Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
Wymsey

Also in the News - Part 2

By Wymsey, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

urban.spaceman

urban.spaceman

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, st albans fox said:

I believe it’s also to do with being attacked from behind by a passenger pulling on the seatbelt which effectively traps them /strangles them 

 

 

  • Haha 1
Raj

Raj

Posted
Posted

Are people really calling for Rishi to get the sack just cos he didnt have his seatbelt on?

FFS.

BoJo would have laughed this off being a part he is and I'm sure hes done ALOT worse as OM.

Give him  the biggest  fine they can allocate, give him points if applicable, he's apologised, move on...

  • Like 1
Jimothy

Jimothy

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Unbelievable. 

 

 

Negotiated his own punishment lol

 

Unfortunately its very believable from this government.

urban.spaceman

urban.spaceman

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Raj said:

Are people really calling for Rishi to get the sack just cos he didnt have his seatbelt on?

FFS.

BoJo would have laughed this off being a part he is and I'm sure hes done ALOT worse as OM.

Give him  the biggest  fine they can allocate, give him points if applicable, he's apologised, move on...

I'd prefer him to get the sack because he's an unqualified and unelected cvnt personally, and would be quite relieved if not wearing a seatbelt became a sackable offence in this case. It is worth noting that 25% of deaths on the road involve not wearing a seatbelt. https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/driving-law/almost-one-in-four-people-killed-on-uk-roads-were-not-wearing-seatbelts/

 

More to the point, he is now the second Prime Minister in history to be cautioned by the police, after Boris, and this is his second while in government and in just the last year. There's a clear pattern of behaviour that suggests he feels rules everybody else follows don't apply to him.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Izzy

Izzy

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Countryfox said:

Top photo shopping from the Sun today ..  office junior getting some practice maybe .. lol
 

 

3D746650-4308-41D5-BAEB-666BABC5753D.jpeg

And they're not wearing seat belts. Fvckin disgraceful!

  • Haha 4
Zear0

Zear0

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, RoboFox said:

Tory cvnt in corruption shocker.

You'll have to help us narrow that one down. 

  • Like 2
Parafox

Parafox

Posted
Posted
On 21/01/2023 at 13:58, nnfox said:

A sad case and a just reward, but I always thought compensation claims would be paid out through insurance policies, rather than from the NHS directly.

This.

 

I am aware of EMAS having insurance policies to cover compensation claims, just in case. Most public corporations will have the same.

Jattdogg

Jattdogg

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Countryfox said:

Top photo shopping from the Sun today ..  office junior getting some practice maybe .. lol
 

 

3D746650-4308-41D5-BAEB-666BABC5753D.jpeg

Thank you for your feedback, we take your comments seriously and aim to add authenticity to our photography.

 

Screenshot_20230122-144311_Chrome.jpg

  • Haha 1
Robo61

Robo61

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Parafox said:

This.

 

I am aware of EMAS having insurance policies to cover compensation claims, just in case. Most public corporations will have the same.

I am pretty certain that is not right.  Due to the annual total cost of commercial insurance being greater than the annual value of claims  NHS like most public bodies cover any third party liabilities from their own budgets. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
nnfox

nnfox

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, Robo61 said:

I am pretty certain that is not right.  Due to the annual total cost of commercial insurance being greater than the annual value of claims  NHS like most public bodies cover any third party liabilities from their own budgets. 

They're dealt with by a part of NHS Resolution, which is an oversight department of the NHS that handle claims, disseminate learning and more.  Specifically, it's the Clinical Negligence Scheme for Trusts (CNST) that handle the financials.  NHS Trusts pay a voluntary annual premium (they all do) and payouts are made through this part of NHS Resolution, providing the Trust is part of the scheme.

Ric Flair

Ric Flair

Posted
Posted
On 21/01/2023 at 13:58, nnfox said:

A sad case and a just reward, but I always thought compensation claims would be paid out through insurance policies, rather than from the NHS directly.

 

On 21/01/2023 at 11:52, The Year Of The Fox said:

https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/girl-who-lost-four-limbs-26036687
 

 

Incredible that the NHS can find £39m in compensation but can’t fund their own nurses pay rise.

 

21 hours ago, Parafox said:

This.

 

I am aware of EMAS having insurance policies to cover compensation claims, just in case. Most public corporations will have the same.

 

18 hours ago, Robo61 said:

I am pretty certain that is not right.  Due to the annual total cost of commercial insurance being greater than the annual value of claims  NHS like most public bodies cover any third party liabilities from their own budgets. 

