lionheart

According to Yahoo UK News, the M-O-D have agreed to pay 2 million pounds to an Iraqi who, when aged 13, was injured when his UK soldier friend in Baghdad or wherever accidentally dropped his gun, which discharged on impact. Bearing in mind that UK soldiers are only entitled to a maximum 285,000 pounds, does the team think that this decision is a little crazy and could open the floodgates to many similar claims? I have no problem with the decision to compensate but its the amount which I object to...

NedKelly63

It's not quite as 'cut and dried' as that.

And instead of using Yahoo as a News Source - why not the BBC?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7347691.stm

Inselaffen

was just about to post that it is ridiculous but then read that the kid is paralyzed and will need help for the rest of his life and will probably never work.

an award in the English courts would normally give approx GBP 150,000 just for the pain and suffering of the injury itself. then you have loss of standard o living/ loss of chance/ loss of future income/ future medical costs etc etc.

so it is probably a fair amount and a little on the low side compared to an award that would be made if this had happened in England.

I cannot understand how he was able to bring a claim through the English courts though for something that happened in Iraq.

ScotsExpat

Probably classified Iraq as a 'British Protectorate'!!!!!!

lionheart

Because I don't like the BBC...in this case, however, the reports are virtually identical.

NedKelly63

Well maybe you should take some time to read, digest and understand the content before posting in the style of 'Outraged of Tunbridge Wells'.

lionheart

What on earth are you talking about? I said that both reports are identical and stand by my view that the amount paid is unreasonably high. What is your point?

NedKelly63

I work in IT - I'm not a remedial teacher.

Spugsy

bbc news website is superb mind you

Biene zwei

I would not quite agree there.. they very often sit on the fence.. I know this for a fact

Madam Medusa

but of course they do...it's a publicly funded organisation...

MM, xx

jvr20

yeah, FOX news is much better - that way you're not expected to be capable of taking in 'both' sides. Far easier when you're told what to think.

lionheart

My personal favourite news channel is Al Jazeerah...they have recruited some pretty good presenters as well as being reasonably impartial.

Inselaffen

and very much politically controlled under this government.
Blair took heed from Putin on that matter

Inselaffen

hardly impartial on the middle east though which lets face it is often a large part of the news.

If there is an earthquake in a muslim country they will balme the zionists!