Injured in Tesco's

rosysparkle

I am very surprised the medical team insisted on an X-ray for a suspected broken toe during pregnancy; I've broken a couple of toes and not been offered X-rays and I wasn't pregnant.

marleyboy wrote:

Should this be within a Tesco supermarket, so long as it was not my fault the accident occurred, Ultimatley I would have to put Tesco into that category of blame, as any legal representative or judge, would more than likely do likewise.

If the accident could be shown to be due to someone else's fault, then yes. But sometimes an accident is just an accident.

Tozer

blue_monkey wrote: »

What s a Tesco Employee putting the vase in the wrong place makes a difference.

I think I am going to give Tesco an email and tell them only to sell pillows, towels and marshmallows on the top shelves.

Hmmm, I think I am going to walk around move a few things, bump into the shelves and then get things to fall on me.

It's a winner. With that and suing my parents I am gonna be rich, rich I say. Tozer, you want to represent me or shoudl I call my Home Insurance legal helpline for more advice on this??

He he. Not sure I understand the point you are making but if Tesco don't put in place safeguards to prevent people bumping into things and stuff crashing down on them then YES they should be liable.

Of course if you did it deliberately then you would be massively contributory negligent.

Bottom line is it makes the world a safer place for us all.

blue_monkey_2

Tozer wrote: »

Not necessarily. Tesco have a duty to provide a safe environment. Tesco would have to show that it discharged its obligation by providing a system to minimise the risk of accidents.

There are plenty of possibilities in connection with its breach. However, without all of the facts, we just don't know. In my view this should not stop the claimant applying.

Ah but then claimant should have seen the vases on a high shelf and not taken the risk of going down that aisle.

That would be like going rock climbing and suing for a rock falling on your toe depsite you knowing that the rocks were there.

You should have not gone somewhere that you could see there was a danger.

Can people not take responsibility for themselves these days??

Tozer

rosysparkle wrote: »

If the accident could be shown to be due to someone else's fault, then yes. But sometimes an accident is just an accident.

Yep, in which case there is not culpability to support a claim.

uktim29

Tozer wrote: »

Not necessarily. Tesco have a duty to provide a safe environment.

I expect the word reasonable will come into their duty somewhere or other. Which I bet they have. The op can apply but I think the op will lose. If Tescos were at fault merchandising will have been the most likely problem. As I said with poor displays the lot will come down. With single items something else has gone on (something to do with the customers!).

Tozer

uktim29 wrote: »

I expect the word reasonable will come into their duty somewhere or other. Which I bet they have. The op can apply but I think the op will lose. If Tescos were at fault merchandising will have been the most likely problem. As I said with poor displays the lot will come down. With single items something else has gone on (something to do with the customers!).

It sure does. And as I have said (probably about 10 times!) we do not know all of the facts so it is not down to us to determine the prospects of success.

Prima facie, yes she has a claim. I've been successful in pursuing much weaker claims in my career.

uktim29

Tozer wrote: »

Bottom line is it makes the world a safer place for us all.

The bottom line with compensation culture is it makes the world a more expensive place.

blue_monkey_2

Tozer wrote: »

He he. Not sure I understand the point you are making but if Tesco don't put in place safeguards to prevent people bumping into things and stuff crashing down on them then YES they should be liable.

Of course if you did it deliberately then you would be massively contributory negligent.

Bottom line is it makes the world a safer place for us all.

If we wanted the world to be safer we could just stay at home, not have any knives in (just in case - cut yourself) not eat (just incase - food poisoning), not have a bath (burn yourself), cross the road (run over) swimming (drown)....

Life is full of risks every single day, you can avoid those risks but people are blaming other people for them and they want everything for free. And this is what this is all about.

I think I should be suing Martin Lewis for opening this site as I've got naff all done since I found this thread and I have work to do!!

uktim29

Tozer wrote: »

we do not know all of the facts so it is not down to us to determine the prospects of success.

Wasn't it on CCTV but no one wants to touch the case?

Tozer

uktim29 wrote: »

The bottom line with compensation culture is it makes the world a more expensive place.

Increased safety comes at a price I guess.

Bottom line in law is that general damages awarded by courts are actually pretty low. There are no massive punitive damages awarded by the Courts in this country (unlike the USA), never have been and never will be.