 

4 hours ago, Parafox said:

Think I'm probably mixing up commercial insurance with vehicle insurance lol

 

3 hours ago, nnfox said:

They're dealt with by a part of NHS Resolution, which is an oversight department of the NHS that handle claims, disseminate learning and more.  Specifically, it's the Clinical Negligence Scheme for Trusts (CNST) that handle the financials.  NHS Trusts pay a voluntary annual premium (they all do) and payouts are made through this part of NHS Resolution, providing the Trust is part of the scheme.

@nnfoxis bang on. The total collect requirements for clinical negligence and other indemnity schemes within the NHS are funded by treasury through the channels in to the NHS.

 

Each NHS body is charged an individual member contribution and the total value of those contributions amounts to the projected expenditure on settling claims in any given year. The NHS bodies are funded for this via tariff.

 

The way in which NHS Resolution manages its indemnity schemes means that the annual cost is way less than the actual cost of harm, this is because rather than pay out high value claims in lump sums in the multiple millions (can happen on occasion due to certain legal rulings), the total cost that is reported is paid annually for the lifetime of the injured party / claimant.

 

If this wasn't ran like it is, the likely annually cost would be £8bn, as opposed to £2.5bn.

 

Big figures regardless but sadly this is the cost of harm that occurs and when things goes wrong in this field, they can be very costly. Don't forget these settlements aren't just a monetary way of saying sorry, it's the value of care costs that will be incurred to give the injured party the care they require for the rest of their lives.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
The Year Of The Fox

The Year Of The Fox

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

 

 

 

 

 

@nnfoxis bang on. The total collect requirements for clinical negligence and other indemnity schemes within the NHS are funded by treasury through the channels in to the NHS.

 

Each NHS body is charged an individual member contribution and the total value of those contributions amounts to the projected expenditure on settling claims in any given year. The NHS bodies are funded for this via tariff.

 

The way in which NHS Resolution manages its indemnity schemes means that the annual cost is way less than the actual cost of harm, this is because rather than pay out high value claims in lump sums in the multiple millions (can happen on occasion due to certain legal rulings), the total cost that is reported is paid annually for the lifetime of the injured party / claimant.

 

If this wasn't ran like it is, the likely annually cost would be £8bn, as opposed to £2.5bn.

 

Big figures regardless but sadly this is the cost of harm that occurs and when things goes wrong in this field, they can be very costly. Don't forget these settlements aren't just a monetary way of saying sorry, it's the value of care costs that will be incurred to give the injured party the care they require for the rest of their lives.

 

I think you were replying to me on Twitter 👀 

  • Like 1
Footballwipe

Footballwipe

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, weller54 said:

Sooner the cretins are out of power the better!!

And we'll be back here in 25 years time even if it happens. It's rinse and repeat. Bring them in, let them get complacent, dump them out, let Labour rule and then when we're bored of them bring them all back in and MPs with their snouts in the trough and looking after themselves will be back in fashion.

 

The public never learn and frankly more people than we'd like to admit don't care about it (well, unless it's a politician of a political colour they don't like). These politicians largely don't care either, because if they're dumped out of office or sacked they can just slide into the private sector. It's just a bit... depressing really.

 

The parachuting in of candidates into safe seats plays no small part in this sorry mess. People who have no affiliation with where they're representing just because they're a flavour for the national party and there's a 30,000 majority. Also shows the apathy of voters who just tick the blue/yellow/red box like a zombie and don't care if their candidate gives two shits about their area.

 

Sorry - this was political. Tried to keep it as neutral as possible tho.

  • Like 2
Daggers

Daggers

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, weller54 said:

Sooner the cretins are out of power the better!!

I’d go far further than that but it would be a political comment (and violently graphic to boot) so I won’t.

  • Haha 1
ozleicester

ozleicester

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, Footballwipe said:

And we'll be back here in 25 years time even if it happens. It's rinse and repeat. Bring them in, let them get complacent, dump them out, let Labour rule and then when we're bored of them bring them all back in and MPs with their snouts in the trough and looking after themselves will be back in fashion.

 

The public never learn and frankly more people than we'd like to admit don't care about it (well, unless it's a politician of a political colour they don't like). These politicians largely don't care either, because if they're dumped out of office or sacked they can just slide into the private sector. It's just a bit... depressing really.

 

The parachuting in of candidates into safe seats plays no small part in this sorry mess. People who have no affiliation with where they're representing just because they're a flavour for the national party and there's a 30,000 majority. Also shows the apathy of voters who just tick the blue/yellow/red box like a zombie and don't care if their candidate gives two shits about their area.

 

Sorry - this was political. Tried to keep it as neutral as possible tho.

There is a chance... a chance.... that infact real generational change is occurring. The upcoming youth are not the result of war ravaged parents, or the children of Thatcher, the next gen voters have perhaps a little more compassion, a little more concern for their nighbours and people in general, they are more fucussed on us than me.

A chance

  • Like 1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...