Is this compensation good enough?

keiran

I posted to ask just 2 things - was the compensation enough, and if there were any other routes that could be followed

But I see that on an open forum the thread takes on a life of its own

The analogy with the fast car is particularly irksome. The correct comparison of a defective pressure cooker would be with a fast car having faulty brakes.

I'll consider carefully whether to enquire in future, and propose this thread be now closed

marliepanda

Ignore all the naysayers. Your friend is of course entitled to compensation.

Let me get out my handy compensation guide:

R for red face.... right that's £20
S for shock (minor) that'll be £55

So you're friend is absolutely due £75! Oh wait.

neilmcl

keiran wrote: »

I posted to ask just 2 things - was the compensation enough, and if there were any other routes that could be followed

And you got answers to both pretty much within the first few replies.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

keiran wrote: »

An exploding pressure cooker can be life threatening, life changing and potentially fatal - how would you fancy being in a kitchen when that happened?

That didn't happen though. It might have happened, granted. But it also didn't happen, but might have happened, to everyone who has ever bought a pressure cooker from anywhere. Should they all be compensated for the potential damage, or should compensation be limited only to the damage that was actually done?

theonlywayisup

keiran wrote: »

An exploding pressure cooker can be life threatening, life changing and potentially fatal - how would you fancy being in a kitchen when that happened?

And if it had been life threatening, life changing or fatal, the compensation would reflect that.

Compensation is for what actually happened. Not what might have, could have or potentially did.....