writing a letter of complaint to wilkinsons

DaisyClaire

Wig wrote: »

And do you not think that the cashier as the professional and thus in the best position to know of the potential failings of a single bag should take more of the blame?

Can you get a 'professional cashier'?

uktyler

Wig wrote: »

Except in this case it was not the action entirely of the customer. Does your argument not also apply to the cashiers responsibility for his/her actions? If not why are apportioning all the blame to one party when both parties were involved. And do you not think that the cashier as the professional and thus in the best position to know of the potential failings of a single bag should take more of the blame?

Does the cashier know how long the OP is going to carry the bag?

The OP was the one carrying the bag, if they felt it was not suitable they should have asked for another.

Does this mean I can sue Macdonalds for supplying my breakfast in a paper bag when its raining?

Or should I take some responsibility?

Wig

uktyler wrote: »

You can tell when a carrier bag is over loaded, the handle digs in and starts to stretch.

This is not the fault of Wilkinson's. People need to take responsibility for their actions. If the bag feels over loaded get another/double/triple bag/hold the paint by its handle.

You're assuming the bag broke at the top, I think it far more likely the bag broke at the base due to to the localised pressure effect of the probably wide paint tin.

The cahier supplied the goods in an unsuitable bag for the purpose of carrying it home. Fault lies on both sides. But in my opinion mostly on the cashiers side.

I can't be bothered with the chattering anymore, and I'm ignoring this thread now.

End of.

DaisyClaire

Wig wrote: »

I think it far more likely the bag broke at the base due to to the localised pressure effect of the probably wide paint tin.

[sniggers]



Its a bag for farks sake!

uktim29

Wig wrote: »

You don't see the signs because those bags are perfectly capable of carrying goods for extremely long distances and times when correctly loaded. In this case the bag was incorrectly loaded by the cashier. So as I said liability is at the very least on both sides.

There you go Wig then. The op should have known better and not needed a sign. It'll have been a bog standard carrier bag, not a bag for life type one.

The op should have known better!

uktim29

Wig wrote: »

And do you not think that the cashier as the professional and thus in the best position to know of the potential failings of a single bag should take more of the blame?

No.

Why do you think a cashier will be any more of an expert on carrier bags than the customers. As someones just said, a carrier bag is a carrier bag. Theres no complexities about it. The op did know how far they were going to take it the cashier didn't (the cashier would obviously gave a second bag of it was requested). It's the op's fault. Why didn't the op ask for another bag?

The bag may well have been fine for the weight of the paint, the op may have knocked it against something or scraped it against a wall without realizing.

uktim29

Wig wrote: »

The cahier supplied the goods in an unsuitable bag for the purpose of carrying it home.

Most people drive everywhere. The op should have said. It was the op's fault.

Wig wrote: »

there are many people in this board (vent & warnings) who will attack anyone rather than advise constructively.

Whilst theres you who just tells everyone to sue each other.

uktyler

Wig wrote: »

You don't see the signs because those bags are perfectly capable of carrying goods for extremely long distances and times when correctly loaded. In this case the bag was incorrectly loaded by the cashier. So as I said liability is at the very least on both sides.

Surely then the bag was not up to scratch, therefore we have a third party with liability, the manufacturer of the carrier bag.

The paint tin was obviously not strong enough, blame the paint manufacturer.

Who regulates all these people? The government, maybe we should blame them too?

Maybe the OP should just get an ambulance chasing no win no fee solicitor on the case to sue everyone involved.:rotfl:

Mimi_Arc_en_ciel

Will you just give it a rest.You've already scared the OP away and arguing over a carrier bag is pointless. I certain members have re-thinked their attitudes towards other people when so called "welcoming" them to this site, you was all newbies once and i'm sure you didnt get the cynical reponses that you have yourself given. Break times over children - let it go

P.S - i think one of you should be very careful about joining in on the ganging up seeing as i have recently read a "silly" question from yourself and i dont see anyone making the remarks to you that this unfortunate OP has had to have

uktim29

mommyme wrote: »

and arguing over a carrier bag is pointless.

Yes we know, thats what we're talking about!

mommyme wrote: »

as i have recently read a "silly" question from yourself

Not from me you wouldn't, unless you didn't understand the context it was asked in.