UK victims of 7-7-05 offered 1% of the compensation of people from 9-11

[Epicurus]

Are you suggesting that there should be no distinction between criminal and civil cases; that the government should try to match multimillion civil payouts even though they hold no direct culpability? Or that there should be a cap on the payouts from civil actions?

No I’m saying it looks to me like people who can afford to go to court for Libel have a reputation worth 10 X the value your government places on your life.

It just seems a little strange, I’m not linking the 2 things in anyway other than that.

 

[flowmotion]

Sorry I edited my post above to add this so maybe you didn't see it
I see a couple of people are question if compensation should be given ay all in cases like this and that is a very different debate.

ok then well in very specific response to your original question... I don't think we should be basing our compensation on what the US does... I can't think of a reason why we should

 

[STFC]

I feel you're missing the point. Which is that by calling it "7/7" we are saying "this is our 9/11". It isn't.

What it is is our Tube Bombings.

Why do you feel so strongly about it? It doesn't matter what people refer to the events as. If I was a pedantic I'd point out that it was tube AND bus bombings.

What do you think of the compensation issue?

 

[Termite Man]

the Criminal Injuries Board pay out on a tariff - losing two teeth is worth £2,500!

Criminal Injury Compensation Board trauma award value (not sure if its bang up to date) :-

* Fatal Injury £10,000
* Loss of one eye £25,000
* Multiple facial fractures £10,000
* Displaced broken nose £2,000
* Rape £7,500
* Loss of one tooth £1,500
* Fractured Jaw £5,000
* Fractured tibia £3,000
* Fractured rib £1,000

In the case of mulitple injuries your 3 worst injuries are conpensated for !

 

[Epicurus]

ok then well in very specific response to your original question... I don't think we should be basing our compensation on what the US does... I can't think of a reason why we should

But my point isn’t that UK citizens should get the same it is about the value your government places on your life.

 

[Termite Man]

You can get a guide to the compensation paid to victims of the London Bombing here

 

[flowmotion]

But my point isn’t that UK citizens should get the same it is about the value your government places on your life.

why should the government place a value on life? and how do you value life?

 

[Epicurus]

why should the government place a value on life? and how do you value life?

Because it is the Government or a Government department that will work out the compo to each person so they will have to put a value on life.

The current value (said on Sky news) is £11,000 the US Government puts a value of £1.2M a massive difference when you consider that they are both very rich countries and it costs about the same to live in London as it does in New York (they swap every few years as to which is more expensive but they are very similar).

 

[Jangla]

I question why they should receive anything at all. Being in the wrong place at the wrong time is horrendously unlucky, but that's true for any random death. What's the rationale behind it: sympathy?

Injured victims being given compensation is different IMO.

what if the only wage earner in a family was killed in the bombings? You can't means test this kind of thing so compensation for all affected seems right. 11k is a pure insult though.

 

[belboid]

I find it pretty distasteful. What are they going to do, buy a new conservatory with the money? If people choose to make financial provisions for their family in the event of their death, i.e. buying life insurance, fair enough. But how is £11,000 going to compensate anyone for the loss of a loved one?

£11,000 or $1.2M, doesn't matter. The yanks always do things bigger.

belated thought - dont most life insurance policies still have a clause that explicitly declares them null and void in case of terrorism?

 

[Epicurus]

Does anyone know if Terrorist attack is still on insurance policy’s, I remember having insurance for a place I lived in and damage from terrorist attack was an exclusion, would that be the same for life insurance?

Sorry we both asked the same question at the same time

 

[Jangla]

belated thought - dont most life insurance policies still have a clause that explicitly declares them null and void in case of terrorism?

yup!

 

[flowmotion]

Because it is the Government or a Government department that will work out the compo to each person so they will have to put a value on life.

