Injured in Tesco's

Tozer

d.edna wrote: »

I will sue you because you sell womens underwear over the internet so nurrr

I mean thats how silly things are getting and blue_monkey you made some quality posts

And how would that attract liability????

Tozer

blue_monkey wrote: »

But she wasn't just whining, she wanted something otherwise why go to all that trouble. 3 people had already said sorry to her as she was passed from one person to the next so I cannot understand what she wanted, or what Asda could give her.

I seriously went home thinking about this for 2 or 3 days. What did she want Asda to do? It is not the kind of treatment you get privately so it was not like Asda had to pay for medical treatment, she got the money back for the cake. It was a serious question as I got the impression you knew about these things. Just what could Asda have done there and then, especially without the husband being seen. Maybe she could have been lying. Maybe she could have bought 2 cakes a week apart and used the receipt from yesterday to try and get something out of Asda.

I agree with you. But in fairness it is not a legal claim being pursued through the courts....and if it was, it would be dismissed.

blue_monkey_2

mrcow wrote: »

Maybe he was in hospital? Maybe she's so stressed that being angry with ASDA is the only outlet she could see? Who are you to judge.....you overheard part of a conversation in a supermarket, you have no real insight into this woman's life though.

As for being ginger, you don't have to stand for that. You can always dye it?

No, she said he was at home. I was listening as I was interested to see what she was get... they walked off though and I would have loked like a stalker by trying to find out the outcome...

I used to dye my hair but I cannot be bothered now. It'd still be ginger though and the physcological damage is already done, at school, when I was tuanted and bullied for it and called names.... and I can sue for that can't I?

Debras_Angel

Tozer wrote: »

Prima facie, yes! An accident happened on their premises so it is for them to show that they discharged their duty of care. If they did, then there is no liability.

I agree if on their premises then they must admit liability unless they can prove otherwise, point taken.

My bug bear is the compensation culture we are becoming.

uktim29

marleyboy wrote: »

To answer your question, if there is a negligence...SOMEONE is to blame, if there is a clerical error, ....SOMEONE is to blame

In fact in every scenario of accidents, somewhere in that chain SOMEONE is to blame. Even if that somone happens to be yourself.

I'm trying to imagine what your like on Xmas day (or winter celebratory meal before someone starts on that!) when someone accidentally knocks something over and maybe you had your foot out and it lands on your toe?

mrcow

blue_monkey wrote: »

.... and I can sue for that can't I?

I wouldn't personally sue for money....I'd just make sure that I get enough babysitting favours to compensate.

Debras_Angel

blue_monkey wrote: »

No, she said he was at home. I was listening as I was interested to see what she was get... they walked off though and I would have loked like a stalker by trying to find out the outcome...

I used to dye my hair but I cannot be bothered now. It'd still be ginger though and the physcological damage is already done, at school, when I was tuanted and bullied for it and called names.... and I can sue for that can't I?

No don't dye it, just wait till you get a bit older and then you can be strawberry blond:p

blue_monkey_2

Right, work to do else my kids will not be able to go out after school tonight and then I'll have to sue you all for distracting me!!

I started being cross but it has turned out to be quite a laugh by all accounts.

I have now started questioning whether I can sue using my own household insurance. On Monday I stood on a piece of paper that was left on the floor but under the paperwork there were some plastic wallets that I had not seen and I slipped and smashed my leg on a ducuments folder that my employer had left there. I now have a huge and nasty bruise and was left in some considerable discomfort as well as embarrassment when the kids laugh at me for being a clumsy a!se!!

My employer is.... oh yes, it's me.

So I could use my household policy to sue my employer (me) and my other insurance poilicy would fight my household insurers (mine)..... do you think it would work??

marleyboy

blue_monkey wrote: »

No, she said he was at home. I was listening as I was interested to see what she was get... they walked off though and I would have loked like a stalker by trying to find out the outcome...

I used to dye my hair but I cannot be bothered now. It'd still be ginger though and the physcological damage is already done, at school, when I was tuanted and bullied for it and called names.... and I can sue for that can't I?

Im sure you can sue the bullies But as you went outside "knowingly" ginger, you took the risk of exposure, Remember how the Elephant man dealt with his liability, he wore a paper bag.

Tozer

Debras_Angel wrote: »

I agree if on their premises then they must admit liability unless they can prove otherwise, point taken.

My bug bear is the compensation culture we are becoming.

I'm really not disagreeing with you. My point is that the law is actually pretty strict on who is entitled to what. In my experience, there are no unjustifiable enormous pay-outs in our legal system. Judges are constrained by guidelines as to what certain injuries are actually 'worth' so it is actually wrong to say that court ordered pay-outs are getting much bigger.

What is correct is that there are a large number of companies which talk about compensation as though it is a lottery win and rely upon insurance companies to make nuisance or commercial settlements to avoid prolonged litigation. However, that doesn't mean that the law is wrong - rather the claims process is.

Injury claims aren't the only form of massive growth industry. The same is happening with employment rights cases.