Damage to item by tradesman

ThumbRemote

lincroft1710 wrote: »

Yes it does as the knife may have been weak or previously damaged, and thus not entirely OP's fault.

Possibly the most pathetic excuse ever. Why not just admit you want to know?

unholyangel

iammumtoone wrote: »

Curious yes but as the OP hasn't answered I figured they don't want anyone to know and its their business.

I understand why they don't want to say as knowing this forum it would probably de-rail the thread, everyone discussing it and possible criticism which would take away from the advice they are after.

Personally I would say on this board (although perhaps not the full forum), the majority of the time a question is being asked is because it could affect the advice given.

In matters like this, the claimant has to be able to prove:
1. the defendant owed them a duty of care; (they did as a contract existed)
2. the defendant was in breach of that duty; (questionable....did OP's husband fail to carry out the service with reasonable care & skill or did he carry it out negligently?)
3. the breach of duty caused damage and; (but for test is applied)
4. the damage was not too remote. (it has to be of a type that is foreseeable, the extent of the damage doesn't need to be foreseeable just damage of that type)

Okay OP wasn't asking that and I get your point. But we don't know whether thats possibly because OP is unaware of the above. Perhaps they don't care and just want to give a fair replacement but I'm pretty sure OP said she thinks the chef will issue legal proceedings, so definitely beneficial for these questions to at least be asked.

However, I don't really think giving advice based on a more complete picture of the facts would in any way take away from the advice they're after - quite the opposite. Especially on a consumer rights board - as annoying as it is, even 1 word/detail can make a polar difference.