Do I need a compo face?
Discussion
Antony Moxey said:
All of those piling into the OP, some quite nastily too, I’m assuming that should the same thing happen to them and their family they’d simply shrug it off and say ah well, sh*t happens, while turning to the server, smiling politely and saying s’ok, no worries, do you have some spare napkins we appear to have had a slight spillage. I expect when they’re down the pub that evening they’ll be saying to their mates oh you’ll never guess what happened today, I was such a berk, still, these things happen eh?
Well Rambo, you best never leave the house then, the world appears to be far too dangerous a place for someone with delicate sensibilities such as yours to occupy. Plus, there may not always be someone else to blame.............theplayingmantis said:
surveyor said:
So should an organisation whose staff member was involved in an event which a person was injured, had to dial 999, with potential long term scarring just simply shrug their shoulders?
Or should they follow RIDDOR (legal require) and properly investigate what has occurred and whether they should have done anything differently?
I do t think compo is necessarily due from what has been described, but I would not want to think an organisation that experiences such an event does not take a closer look.
Necessarily due...jeez.Or should they follow RIDDOR (legal require) and properly investigate what has occurred and whether they should have done anything differently?
I do t think compo is necessarily due from what has been described, but I would not want to think an organisation that experiences such an event does not take a closer look.
When included it does change the statement
Had a similar but less serious incident myself some time ago, my wife and I were shopping with my then 4 and 2 year old (teenagers now) in Booths (posh northern Waitrose equivalent supermarket).
The two year old started wailing because he had somehow managed to get a cable tie around his neck - no doubt due to our inattention. In a mild state of panic, as efforts to get it off caused it to tighten, we hailed a nearby employee who rushed off to get some scissors which did the job in quickly removing it.
A little later the manager came to us very apologetic with a £50 voucher - we felt slightly fraudulent accepting it as the incident was clearly our fault, but nonetheless had some nice wine later that evening!
The two year old started wailing because he had somehow managed to get a cable tie around his neck - no doubt due to our inattention. In a mild state of panic, as efforts to get it off caused it to tighten, we hailed a nearby employee who rushed off to get some scissors which did the job in quickly removing it.
A little later the manager came to us very apologetic with a £50 voucher - we felt slightly fraudulent accepting it as the incident was clearly our fault, but nonetheless had some nice wine later that evening!
richhead said:
fact is, you cant wrap kids in bubble rap 24-7 , things happen, all you can hope is that they arent bad. think back to what you did as a kid.
but we do need to stop this compo culture where someone is always at fault, the people paying for it is us, it has to stop, people need to take responsibility for their actions.
Hip-popbut we do need to stop this compo culture where someone is always at fault, the people paying for it is us, it has to stop, people need to take responsibility for their actions.
Sorry if I missed it having skipped a few pages but should the high chair not be positioned so that the table is out of reach? It only has to be close to a parent's chair not the table.
While I am sorry for anyone being injured if the tray was placed in the middle of the table while there was a parent present to look after each child I think the store staff did nothing wrong.
While I am sorry for anyone being injured if the tray was placed in the middle of the table while there was a parent present to look after each child I think the store staff did nothing wrong.
Lo-Fi said:
richhead said:
fact is, you cant wrap kids in bubble rap 24-7 , things happen, all you can hope is that they arent bad. think back to what you did as a kid.
but we do need to stop this compo culture where someone is always at fault, the people paying for it is us, it has to stop, people need to take responsibility for their actions.
Hip-popbut we do need to stop this compo culture where someone is always at fault, the people paying for it is us, it has to stop, people need to take responsibility for their actions.
gshughes said:
Had a similar but less serious incident myself some time ago, my wife and I were shopping with my then 4 and 2 year old (teenagers now) in Booths (posh northern Waitrose equivalent supermarket).
The two year old started wailing because he had somehow managed to get a cable tie around his neck - no doubt due to our inattention. In a mild state of panic, as efforts to get it off caused it to tighten, we hailed a nearby employee who rushed off to get some scissors which did the job in quickly removing it.
A little later the manager came to us very apologetic with a £50 voucher - we felt slightly fraudulent accepting it as the incident was clearly our fault, but nonetheless had some nice wine later that evening!
The two year old started wailing because he had somehow managed to get a cable tie around his neck - no doubt due to our inattention. In a mild state of panic, as efforts to get it off caused it to tighten, we hailed a nearby employee who rushed off to get some scissors which did the job in quickly removing it.
A little later the manager came to us very apologetic with a £50 voucher - we felt slightly fraudulent accepting it as the incident was clearly our fault, but nonetheless had some nice wine later that evening!
gshughes said:
he had somehow managed to get a cable tie around his neck
Please explain how that could possibly happen?Probably in the same way as a small number of kids garrote themselves with blind and curtain pull cords or otherwise kill themselves with innocuous domestic items or in the good old bad old days drown in stagnant water or suffocate in abandoned fridges; they're kids and they muck about, if there's something dangerous they'll gravitate toward it like bees to nectar or tiny imps of the perverse.
BertBert said:
Lo-Fi said:
richhead said:
fact is, you cant wrap kids in bubble rap 24-7 , things happen, all you can hope is that they arent bad. think back to what you did as a kid.
but we do need to stop this compo culture where someone is always at fault, the people paying for it is us, it has to stop, people need to take responsibility for their actions.
Hip-popbut we do need to stop this compo culture where someone is always at fault, the people paying for it is us, it has to stop, people need to take responsibility for their actions.
Sebring440 said:
Please explain how that could possibly happen?
Not entirely sure, as I said we didn't have our eyes on him for a few seconds, but I presume he picked up a discarded cable tie from the floor and somehow managed to get it fastened through trial and error - juts bad luck it worked.
BertBert said:
GasEngineer said:
Parrot for Bert please.
Much appreciated 
https://youtu.be/n8pMJuEIOd8?si=21LqkKqFbclgWDEt
vaud said:
Reading back I think I agree with you OP on the RIDDOR report
"or, when any person other than an employee suffers: An injury as a result of an accident at work and that person has to be taken to hospital;"
Non-fatal accidents to people other than workers
Accidents to members of the public or others who are not at work (such as customers or volunteers) must be reported if: ( I'm not sure if all of these conditions have to be met or if it is "or"):
If nothing else the Morrisons might get some staff training improvements.
Just to raise a pedantic point - if each of those bullets has to be satisfied (i.e. it is an 'and' not an 'or') - and that's how it reads to me - then I'm not entirely convinced that the first bullet point is satisfied."or, when any person other than an employee suffers: An injury as a result of an accident at work and that person has to be taken to hospital;"
Non-fatal accidents to people other than workers
Accidents to members of the public or others who are not at work (such as customers or volunteers) must be reported if: ( I'm not sure if all of these conditions have to be met or if it is "or"):
- they involve work activity
- they result in an injury
- the person is taken directly from the scene of the accident to hospital for treatment to that injury
- a dressing applied
- stitches
- a plaster cast
- surgery
If nothing else the Morrisons might get some staff training improvements.
The OP's timeline is a little hazy (deliberately so?) as it really doesn't give any indication as to how much time passed between the staff member putting down the tea (in the space cleared for that purpose by the OP), the OP's wife getting distracted by putting the books away, the staff member leaving (assuming they did walk away?) and the child hooking the tea-pot and scalding themselves.
On a slight tangent for a second - wouldn't you usually consider waiting staff bringing something to your table somewhat of a 'transition'? They have a job to do, but so do you. Kids or not. If someone's bringing me my Sunday Roast, I'll be looking down at my part of the table to check their path is clear. If they're bringing a tray of drinks, you'd be ready to say "mine" when they call out your drink. That sort of thing. It is (or should be, in polite circles) an interaction. You don't take that opportunity to ignore the waiting staff, do your own thing, and make it entirely their responsibility. Do you?
Back to my point, though... Although there's probably no 'defining moment', there is a point at which the waitress' role in bringing the tea to the table was 'complete'. A point at which, even if she'd not quite put them in the optimal spot, the act of bringing them and putting them in front of the parents transferred total responsibility to them. Certainly in the absence of either parent giving explicit instructions as to where the tea should be placed, or taking the opportunity to say 'No, not there you effing idiot!" when she placed them (not unreasonably) in the middle of the table, there's a strong sense in my mind that the waitress' role was 'complete', Especially if she'd then moved away and more time had elapsed.
In other words, if the OP or his wife didn't take any care to give the waitress specific direction; didn't take any responsibility for providing guidance or explicitly disagree with the waitress' choice of position, and she sets down the tea and walks off, what may or may not happen next is 100% the parents' responsibility.
Fact is, the OP saw the waitress coming and made an unconscious (or possibly conscious) decision to not interact with her, and to focus on his son instead. He didn't check to see if his wife was taking charge, or able to interact with the waitress. They both left 100% of the decision-making to her purely by deciding not to be helpful, or be part of that 'transition' process that happens when someone brings you something.
It is no wonder they blame her in hindsight.
For me, the primary issue isn't that they blame the waitress - it is that they couldn't even be bothered to help her complete her task in the first place. Absenting yourself from that interaction usually only has rudeness as a consequence - but this time it was so much worse. I feel sorry for the girl and hope she recovers.
