RiderSite.com - Motorcycle Forums

Had a phone call this morning from them about an old employee of ours, she's claiming compensation for damage to her back. FFS she left donkeys years ago.

Anyway they are coming down to inspect our premises.

I rang our insurance company, they said okay just pass on any letters/emails etc we get.

If she's claiming that she hurt her back whilst working for you is there an entry of the incident in your accident book?

I the answer is "no" then I doubt she has a leg to stand on.

If the answer is "what accident book" than god help you!

I'll second that, she needs to have logged something with you, either regarding an accident or poor working conditions, or she will find it very difficult to go any further.

She also only has 3 years to issue proceedings from date of the injury or date of knowledge whichever is the sooner.

If she left some years ago, I would have thought that a bad back would have been evident sooner or it suggest that she either developed her bad back somewhere else after she left you, or considers you an easy target.

Either way, find out when the injury first came to light, and if it is over 3 years ago, tell her to take a hike!

TC wrote:She also only has 3 years to issue proceedings from date of the injury or date of knowledge whichever is the sooner.

If she left some years ago, I would have thought that a bad back would have been evident sooner or it suggest that she either developed her bad back somewhere else after she left you, or considers you an easy target.

Either way, find out when the injury first came to light, and if it is over 3 years ago, tell her to take a hike!

Its 4.5 years ago, she was on 3 months trial, but she left after 2 months as she found it hard work

She had a bad back after 2 months?! Bloody hell man, what were you getting her to do, mobile sandwich sales with the cash register strapped to her back?!!

Gio wrote:
Its 4.5 years ago, she was on 3 months trial, but she left after 2 months as she found it hard work

So she will have to prove that her knowledge of the injury has only occured within the last 3 years, and then it will have to be shown on the balance of probability that it was whilst working for you during those 2 months that she sustained her injury.

I think a little bit of digging into her working life post Gio Ltd will be in order as well as some suitable questioning about her medical history, and a copy of her medical records will not go amiss either.

This smacks of an insurance fraud

TC wrote:

Gio wrote:
Its 4.5 years ago, she was on 3 months trial, but she left after 2 months as she found it hard work

So she will have to prove that her knowledge of the injury has only occured within the last 3 years, and then it will have to be shown on the balance of probability that it was whilst working for you during those 2 months that she sustained her injury.

I think a little bit of digging into her working life post Gio Ltd will be in order as well as some suitable questioning about her medical history, and a copy of her medical records will not go amiss either.

This smacks of an insurance fraud

Are we entittled to ask about her employment after she left us?

Bloody right!

Counter claim against her..

still working on what for ...

Gio wrote:
Are we entittled to ask about her employment after she left us?

Too right you can. For all you know, she may have spent 6 months as a trainee hod carrier after she left your employ, and for that reason she will needto prove that her injury occured whilst working for you not whilst humping half a ton of bricks every half hour.

She may have a history of medical problems, particularly back pain which was known to her before she came into your employ, if she did, was this knowledge disclosed to you? Of course it wasn't. If it had been, depending on the type of work she was required to do, you either ould not have employed her in the first place, or you would have foun her work suitbale to her condition.

You can ask whatever questions you like to establish liability providing the questions are relevant.

Cheers TC, points duly noted