Publication
24099 (19 May 2022)
From Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme
Published on
Last updated on
From Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme
Published on
Last updated on
The Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal
In the matter of an application under the Scheme of Compensation for Personal Injuries Criminally Inflicted
Decision of a Single Member
Name of applicant: [ ]
Application number: 24099
Date of incident: [ ]
Date of application: [ ]
Decision outcome: The applicant has not given adequate evidence of his claim; it must be refused under Paragraph 10 of the Scheme.
1. [ ] (‘the applicant’) has made a claim for compensation under the Scheme of Compensation for Personal Injuries Criminally Inflicted (‘the Scheme’).
2. In his application for compensation under the Scheme, [ ], the applicant stated that he had suffered injuries at [ ] in [ ] when a man took his glasses from his head and in attempting to get them back, he was hit across the head with an unopened bottle making him lose consciousness. He says that he broke his nose, bone in face and teeth.
3. The garda report on file corroborates the applicant’s version of events to the extent set out above. As such I am satisfied that the applicant has established, on the balance of probabilities, that he was a victim of a crime of violence and sustained personal injury which is directly attributable to that crime of violence. Accordingly, I admit the application for consideration under the Scheme.
4. On his application form the applicant states that he sought dental care and that he had pain in his nose, face, teeth, shoulder and ankle as a consequence of the incident. He says he spent €60 on taxis to and from the hospital and €40 on pain-killers.
5. The garda report states that the applicant suffered a broken nose, damage to the cheek bone, three broken teeth and damage to other teeth.
6. Other than two receipts from a physiotherapist dated [ ] and [ ] for €45 each, there are no medical records or receipts for travel or medication on file.
7. The applicant makes no claim for loss of earnings.
8. Shortly after receipt of the application, the Tribunal Secretariat wrote to him on [ ] informing him that in due course the Tribunal would need full details of his expenses. It also asked him to clarify whether his expenses would be for medical, dental and travel expenses.
9. On [ ] the Tribunal Secretariat wrote to the applicant enclosing a copy of the garda report and asking in due course for travel and medical expenses to be submitted.
10. On [ ] the Tribunal Secretariat wrote to the applicant asking if he was continuing with the application. It enclosed the letter of [ ]. A similar reminder letter was sent by the Tribunal Secretariat on [ ], seeking response by [ ].
11. On [ ] the applicant replied, stating that he had changed address in [ ] and had only recently received the two letters from the Tribunal. He said that he wished to proceed with the application as ‘it scared me mentally and physically also with two surgeries’.
12. On [ ] the Tribunal Secretariat wrote to the applicant pointing out that to date he had only furnished it with two receipts for physiotherapy. It asked that he furnish any further outstanding documentation to support his claim before [ ], after which the matter would be sent to a Tribunal Member for decision. It also pointed out that damages for pain and suffering could not be awarded under the Scheme.
13. There is no reply to this letter on file.
14. In any application it is necessary for the applicant to give evidence which corroborates or contextualises their claim. Indeed where medical or other reports are required, should they not be furnished the Tribunal has the right to refuse compensation on the basis that the applicant has failed to give reasonable assistance – this is set out at paragraph 10 of the Scheme. This reflects the reality of the Tribunal’s task: it cannot award compensation without having a solid basis for doing so. Very often, the information that would substantiate a claim can only come from the applicant.
15. In this case the applicant has alluded to surgeries and has stated that he had dental treatment. While this is supported by the garda report, there is no report from a dentist, or any bill from the dentist or any medical practitioner setting out the extent of the applicant’s injuries. There is no letter or report or invoice giving detail of any expenses incurred by the applicant to treat the head injuries subject of the claim. While there are receipts from a physiotherapist on file there is no indication as to how a physiotherapist’s services were required for what appear to have primarily been head injuries. It is noted that on the application form some ankle pain was claimed, but this was very unspecific and it is unclear how this injury was sustained, diagnosed or treated.
16. Similarly, while there is a claim for taxis to and from hospitals the purpose of those trips, and how many of them there were, and the distance travelled, is not known. It is noted that on the date of the incident the applicant stated that he arrived at the hospital by ambulance.
17. While it appears that the applicant suffered injuries which were criminally inflicted, there is scant information on the injuries sustained and the expenses arising from them, and how those expenses were directly attributable to treating the injury in question rather than some other event in the applicant’s life. As such, the applicant has provided insufficient evidential basis upon which the Tribunal can make an award of compensation.
Tricia Sheehy Skeffington
Member, Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal
19 May 2022