Judge shown snap of Fine Gael TD Alan Farrell up ladder with poster of himself before he brands his €15k prang injury case ‘unusual’
THIS is Fine Gael TD Alan Farrell up a ladder with a poster of himself during the time he claimed he suffered painful neck and shoulder injuries from a car accident caused by a spider.
Alan Farrell — who is an ally of Taoiseach Leo Varadkar — sued for up to €15,000 over a prang which a judge branded “very minor”.
The Public Accounts Committee member alleged he suffered neck and shoulder issues which affected his personal and professional life for up to 18 months following the accident in Drumcondra, Dublin, on April 9, 2015.
But the Irish Sun can reveal Judge Michael Coghlan has ruled the Fine Gael politician did not suffer a “significant injury” and only awarded him €2,500.
The judge said: “There is little or no notation to back up a claim of significant whiplash.”
Dublin Fingal Deputy Farrell brought a personal injuries claim against Hertz Rent A Car after a collision with one of their vehicles.
Giving evidence to Dublin District Court, the Fine Gael rep told how he was left in pain after being “shunted” as he sat in traffic in Drumcondra in his Audi A6.
The court was told how the driver behind him was at a standstill in traffic when a spider ran across her arm, causing her to panic and take her foot off the brake. Her vehicle then “rolled into” Farrell’s car.
Farrell said: “Within a few minutes of the incident I felt a very warm tingly sensation on my shoulders and neck.
“Over a series of days the pain and discomfort continued — developed, I should say — and continued thereafter.
"Initially I treated it with over-the-counter medicine and I went to my GP then sometime later.”
In his personal injury summons, Farrell said he experienced difficulty for six months following the accident, claimed he had to reduce his activities for up to 14 months after, and suffered occasional spasms up to 18 months on.
The 40-year-old said he experienced stiffness and pain at work and also while flying during the course of his work.
And he claimed his recreational exercises, particularly running, were compromised for approximately six months.
Contesting the claim, Hertz said in court they were “at a loss to understand how a personal injury claim could arise”.
As Farrell gave evidence of his injuries, Judge Coghlan was shown a photograph of the TD up a ladder in Skerries, north Co Dublin, just four months after the prang.
The photo, which was uploaded to Farrell’s Facebook page, shows him turning his neck to face the camera, with his arms raised and outstretched. The court heard Farrell wrote on Facebook: “Lovely day in Skerries for putting up some posters.”
But when quizzed in court about the snap, Farrell claimed the photo was “staged”.
Eve Bolster, barrister for Hertz, asked Farrell if he was expecting the court to accept that it was a staged photograph because “it doesn’t sit with your evidence so far”.
He said: “No, it is nothing to do with my evidence, I’m just telling you that that photograph is a staged photograph.”
During the court proceedings, Farrell told how his neck and shoulder injuries placed some restrictions on his life, including “difficulties” and “pain” in lifting his young sons and handling boxes.
“I put posters up with a supporter of mine in Skerries. It’s a staged photograph. I would have alternated between putting them up and supporting the ladder with the other person."
Alan Farrell TD
Asked how long it was before he sought medical attention following the accident, Farrell said: “I don’t know, perhaps a week.”
Farrell insisted he had to make some changes to his life, particularly in the first six months after the accident — and he claimed the “discomfort” lasted for over a year.
As he was cross-examined, Hertz produced the photo of Farrell up a ladder holding a poster of himself in Skerries in August 2015.
COURT EVIDENCE Driver of rented van that rolled into Alan Farrell’s Audi says Fine Gael TD was in ‘a rage’ after the accident
The court heard the snap was taken during the period he had claimed the “pain” and “discomfort” was at its worst.
Bolster said: “In that photograph you are putting up posters of yourself in Skerries.” Farrell replied: “Correct.”
Bolster continued: “You are at the top of a stepladder and you are reaching out with your arms extended and raised above you. You are putting up posters. And you had no difficulty of doing that?”
Farrell replied: “Well firstly in that photograph I’m not putting up a poster, it is already up. And that’s a staged photograph.”
Questioned further over the photo, Farrell said: “I put posters up with a supporter of mine in Skerries. It’s a staged photograph. I would have alternated between putting them up and supporting the ladder with the other person.
“I have never suggested I was completely incapacitated, I just said that I would have been very careful as to what I did.”
Bolster continued: “You are still on that stepladder. Your arms are raised up, you had no difficulty. Your arms are held up and you are putting up a poster. But you couldn’t pick up a child?”