The current value (said on Sky news) is £11,000 the US Government puts a value of £1.2M a massive difference when you consider that they are both very rich countries and it costs about the same to live in London as it does in New York (they swap every few years as to which is more expensive but they are very similar).

so I think it depends on how you view the compensation.... I suppose we can assume that £1.2M could be the full monetary value of someones life so therefore the US are paying the value of life... where as I think the UK government aren't trying or attempting to place a value on life or pay for that life... I think they are merely providing a helping hand to relatives... its more like something to get them back on their feet

fair enough imo although I still think no compensation is really necessary

 

[belboid]

Does anyone know if Terrorist attack is still on insurance policy’s, I remember having insurance for a place I lived in and damage from terrorist attack was an exclusion, would that be the same for life insurance?

funny how it can take so long for such thoughts to filter through!

 

[Badger Kitten]

It's meant to be a gesture of public sympathy for the victims of violent crime.

The 7/7/05 events were criminal acts causing violence and death thereofre compensation is paid. The £11k figure is the standard paid to the family if death is caused by criminal injury.

It takes about a year to get the money.

Many of the victims who walked from my train have perforated eardrums; I checked, they should be eiligible for about £1250. PTSD lasting more than 6 weeks = £1000. But if you claim for several things eg; cut face, perforated eardrums, glass lacerations, PTSD you get 100% of the most serious injury award, then a percentage of the second worst and an even smaller percentage of the third worst and then nothing after that. So you have to rather ghoulishly add it all up and see which is the worst injury. And get them all documented as well, by doctors, preferably photographed as well.

It's a bloody nightmare and usually the last thing you think about after being a victim of violent crime.

 

[Epicurus]

funny how it can take so long for such thoughts to filter through!

yes we both posted at 13 minutes past

 

[Badger Kitten]

the Criminal Injuries Board pay out on a tariff - losing two teeth is worth £2,500!

Criminal Injury Compensation Board trauma award value (not sure if its bang up to date) :-

* Fatal Injury £10,000
* Loss of one eye £25,000
* Multiple facial fractures £10,000
* Displaced broken nose £2,000
* Rape £7,500
* Loss of one tooth £1,500
* Fractured Jaw £5,000
* Fractured tibia £3,000
* Fractured rib £1,000

That's a bit out of date. Rape is up to £11,000 now after public outscry and the other awards have been tweaked too,

 

[rubbershoes]

the London victims will receive awards under the normal (stingy) CICA tarriff. I doubt america has an equivalent scheme. the payments to them were politically motivated AFAIK inasmuch as the US govt wanted to be sen to look after its own . Someone killed by a mugger in New York on 10 September 2001 would receive no payout at all from the govt AFAIK

 

[slaar]

Does anyone know if Terrorist attack is still on insurance policy’s, I remember having insurance for a place I lived in and damage from terrorist attack was an exclusion, would that be the same for life insurance?

Sorry we both asked the same question at the same time

Totally depends on the policy.

rubbershoes - interesting info, that's precisely why the two situations are not comparable.

 

[Termite Man]

Just checked the CICA website ! If you were dependant on the income of the dead person then you are eligible to claim more , and if a child under 18 has lost a parent then they are eligble for up to £2,000 a year untill the 18th birthday is awarded for "loss of parental duties" !

It may be significantly less than the Americans paid out but it seems to be a lot fairer IMO !

 

[dylanredefined]

And i guess nhs and benefits lessens the need for the money .I guess the us famalies lose any healthcare coverage which could soon eat up compensation . I guess insurance will pay up fearing bad publicity .
10 years ago i got £1000 for a broken nose from the cic board i guess compared to that £11000 look a tad poor .

 

[Ms T]

The £11,000 will go to everyone, but families can also apply for compensation to cover loss of income etc, which could be up to half a million. So the headline figure is somewhat misleading.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4741579.stm

 

[pilchardman]

Why do you feel so strongly about it? It doesn't matter what people refer to the events as. If I was a pedantic I'd point out that it was tube AND bus bombings.

What do you think of the compensation issue?

I feel strongly that there ought to be a sense of proportion. It wasn't the Twin Towers. And saying it was makes us look foolish.

If we want the atrocity to be treated seriously - as it should be - then we ought not to do it the disfavour of comparing it to 9-11.

My thoughts on compensation is that we don't have the litigation culture of the US. Which is a good thing. Coupled with human life being taken less seriously than damage to property here. Which is a bad thing.