks for me 3 times a week in a lay-by on the A6 

 

 

[polarbear]

2 hours ago, baldeagle said:

I get the family looking after each other thing as that what families should do . But expecting one person to look after the whole family while the rest of them sit on their arse is a totally alien concept to me . I come from a family of grafters had my first job at 12 and have been  always worked . My dad often had 2-3 jobs and earned good money,  I would never have sat back and expect him to pay for everything and vice versus . Don’t get me wrong if I’d have become a millionaire then my family wouldn’t have to work but they wouldn’t expect it . I know cultures are different but it just odd to me expecting someone to pay your way . 

You're taking his comment to literally. Just because she had a well paid job over here, her family are likely to have jobs in Thailand jsut not as well paid - they won't be hangers on at all. Much like immigrants who come to the UK for better wages will tend to send some money back to their families in lesser paid jobs to help them 

[SheppyFox]

Absolute nonsense. No chance they get a penny, they’ve gone down the wrong route.

[Guest SO1]

4 minutes ago, SheppyFox said:

Absolute nonsense. No chance they get a penny, they’ve gone down the wrong route.

Here in the land of the free you sue everyone and everything and let the judge sort it out. Unless your a millionare you settle and walk away.

Sounds like its time for both sides to put their cards on the table and reach a settlement. It's part of the Litigation game.

[Trav Le Bleu]

Give them Ghezzal.

[Ric Flair]

4 hours ago, baldeagle said:

Then surely that is the families fault for being dependent on one bread winner rather than getting jobs themselves . Is it our owners fault that they are dependent on the person who is working for them? All sounds very strange 

Out of interest if a man or woman of a family of 5 had a good job pulling in 60k a year and the partner doing casual work around the kids growing up and the bread winner became severely disabled from a routine op, do you not think its pertinent for the family to be compensated for not only the care costs going forward for the disabled person, but the loss of earnings as well? 

 

 

[Mendi]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/9989785/leicester-city-helicopter-victim-family-sues/

 

 

Not a happy reading 

[urban.spaceman]