Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Glassman
    • By Glassman 12th Jul 17, 8:19 AM
    • 115Posts
    • 27Thanks
    Glassman
    Sports Injury Due to Trip Hazard
    • #1
    • 12th Jul 17, 8:19 AM
    Sports Injury Due to Trip Hazard 12th Jul 17 at 8:19 AM
    A group of friends and I play five-a-side football every week on an artificial pitch surface.

    Some time into our pre-booked session, parts of the pitch surface started to lift; we reported them raising concerns that if these areas were to get worse they could become trip hazards. Nothing was done. The problem worsened.

    After several complaints, we raised on officially, in writing. Still nothing. Two weeks later, a player tripped and was injured. He remained off work for several days as he could not put any weight on the injured leg.

    The pitch owners are shrugging it off saying all players are 'advised' to arrange their own insurance.

    It is my view that they should be held responsible for not addressing the matter.

    Where does the injured party stand in this (obviously not on his injured leg before anyone says it).
Page 1
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 12th Jul 17, 8:24 AM
    • 32,345 Posts
    • 16,413 Thanks
    Quentin
    • #2
    • 12th Jul 17, 8:24 AM
    • #2
    • 12th Jul 17, 8:24 AM
    He could see if a no win no fee injury compensation solicitors will take him on and pursue a claim
    • paddyandstumpy
    • By paddyandstumpy 12th Jul 17, 8:38 AM
    • 733 Posts
    • 292 Thanks
    paddyandstumpy
    • #3
    • 12th Jul 17, 8:38 AM
    • #3
    • 12th Jul 17, 8:38 AM
    If your friend realised there was a hazard and continued to play that's contributory negligence.

    As above you may find a no win no fee willing to take it on, but it may be thrown out due to that.
    • Crazy Jamie
    • By Crazy Jamie 12th Jul 17, 9:44 AM
    • 2,129 Posts
    • 2,038 Thanks
    Crazy Jamie
    • #4
    • 12th Jul 17, 9:44 AM
    • #4
    • 12th Jul 17, 9:44 AM
    The operators of the pitch have a duty under the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 to take all reasonable steps to ensure that those lawfully using their premises are reasonably safe from personal injury. It is relevant to consider the reason why they're there as well, and in this case it obviously extends to ensuring that the pitch is not a trip hazard.

    One of the common issues with these sorts of cases is that the occupier was not aware of the hazard prior to the accident, though if your group specifically raised this issue on a number of previous occasions, it may be that the occupier would be in difficulty suggesting that they weren't aware of it. However, there is still far more to these cases than you have mentioned in your opening post. This is really a case that your friend needs to instruct a solicitor in relation to if they want to pursue it further, and as Quentin says that should be a personal injury solicitor taking the case on a no win no fee basis.

    If your friend realised there was a hazard and continued to play that's contributory negligence.

    As above you may find a no win no fee willing to take it on, but it may be thrown out due to that.
    by paddyandstumpy
    There may well be contributory negligence for continuing to play on a pitch that he knew was hazardous, but the case won't be 'thrown out' due to that. It may result in a reduction of compensation to one degree or another, but the majority of the fault is still likely to be with the operator of the pitch if they have continued to hire it out with knowledge of the hazard.
    "MIND IF I USE YOUR PHONE? IF WORD GETS OUT THAT
    I'M MISSING FIVE HUNDRED GIRLS WILL KILL THEMSELVES."
    • Glassman
    • By Glassman 12th Jul 17, 4:16 PM
    • 115 Posts
    • 27 Thanks
    Glassman
    • #5
    • 12th Jul 17, 4:16 PM
    • #5
    • 12th Jul 17, 4:16 PM
    If your friend realised there was a hazard and continued to play that's contributory negligence.

    As above you may find a no win no fee willing to take it on, but it may be thrown out due to that.
    Originally posted by paddyandstumpy
    There were some attempts to fix the issue, and the management assured us that the surface was fit for purpose. At a glance, it seemed to be OK but after playing on it for 10-15 minutes, the 'glued down' bits curled back up. At this point you decide that it is something you need to speak to the management about again, but it was too late as a short while later one part of the covering popped up and tripped a player.

    I can't see that as contributory negligence on the basis that the arena was deemed fit for purpose by the management.
    • daveyjp
    • By daveyjp 12th Jul 17, 5:02 PM
    • 6,967 Posts
    • 5,328 Thanks
    daveyjp
    • #6
    • 12th Jul 17, 5:02 PM
    • #6
    • 12th Jul 17, 5:02 PM
    The injured party sees a solicitor who writes to the company with details of claim. Company then contacts their insurance company.

    A chain of letters then begins.
    • Crazy Jamie
    • By Crazy Jamie 13th Jul 17, 9:17 AM
    • 2,129 Posts
    • 2,038 Thanks
    Crazy Jamie
    • #7
    • 13th Jul 17, 9:17 AM
    • #7
    • 13th Jul 17, 9:17 AM
    There were some attempts to fix the issue, and the management assured us that the surface was fit for purpose. At a glance, it seemed to be OK but after playing on it for 10-15 minutes, the 'glued down' bits curled back up. At this point you decide that it is something you need to speak to the management about again, but it was too late as a short while later one part of the covering popped up and tripped a player.

    I can't see that as contributory negligence on the basis that the arena was deemed fit for purpose by the management.
    Originally posted by Glassman
    What you've written here may well help against any allegation of contributory negligence, but it also may have an impact on the claim as a whole, as any attempt to fix the pitch may be seen as a reasonable step until the problem manifested itself again. Then again it may not if the attempt was clearly inadequate. Either way your friend clearly needs to instruct a solicitor if they want to pursue this claim further. Going back and forth on an internet forum isn't going to help.
    "MIND IF I USE YOUR PHONE? IF WORD GETS OUT THAT
    I'M MISSING FIVE HUNDRED GIRLS WILL KILL THEMSELVES."
    • Glassman
    • By Glassman 13th Jul 17, 10:20 AM
    • 115 Posts
    • 27 Thanks
    Glassman
    • #8
    • 13th Jul 17, 10:20 AM
    • #8
    • 13th Jul 17, 10:20 AM
    Going back and forth on an internet forum isn't going to help.
    Originally posted by Crazy Jamie
    Thread started yesterday. The reason for doing so was to seek advice; responses aren't always instant, but hardly toing and froing, is it?

    Thanks for your input nonetheless.
    • Crazy Jamie
    • By Crazy Jamie 13th Jul 17, 11:03 AM
    • 2,129 Posts
    • 2,038 Thanks
    Crazy Jamie
    • #9
    • 13th Jul 17, 11:03 AM
    • #9
    • 13th Jul 17, 11:03 AM
    Thread started yesterday. The reason for doing so was to seek advice; responses aren't always instant, but hardly toing and froing, is it?

    Thanks for your input nonetheless.
    Originally posted by Glassman
    I didn't say you had gone back and forth. I said going back and forth isn't going to help. A subtle but important difference.
    "MIND IF I USE YOUR PHONE? IF WORD GETS OUT THAT
    I'M MISSING FIVE HUNDRED GIRLS WILL KILL THEMSELVES."
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

318Posts Today

3,054Users online

Martin's Twitter