7/7 Compensation

[january_bug]

I've just seen again on the news the controversy surrounding the compensation for victims of the 7th July London bombings.

Whilst I agree that the money victims of crime receive should almost certainly be higher, I cannot understand how it is justifiable to claim that victims of Acts of Terror deserve more money for comparable injuries than victims of "ordinary" crime. If you lose your leg, you lose your leg... why should you get more money depending on the circumstances in which the injuries occurred?

Moreover, giving out too much money simply depletes resources that should be spent on trying to prevent future Acts of Terror or other crime, thus in the long run could result in more victims.

I know I've set out my stall, but I am genuinely interested to hear what others think!! Am I being heartless?

[Miss Zippy]

I agree that victims of terror should not necessarily be awarded extra compensation simply because of the circumstances in which they sustained their injuries. To use the example of losing a leg, this must surely be a pretty horrific experience whether the loss of the limb is the result of a terrorist attack or the result of a car accident. I think the problem is that the compensation the 7/7 victims are receiving/have received in purely to compensate them for the injuries they have received � it is not compensating them for other losses that have directly arisen from the injury, whether it be loss of earnings or the cost of having to adapt their property to help them cope with a disability, or in the case of a lost limb, the cost of having prosthetic limbs made for the rest of their lives (a �life like� prosthetic half leg (from the knee down) costs of a min of �8k and needs replacing every 5 or 6 years). If someone loses a leg in a car accident that is not their fault, they can sue the third party driver�s insurance company (or the MIB where the driver is uninsured) and be compensated in respect of both their injury (called �general damages�) and their direct consequential losses (�special damages�). General damages are actually relatively low (e.g. JSB Guidelines say about �60,000 for the loss of one leg from the knee down) but �special damages� for serious injuries can run into hundreds of thousands of pounds, largely due to the future loss of earnings factor. The 7/7 victims have no-one to sue so cannot seek compensation in respect of their �special damages�, so I do think the government should be stepping in here and awarding compensation in respect of these losses.

[Miss Zippy]

Sorry, meant to clarify something - the JSB Guidelines (as in Judicial Studies Board) are the guidelines used by personal injury lawyers.

[ronniemonda9]

The government doesn't have money to burn. Do you know how much it costs to keep government running? To pay the train fares of cabinet members' nearest and dearest?

[Gef]

Fair question jan and a a very good answer from Miss Zippy.