OPs question is what compensation she can get for that supposed increased suffering. People have correctly answered: pretty much none. Whether there actually is increased suffering or not no one knows but with all due respect, the main motivation seems to be money. If that is an incorrect assessment, then OP might want to finally comment on that "lasting damage" her child will supposedly suffer.
There is just no need to be so harsh on the OP. People are different, some get over things faster than others.
so harsh? I think everyone has been very restrained especially given this topic has been covered a million times before on here.
Given that your pseudo is "big blue" and the image you chose is a photo of a car, I suspect your total lack of sympathy stems from the fact that you are one of those drivers who think they own the road, and that pedestrians are just a nuisance.
They are entitled to cross the road , and we are talking about a child here.
Show more basic respect.
Personal responsibility for your own well being is very big in CH, much less of a nanny state than the UK.
No, bikes are a nuisance, pedestrians are a mild irritation.
how I would react it totally irrelevant, I've been here long enough to know we wouldn't be getting any payout, I may start a thread asking how to dispose of a stupid drivers body leaving no trace though.
and as I said, just because you are entitled to cross, doesn't mean you should, a little bit of common sense goes a long way.
and finally, respect is earnt.
PS I own a merc, so I DO own the road.
As has been pointed out, there is no such thing here.
True costs will be covered 100%, but that's all.
Tom
First and foremost, no one is saying it's the kid's fault. It also doesn't matter because from what we know, it was an accident . From what we also know, there seems to be zero indication of actual long-lasting physical damage. The kid broke a leg. Unfortunate and painful, but very likely not more. Lastly, OP doesn't want to know what compensation she can get for the actual costs that occurred due to the accident (cause she is already being compensated for them). What OP wants to know what she can get for "pain and suffering". So it is indeed about money. And the answer to that question is and continues to be: nothing.
Aside from all that, Sandgrounder raises a good point - did the kid run into the street without looking and no, no one is that entitled to cross the road - or was the driver on the phone/drunk/whatever or was it - shock oh shock - simply an accident.
I've had some person walk into the street out of nowhere while I was driving plenty of times. I've seen small kids play by the main road on a busy Saturday afternoon in the middle of Zurich, with one of their toys falling into the street and the younger kid running after it. And once somebody dressed all in black walked onto the crossing in a poorly lit street while it was dark and raining heavily - I came to a stop only just.
None of these incidents ended in an actual accident, but some, actually many, people don't look - exactly because they think, as you do yourself, they are "entitled". They are not though. Having right of way does not mean you bear zero responsibility and can walk onto the crossing whenever you feel like it.
And then Friday kicked in.
You've got to love EF (and the snowflakes)
Who has told you a road traffic accident on a pedestrian crossing is "perfectly fine"?
What are you expecting, exactly? So far you have simply put down your objections to everything but you haven't detailed what it is you need (want?) to come out of the situation.
If you aren't clear, you've got no chance of any concrete answers beyond the concrete and thorough answers you have received up to now, based on the scant information you have provided.
Do you what punishment the driver received?
You miss the point that here there is no "accident damages" .. You will be compensated for anything you lost. That's all.
What you receive and what happens to the driver are not related..
As John H has outlined on the first page: you will get what you need to restore your situation and that of your daughter to how it was pre-accident, with no negative (financial) consequences. That is the value and cost of this accident. It is not "very low". It is the real, actual cost that you had.
What is it you want? Can you maybe answer the questions that have been asked several times now?
what exactly where you expecting? do you have more costs that haven't been covered??
hitting someone on a crossing is not perfectly fine, the driver is going to be punished, I really wouldn't want the kind of trouble coming his way.
value is low????? you won't 'make' money out of this ACCIDENT, end of story
and what would you like out of it?
What more do you want?
Tom
The law will deal with the driver whose life is about to turn to a heap of shit if he hit a child on a pedestrian crossing whilst speeding and phoning.
I do get the feeling you are looking for some kind of "hurt feelings" kind of multi-million style pay out. Apologies if I'm wrong but that's the impression you are giving.