We can help you claim
compensation following an accident
illness or injury - nationwide
Call: 0800 10 757 95
As a writer for a no win, no fee claim company, part of my job is to keep my finger on the pulse of the news. This has certain upsides. For example, it makes me hot property at pub quizzes. Then it has its downsides, such as the way I have to consume a disproportionate amount of bad news. One of the many shocking news items I encountered this week concerned the story of a German woman who, for some insane reason, decided to climb into the polar bear enclosure at Berlin Zoo for a nice refreshing swim.
Although the 32-year-old, following the quick intervention of zookeepers, somehow survived after suffering miraculously minor personal injury - just severe flesh wounds - the photographs of her being mauled are quite disturbing. One cannot blame the polar bear for "attacking" her. To do so would be like indicting me for devouring a surprise lunchtime gift from Alain Ducasse.
Just why anyone would want to scale a zoo barrier and climb into the polar bear enclosure is beyond me. Assisted suicide? Perhaps. Delusional notions about forming a cuddly bear-type relationship with animal weighing some 1,200lbs? Anything's possible, I guess. Thinking it might be a good way to get injured so as to proceed with a no win, no fee claim? C'mon, let's face it, that is unlikely, despite what one irate poster to a newspaper blog (no prize for guessing which) postulated this week.
Zoo accidents, of the kind involving the animals at least, rarely befall visitors who are simply moving about the zoo in an innocent way, minding their own business. Of course, this does not mean that such accidents do not happen, nor does it mean that personal injury claims for zoo animal attacks are unheard of.
One rare of example of a no win, no fee claim being made for an animal attack in a zoo occurred in 2007, following the San Francisco Zoo tiger attacks. In this incident, a four-year-old female tiger named Tatiana somehow managed to scale her enclosure, before killing one 17-year-old boy and injuring two of his friends.
Even this incident was not as clear-cut as it might first seem, as both claimants were accused of provoking the tiger, accusations that were supported by a number of witness statements.
Needless, to say, none of my research indicates that either of these men has had any success in claiming personal injury compensation.
In the hours following the attack, poor Tatiana was shot by police. Her story and such a tale has the inevitable effect of making one wonder why lions and tigers are allowed to live in small city zoos in the first place. A 2004 report from experts at Oxford University concluded that it was cruel and inappropriate to keep large, wide-ranging carnivores in captivity, as, invariably, they would develop some form of potentially dangerous neurosis.
Well, I'm just glad that my only experience of a zoo animal attack came at Auckland zoo when I was hit full in the face by a bit of flung chimpanzee poo. Not nice, but not deadly either, and certainly not worthy of a no win, no fee claim. At least the chimpanzee seemed pleased; as did my children. In fact, my 12-year-old immediately took a photograph of me, poo-faced and grimacing. It now has pride of place on her desk.