Farrell had told the court he would have “braced” before picking up his young sons because of his prang injuries.
Questioned about why the claim for material damage to his up-market motor was being pulled, Farrell said: “The damage to the vehicle was not of significance to me.”
In another development, the judge heard Farrell’s claim for material damage to his Audi A6 was being dropped — three years on from the accident.
Questioned about why the claim for material damage to his up-market motor was being pulled, Farrell said: “The damage to the vehicle was not of significance to me.”
The Hertz barrister insisted the prang was the “most minor of accidents” and described it as “a minimal impact case”.
Ms Bolster put it to Farrell the reason he was no longer pursuing a material damages claim was because he had said to a Hertz rep “there was no visible damage on the car’s bumper”.
Farrell replied: “I’ve no recollection of having said that.”
Ms Bolster said: “I’m actually surprised to see that they are not pursuing their claim in relation to material damage as it has been consistently sought by Mr Farrell all along.”
Despite that claim being dropped, Farrell maintained in court that his Audi had indeed been damaged in the accident.
He said: “There was some scratching, some minor damage...”
Photos taken at the accident scene of the two vehicles involved were produced in court.
The court heard Naomi Sheard — the driver of the other vehicle — took photos at the scene but Farrell did not take any photos at the scene.
Asked to point out scratches on his car from the photos, Farrell said: “It is not really clear to me.” In response, Bolster said: “Because it is not there, Mr Farrell.”
Asked again to point out the damage to his vehicle, Farrell added: “It is very hard to tell, to be quite honest, because of the light.”
Naomi Sheard — the driver of the rented Hertz van at the time of the accident — also took the stand to give evidence in court.
Ms Sheard insisted there was “absolutely no damage to either vehicle” and told of her disbelief that “he could sustain any injury from something so light”.
The River Island visual manager told how she only “very gently” rolled into Farrell’s vehicle after a large spider came onto her arm while at the wheel, causing her to take her foot off the brake in a panic.
Asked to point out scratches on his car from the photos, Farrell said: “It is not really clear to me.” In response, Bolster said: “Because it is not there, Mr Farrell.”
Ms Sheard challenged Farrell’s claim he was “shunted”. She maintained “the contact was so gentle she could not have replicated it if she tried”.
Her River Island colleague Michelle Malone, who was a passenger in the van, testified that she didn’t even think contact had been made between the vehicles.
Farrell’s barrister told the court his client was also looking for ‘special damages’ as part of his claim, “totalling €735 — that’s physiotherapy fees the sum of €110, GP visits the sum of €180, a medical report which is €300 and there’s unvouched medication at €100”.
In his ruling Judge Coghlan concluded that Farrell did not suffer “a significant injury” and branded his case as “somewhat unusual”.
The judge said: “What is unusual in this case is that Mr Farrell has had, on his own discussions, some discomfort, in the form of a whiplash accident.
“I have spent the last minutes reading the medical reports that have been presented to me in relation to this . . . The report itself is less than comprehensive . . .
“In the circumstances I consider it to be a very minor injury. Now how minor is very minor? In my view there was certainly some pain and discomfort over a period of between two or three months.
“So there is little or no notation to back up a claim of significant whiplash. In the circumstances I value this at €2,500.”
Judge Coghlan also questioned why the material damages claim had been dropped.
He said: “There’s a lot of slightly unusual aspects in this case. And the fact that damages (material damages) were initially considered but not proceeded with is somewhat unusual.
“After all, if you have damage you may as well tack it on, and clearly that was being considered at one stage early on in the proceedings.
“Undoubtedly there was an impact and there were reasons for it. One can understand that a spider can distract you. And to have a debate as to whether it takes a second, a millisecond or seconds to wipe a spider away, it doesn’t really deal with the issue at hand.
“I accept the evidence of the respondents, the respondent driver and her colleague, that they were in traffic and they were, to use the term, inching forward.
“I accept that there was probably, literally, the eye taken off the ball when the spider arrived, and I can’t think of any more obvious reason than so to do . . . I’m satisfied the vehicle did roll forward.
Most Read in News
“I’ve listened to the evidence as to the impact and the impact at its maximum is a five mile an hour impact but it may not have been that.”
The judge also refused Farrell’s bid for special damages.
When contacted about the case yesterday, Deputy Farrell told the Irish Sun: “I am not interested, thanks for the call.”