Jack Hales was walking towards a slide at the indoor water park when he felt a sharp pain in his left foot. He looked down to see three or four pebbles on the floor, Stoke-on-Trent County Court heard yesterday.
Jack, who was 10 at the time of the incident in February 2009, suffered soft tissue damage to his left heel and was in plaster for two weeks after doctors mistakenly thought he might have chipped a bone in his foot.
Solicitors representing Jack, now aged 14, took Waterworld 2000 Ltd to court after claiming staff had not done enough to keep visitors safe at the time of the accident.
How are they supposed to prevent this?
They claimed the pebbles had been on the walkway for more than two weeks but had not been spotted or removed by staff.
Really? Blimey, they must be worse at tidying up than me!
But in throwing out the claim, district judge Glynis Crowe said she was satisfied the company had maintained its duty of care.
Staff logs read to the court showed walkways had been checked for debris every half hour on the day of the accident, and no problems had been reported.
Well, well, well...
“The main issue is whether the accident occurred due to what has been described as a want of care by the defendants,” said Judge Crowe.
“The defendant said the facilities were checked on an hourly basis by the duty manager, and every 30 minutes by supervisors.
“There were also 16 lifeguards on duty at the time, whose duty it is to make sure the floor area was tidy. On the balance of probabilities the pebbles had not been on the walkway for more than two weeks as suggested by the claimant.
“The tiles are quite light in colour, so they would have been quite easy to spot by staff.
“I find the pebbles were deposited close to the time of the claimant’s accident, but it is impossible to say by what mechanism. I'm satisfied the defendants have discharged their duty of care.”
Me too.
She added: “It’s unfortunate that the claimant suffered the injury but the defendants are only bound to do what is reasonable.”
At last! It might be time for the compo culture to
think again.
Speaking outside court, Jack’s mum, Maxine Hales, who lives in Belmont Road, Etruria, said: “The pebbles shouldn't have been there in the first place.”
Never mind, love. Perhaps you can sue the doctors for misdiagnosis instead?
Well someone has to pay. So who gets to sue the parents for failing in their duty of care to teach their offspring to watch where they're walking ?
ReplyDeleteFailing to do so evidently puts the offspring at risk far more than anyone else, ever, and for their entire lives.
Send in the Social Workers and let the claims begin !
"At last! It might be time for the compo culture to think again."
ReplyDeleteIn countering this abuse, such formulations as Parliament could devise to cap and regulate extortionate legal fees, probably carry the risk equivalent of surrendering Chickens to Fox care.
So, the claimant KNEW they were there, even how LONG they had been there, but steps on them any way???
ReplyDeleteRIGHT!!
Close to the time of the accident you say? How close, one cannot help but wonder ... Being of a suspicious nature
ReplyDeleteI suspect very close indeed.
It's not clear how the solicitors know that the pebbles had been there 'for more than two weeks'.
ReplyDeleteSurely the person who claims to have observed them two weeks before and neither moved them nor reported them to staff has a few questions to answer...
Bunny
ReplyDeleteThe compensation culture is in for a bit of a shock, there was a review by one of the Law Lords a couple of years ago that is being worked up now. One of the targets for the review are claims management companies, which in the terms of the review 'add nothing to the process'. There are also moves to limit the amount of fees that solicitors, lawyers etc can charge. The gravy train may be drying up, now if this can 'adding nothing to the process' concept can applied to politicians and high ranking civil servants too, then all the better.
Look up Nield v Loveday. Making exaggerated claims is contempt of court and some of these fuckers are in for a big shock. And jail time for lying on oath, I hope.
ReplyDeleteDr Cromarty you are joking...right?
ReplyDeleteBritish "law" has been a laughing stock for, what....20 yaers?
When was the LAST time that you heard of any one being sent down for "contempt of court"?
The same as "wasting police time", it appears not to exist any more.
@FT Agreed but that may be changing
ReplyDeleteGoogle Nield v Loveday
Mr Teutonicus
ReplyDeleteA recent example of a compensation claimant being imprisoned in Caerphilly CBC v Hughes, where a false claimant was sent to prison for fourteen days, not much but a bit of a deterrent. His friends who acted as witnesses in this matter were each fined £1500 each.
"Well someone has to pay. So who gets to sue the parents for failing in their duty of care to teach their offspring to watch where they're walking ?"
ReplyDeleteThis is the age of No Parental Responsibility Ever!
Want to dangle your toddler over the wild dog enclosure? Go right ahead!
Afterwards, no-one dare blame you, everyone will race around trying to see if there's a loophole they can sue the zoo through, and the zoo will 'consider the future of the exhibit'....
:/
"Close to the time of the accident you say? How close, one cannot help but wonder ... "
;)
"It's not clear how the solicitors know that the pebbles had been there 'for more than two weeks'."
No, I wondered that - who told them this?
"...not much but a bit of a deterrent. His friends who acted as witnesses in this matter were each fined £1500 each."
Excellent! More please, faster!