Discussion
Jhonno said:
What would the law be on someone being paid to go into someone's house, bringing their child with them (to work) without consent/permission/knowledge of the person who's house it was, and an incident occurring whereby the child was injured? Is the child technically trespassing?
no, the child is not trespassing, as they were brought along by the adult.What the actual f
rgf100 said:
Is your actual concern liability for the accident?
Yes.. I'm no lawyer, but trespass being someone who doesn't have permission to be on your property. Which the child didn't, nor would it have been given permission. I don't know how it stands for someone brought on to property without permission, by someone who has permission. This is nothing to do with actual trespass as such, but how it stands that the child was brought into the house without permission or knowledge and been injured. The person who did have permission to be in the house was employed to be there.
OK, in the mean time the person has had legal advice..
The child was technically trespassing as permission wasn't given nor inferred, and as the adult was being paid to be on the property, it is their duty of care to look after the child, and ensure it isn't injured..
So no the person who lives in the house isn't liable.
The child was technically trespassing as permission wasn't given nor inferred, and as the adult was being paid to be on the property, it is their duty of care to look after the child, and ensure it isn't injured..
So no the person who lives in the house isn't liable.
If the injury was caused by something in the house then they may be, regardless of whether they try and convince others the child was a trespasser.
Sounds a proper charmer as well, no concern for the child other than that they are proved to be trespassing to avoid any liability.
A court would have a hard job saying that was the case when the parent brought the child into the house.
Poor cleaner was probably struggling for childcare.
Sounds a proper charmer as well, no concern for the child other than that they are proved to be trespassing to avoid any liability.
A court would have a hard job saying that was the case when the parent brought the child into the house.
Poor cleaner was probably struggling for childcare.
Brads67 said:
If the injury was caused by something in the house then they may be, regardless of whether they try and convince others the child was a trespasser.
Sounds a proper charmer as well, no concern for the child other than that they are proved to be trespassing to avoid any liability.
A court would have a hard job saying that was the case when the parent brought the child into the house.
Poor cleaner was probably struggling for childcare.
So many assumptions, all wrong.. Sounds a proper charmer as well, no concern for the child other than that they are proved to be trespassing to avoid any liability.
A court would have a hard job saying that was the case when the parent brought the child into the house.
Poor cleaner was probably struggling for childcare.
Back in the 80s, during the summer holidays, I used to "ride along" with my uncle in his Verminex Services Bedford HA van...
God alone knows what can of worms that would open up in this day and age? A van full of baits and poisons of various kinds, and me regularly being taken into premises to assist my uncle. Even to the point of going up on factory gantry cranes to shoot pigeons.
I'm not saying it's right, or was right at the time, but I always felt properly warned about the consequences of playing with rat poison, and I was taught to shoot properly, with respect for safety, other people, and above all the target.
I'm guessing the OP's tale is a tradesperson, working in a property, who has brought along an offspring due to half term and childcare issues?
God alone knows what can of worms that would open up in this day and age? A van full of baits and poisons of various kinds, and me regularly being taken into premises to assist my uncle. Even to the point of going up on factory gantry cranes to shoot pigeons.
I'm not saying it's right, or was right at the time, but I always felt properly warned about the consequences of playing with rat poison, and I was taught to shoot properly, with respect for safety, other people, and above all the target.
I'm guessing the OP's tale is a tradesperson, working in a property, who has brought along an offspring due to half term and childcare issues?
Back to the point, the lawful (paid) entrant could become a trespasser if he did things for which you had not given permission or could have reasonable knowledge.
But if the injury was caused by something about your premises that was inherently unsafe, that you were aware of, then you might be liable.
But if the injury was caused by something about your premises that was inherently unsafe, that you were aware of, then you might be liable.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff