Roof Tile Incident
Discussion
TwigtheWonderkid said:
PAULJ5555 said:
If you were walking down the road and the tile damaged/chopped off your arm and you could no longer work in your type of job. Does the law really leave you out on a limb (bad pun I know)
Yes.That's what personal accident / permanent health insurance is for. If you choose not to by it and cover yourself, who do you expect to pay, when it was nobody's fault. What if you couldn't work again following a lightning strike. It's the same thing. Sometimes accidents happen and no one has done anything wrong.
chazwind said:
Utter rubbish. Most car accidents are down to human error, and that's the same with construction. This fallen tile (in the absence of extraordinary weather) was more than likely caused either by poor construction, installation, inspection or maintenance. The last person who is at fault, or should suffer, is the OP. I can't believe that the consensus of this thread is that they should roll over and accept the financial penalty themselves.
You're completely wrong.Just because a slate falls off a roof, it doesn't mean someone's been negligent.
What you're saying is that even though (for instance) a new roof was fitted to a property say 5 years ago, the fact that one slate then falls off after 5 years means that the roofer should be held accountable? Or the property owner for not inspecting his roof? Do you inspect your roof annually (and I mean do you get a professional roofer to inspect it every year - not just you going up on a ladder)? If you don't, are you saying that you'd be liable if this was your roof slate which had damaged someone's car?
PAULJ5555 said:
If you were walking down the road and the tile damaged/chopped off your arm and you could no longer work in your type of job. Does the law really leave you out on a limb (bad pun I know)
Pretty much. And not just that - what if you're walking along the road minding your own business and through no fault of your own you're struck by lightening and seriously injured? Is it really so shocking to say that you can't demand that someone else pays for every bit of misfortune that befalls you in life?There are accidents which result from someone else's negligence, and there are accidents which are just plain bad luck. If they result from some else's negligence you can usually claim compensation from that person, or his insurers if he has any. However if you want to be protected against the ones which are pure bad luck it's your job to insure yourself against them.
chazwind said:
Utter rubbish. Most car accidents are down to human error, and that's the same with construction. This fallen tile (in the absence of extraordinary weather) was more than likely caused either by poor construction, installation, inspection or maintenance. The last person who is at fault, or should suffer, is the OP. I can't believe that the consensus of this thread is that they should roll over and accept the financial penalty themselves.
Utter rubbish.The reason you can invariably win a case on a motor accident is in the vast vast majority of cases the accident could reasonably have been avoided.
Incidently are you aware that it's possible to have a heart attack, write off three cars as you collide with them and not be deemed to be negligent or liable for the other vehicles damage?
Nezquick said:
You're completely wrong.
Just because a slate falls off a roof, it doesn't mean someone's been negligent.
What you're saying is that even though (for instance) a new roof was fitted to a property say 5 years ago, the fact that one slate then falls off after 5 years means that the roofer should be held accountable? Or the property owner for not inspecting his roof? Do you inspect your roof annually (and I mean do you get a professional roofer to inspect it every year - not just you going up on a ladder)? If you don't, are you saying that you'd be liable if this was your roof slate which had damaged someone's car?
If a slate fell off my roof and damaged someone else's car? Of course it would be my responsibility! Who's else is it?!Just because a slate falls off a roof, it doesn't mean someone's been negligent.
What you're saying is that even though (for instance) a new roof was fitted to a property say 5 years ago, the fact that one slate then falls off after 5 years means that the roofer should be held accountable? Or the property owner for not inspecting his roof? Do you inspect your roof annually (and I mean do you get a professional roofer to inspect it every year - not just you going up on a ladder)? If you don't, are you saying that you'd be liable if this was your roof slate which had damaged someone's car?
chazwind said:
Utter rubbish. Most car accidents are down to human error, and that's the same with construction. This fallen tile (in the absence of extraordinary weather) was more than likely caused either by poor construction, installation, inspection or maintenance.
Negligence means failure to take the standard of care which would be expected of a reasonable person. Not a perfect person - just a reasonable person. Do you consider yourself to be a reasonable person? How often do you have your roof professionally inspected? Can you put your heart and say that there's no chance whatsoever that a tile will fall off it at some point?
If your answers are "yes", "erm..." and "no" (mine certainly are) then the mere fact that a tile fell off the roof does not prove that there was negligence involved.
dacouch said:
chazwind said:
Utter rubbish. Most car accidents are down to human error, and that's the same with construction. This fallen tile (in the absence of extraordinary weather) was more than likely caused either by poor construction, installation, inspection or maintenance. The last person who is at fault, or should suffer, is the OP. I can't believe that the consensus of this thread is that they should roll over and accept the financial penalty themselves.
Utter rubbish.The reason you can invariably win a case on a motor accident is in the vast vast majority of cases the accident could reasonably have been avoided.
Incidently are you aware that it's possible to have a heart attack, write off three cars as you collide with them and not be deemed to be negligent or liable for the other vehicles damage?
A heart attack (without prior history) is more like a lightning strike - unforeseeable.
Aretnap said:
chazwind said:
Utter rubbish. Most car accidents are down to human error, and that's the same with construction. This fallen tile (in the absence of extraordinary weather) was more than likely caused either by poor construction, installation, inspection or maintenance.
Negligence means failure to take the standard of care which would be expected of a reasonable person. Not a perfect person - just a reasonable person. Do you consider yourself to be a reasonable person? How often do you have your roof professionally inspected? Can you put your heart and say that there's no chance whatsoever that a tile will fall off it at some point?
If your answers are "yes", "erm..." and "no" (mine certainly are) then the mere fact that a tile fell off the roof does not prove that there was negligence involved.
chazwind said:
Utter rubbish. Most car accidents are down to human error, and that's the same with construction. This fallen tile (in the absence of extraordinary weather) was more than likely caused either by poor construction, installation, inspection or maintenance. The last person who is at fault, or should suffer, is the OP. I can't believe that the consensus of this thread is that they should roll over and accept the financial penalty themselves.
I assumed the same as you when a tile fell off the roof at work, that the building owner would automatically be liable for any damage. But it seems not, so I got the roof inspected and documented as being in good nick.A similar void in liability seems to apply if e.g. if a car throws up a stone and smashes your window or a wagon tyre explodes and smashes into your car on the motorway: http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?f=10&...
Unless there has been negligence then you have to sort yourself out. I have personal insurance (£25 per month) to pay out a couple of grand a month in case I can not work for longer than eight weeks for any such reason (tile in head).
chazwind said:
If a slate fell off my roof and damaged someone else's car? Of course it would be my responsibility! Who's else is it?!
Say it hit a Bugatti. Did £30K worth of damage. You wouldn't be so quick to offer to pay up then or accept responsibility. Your house insurers wouldn't cover it, as they only cover your legal liability, and regardless of what you think, you have no legal liability. So it would be down to you personally to pay.So...are you going to pay?
chazwind said:
I can't believe that the consensus of this thread is that they should roll over and accept the financial penalty themselves.
I think the concensus of this thread is that most people understand the law of tort. You obviously don't, which is why you can't believe what's being said. The problem is your, not ours.TurricanII said:
I assumed the same as you when a tile fell off the roof at work, that the building owner would automatically be liable for any damage. But it seems not, so I got the roof inspected and documented as being in good nick.
A similar void in liability seems to apply if e.g. if a car throws up a stone and smashes your window or a wagon tyre explodes and smashes into your car on the motorway: http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?f=10&...
Unless there has been negligence then you have to sort yourself out. I have personal insurance (£25 per month) to pay out a couple of grand a month in case I can not work for longer than eight weeks for any such reason (tile in head).
Agreed that stone chips are impossible to prove (suffered several myself), but wagon blow-outs are overwhelmingly caused by under-pressure/over-pressure, misalignment, and general poor maintenance. Tyres rarely fail for no reason (the same as roof tiles). Good for you (genuinely) that you have personal insurance, but would you expect a 10-year old child to 'sort themselves out' if hit in the head by a tile and not insured?A similar void in liability seems to apply if e.g. if a car throws up a stone and smashes your window or a wagon tyre explodes and smashes into your car on the motorway: http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?f=10&...
Unless there has been negligence then you have to sort yourself out. I have personal insurance (£25 per month) to pay out a couple of grand a month in case I can not work for longer than eight weeks for any such reason (tile in head).
chazwind said:
but would you expect a 10-year old child to 'sort themselves out' if hit in the head by a tile and not insured?
No, I'd expect the parents to care for the child, and to pay for their care. That's what parents do when their kids are disabled in freak accidents where no one is to blame. Who would pay for the child if they were struck by lightning?Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff