Advice please!! Injured from burst hot water bottle..

Equaliser123

OlliesDad wrote: »

How is it poor advice to speak to the retailer first? The OP wants compensation for his injury, which the retailer may be happy to pay.

As Ivory Tinkler says, the insurers will not want an admission of liability.

It is poor advice as the Pre-Action Protocol sets out mandatory requirements to be followed. If you do not know about them, you cannot realistically advise on what to do.

UK2010

OlliesDad wrote: »

A lot of shops wil panic at this and offer something to you

No they won't! You've said before you have a degree in business but I struggle to believe this as your knowledge of retail business is so poor. No retailer will want to do anything that signals liability. They will refer the op to their head office who will have their legal department deal with it from then on. Retailers won't panic you're just assuming.

OlliesDad

You are presuming that the shop is not going to accept liability. You are also making assumptions that this is a chain of shops that would have a head office. My local corner shop i am safe to assume does not have a legal department (it may get legal advice though).

My knowledge of Business is sound, but thanks for your concern. I just realise that not all problems have to be resolved with legal/protocol action.

Within the Pre Action protocol it states the following:

2.16
The parties should consider whether some form of alternative dispute resolution procedure would be more suitable than litigation, and if so, endeavour to agree which form to adopt. Both the Claimant and Defendant may be required by the Court to provide evidence that alternative means of resolving their dispute were considered. The Courts take the view that litigation should be a last resort, and that claims should not be issued prematurely when a settlement is still actively being explored. Parties are warned that if the protocol is not followed (including this paragraph) then the Court must have regard to such conduct when determining costs.

This states that settlement should be attempted before litigation.

Equaliser123

OlliesDad wrote: »

You are presuming that the shop is not going to accept liability. You are also making assumptions that this is a chain of shops that would have a head office. My local corner shop i am safe to assume does not have a legal department (it may get legal advice though).

My knowledge of Business is sound, but thanks for your concern. I just realise that not all problems have to be resolved with legal/protocol action.

Within the Pre Action protocol it states the following:

2.16
The parties should consider whether some form of alternative dispute resolution procedure would be more suitable than litigation, and if so, endeavour to agree which form to adopt. Both the Claimant and Defendant may be required by the Court to provide evidence that alternative means of resolving their dispute were considered. The Courts take the view that litigation should be a last resort, and that claims should not be issued prematurely when a settlement is still actively being explored. Parties are warned that if the protocol is not followed (including this paragraph) then the Court must have regard to such conduct when determining costs.

This states that settlement should be attempted before litigation.

Alternative dispute resolution is to be entered after a Letter of Claim!

Letters of Claim do not equal litigation.

Your suggestion of writing without reference to the pre-action protocol is dangerous.

RadoJo

OlliesDad wrote: »

The first place you will start will be writing to the shop advising what happened and what you would like (don't make the focus of this being financial compensation, advise you would like to find out what happened and what they are doing to prevent it happening again, but mention you would like compo).
.

This seems a bit pointless, as the shop have already told the OP there's a recall on the product which would suggest that they know what happened, and they have put the recall in place to stop it happening again.

OP - I think you would be better off approaching a solicitor for some proper legal advice as this is a specialised area and you will need to avoid jeapordising any claim by taking inappropriate action.

voiceofreason

Let's see if they come back first, eh?

OlliesDad

Equaliser123 wrote: »

Alternative dispute resolution is to be entered after a Letter of Claim!

Letters of Claim do not equal litigation.

Your suggestion of writing without reference to the pre-action protocol is dangerous.

Ok then, but we both agree that a letter would be best to write. As per the Pre Action Protocol, following the letter, Discussion and negotiation will be the first attempt at avoiding litigation (i.e. What i was suggesting).

Fair enough i maybe didn't go into enough detail in what should be in the letter.

OP, in the letter be sure to include:

Summary of the facts
Nature of injuries
Any Financial losses

fluffnutter

OlliesDad wrote: »

Nature of injuries

Burnt fanny

dreamypuma

fluffnutter wrote: »

Burnt fanny

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

melworldwide

Hi all

Many thanks for taking the time to pass on advice.

I contacted the UK head office of the international chain of shops, who acknowledged receipt of the letter and informed me they would pass this on to the global head office.
I have yet to hear anything - I will chase this with a recorded letter and seek professional advice in the meantime.