OP - as a human being, if you chose to silently pass all responsibility to the waitress without any other communication, aside from moving a few books around, then shame on you. That's not how to interact with someone who is bringing you something.
Back to my point about the first bullet. If the waitress has put the tea down and has gone, it is no longer a 'work activity'. The tea is now the responsibility of the parents, who are not paying proper attention to what is going on around them.
Hondashark said:
Thankfully solicitors are of a different opinion to the bellends blaming us.
Our daughter was in a position of safety and while we were distracted someone put her in danger.
That is fully blameable and rightly deserving of compensation. The issue is proving it when you have no CCTV evidence.
I'm really sorry you're going through this. I can't comprehend how bad it must be for you all and I hope you and your wife find some peace with it and your little one makes a full recovery. Our daughter was in a position of safety and while we were distracted someone put her in danger.
That is fully blameable and rightly deserving of compensation. The issue is proving it when you have no CCTV evidence.
The issue with these scenarios in my experience is that it's understandably very emotionally involved, especially so when there's the inevitable guilt associated with your child being injured when you were looking after them. Unfortunately though the law rarely takes account of emotion and advise should be accordingly pragmatic. That can feel like a real kick in the nuts when you're caught up in the emotion as it's far easier to try to absolve yourself of blame if it was someone else's fault. It's really important to note that that's not directed at you or your wife. Accidents do happen and in a better place we'd possibly prevent them but life doesn't work like that.
From a standpoint of apportioning blame, you can't claim you were distracted. You'd be distracted if you had a sneezing fit or swarm of bees came towards you. You just chose to do something else at the time the drinks were brought to your table instead of ensuring they were in a part of the table that'd pose less risk. That's not a distraction, that's a choice. Certainly one made from a position of simply not thinking of the repercussions and in hindsight you'd do differently but a choice all the same. It then becomes very difficult to blame the serving staff for placing the drinks too close to your child when you were also seemingly so unaware of the danger that you also didn't make it your priority either.
I don't see you have the basis for a successful claim here for a number of reasons and I'm sorry again you're going through this. I understand this sort of pragmatic advice isn't necessarily what you hoped for but in my opinion you should put the effort into dealing with, and processing the event with your wife. Your wife having counselling is a good move and it might really help her if you attend with her to understand where she is struggling. Another thing to note from a pragmatic POV is; even if you could successfully say the server was fully to blame and went through the proceedings and eventually won, there's little solace to be had from the fact you say someone else was to blame when you still could have prevented it in the first place. Even if you win, you'll still need to process that.
So many people in this thread are determined to be utterly binary, and as I suggested in my earlier post, the world is a sliding scale of responsibility and everyone has a duty of care towards everyone else.
Are the parents ultimately responsible since they were present and overseeing? Yes, of course.
Do other people have a duty of care towards around kids, and considering the dangers to children? Yes, of course.
Both of those are statements are true.
As I mentioned, I’ve been in countless restaurants where the server has deliberately placed anything hot, sharp, or dangerous well out of arms reach of a child and even notified the parents of the danger by saying “I will put this hot plate over here away from the child”.
Which is IMO a basic duty of care towards a child, any child, that I would expect from anyone.
The same as if I see a parent walking along the pavement with a young toddler I lift off the throttle and hover over the brake pedal just incase the toddler makes a break for it, as they sometimes do.
I have a duty of care towards other peoples kids whilst operating a motor vehicle.
Would anyone in this thread seriously claim they would place cutlery/knife or boiling water within reach of a toddler?
I still don’t think the OP has a case for ‘compo’ but I’m merely saying that anyone who doesn’t think they have a duty of care towards other humans is being dreadfully binary.
Are the parents ultimately responsible since they were present and overseeing? Yes, of course.
Do other people have a duty of care towards around kids, and considering the dangers to children? Yes, of course.
Both of those are statements are true.
As I mentioned, I’ve been in countless restaurants where the server has deliberately placed anything hot, sharp, or dangerous well out of arms reach of a child and even notified the parents of the danger by saying “I will put this hot plate over here away from the child”.
Which is IMO a basic duty of care towards a child, any child, that I would expect from anyone.
The same as if I see a parent walking along the pavement with a young toddler I lift off the throttle and hover over the brake pedal just incase the toddler makes a break for it, as they sometimes do.
I have a duty of care towards other peoples kids whilst operating a motor vehicle.
Would anyone in this thread seriously claim they would place cutlery/knife or boiling water within reach of a toddler?
I still don’t think the OP has a case for ‘compo’ but I’m merely saying that anyone who doesn’t think they have a duty of care towards other humans is being dreadfully binary.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff