it's snow joke

[chippy17]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/7910543/H...

[Laurel Green]

Yes, but then I would not have an excuse for not clearing the snow.

[BOR]

chippy17 said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/7910543/H...

That's it ? Just a link to a story ? You couldn't even cut'n paste part of it to give people an idea whether it's worth clicking on ?

[chippy17]

BOR said:

chippy17 said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/7910543/H...

That's it ? Just a link to a story ? You couldn't even cut'n paste part of it to give people an idea whether it's worth clicking on ?

well I thought my rather clever yet cryptic title would have given you some clues

I know that one extra click must be hard

[chippy17]

Laurel Green said:

Yes, but then I would not have an excuse for not clearing the snow.

I had no idea people were actually being sued for this therefore creating an article about not being...

[Laurel Green]

chippy17 said:

Laurel Green said:

Yes, but then I would not have an excuse for not clearing the snow.

I had no idea people were actually being sued for this therefore creating an article about not being...

I don't know if anyone was actually sued but, knew it was possible to be. 'Tis time folk took responsibility for their own actions.

[JMGS4]

Laurel Green said:

I don't know if anyone was actually sued but, knew it was possible to be. 'Tis time folk took responsibility for their own actions.

Only mentalist Labour idiots could think that someone should be sued for clearing snow!!
In proper "snow" countries, you are obliged by law to clear your own pavement. If you don't and someone falls, you can be sued. Mind you here (Germany) you only have to have it cleared from 8am to 8pm, and also not if there's a blizzard (you can wait till it stops). All a bit more sensible IMHO....

[Laurel Green]

JMGS4 said:

Only mentalist Labour idiots could think that someone should be sued for clearing snow!!
In proper "snow" countries, you are obliged by law to clear your own pavement. If you don't and someone falls, you can be sued. Mind you here (Germany) you only have to have it cleared from 8am to 8pm, and also not if there's a blizzard (you can wait till it stops). All a bit more sensible IMHO....

That is far too sensible for modern day GB - though welcome the introduction of such law. Back in my youth (long time ago), everyone would be out clearing the footpaths after it had snowed. Would also clear the neighbours if old or infirm.

[funkyrobot]

Icy where you are coming from with the thread title. Good work.

[chippy17]

funkyrobot said:

Icy where you are coming from with the thread title. Good work.

n ice reply, no that is the best I can do with the available material

[anonymous-user]

Where I lived in NOrway you had to clear the public footpath adjoining your property, and were liable if there was an accident because it was uncleared, exact opposite and better than the UK position.

[Randy Winkman]

Berw said:

Where I lived in NOrway you had to clear the public footpath adjoining your property, and were liable if there was an accident because it was uncleared, exact opposite and better than the UK position.

Has anyone been prosecuted for clearing snow in the UK?

[HundredthIdiot]

Laurel Green said:

I don't know if anyone was actually sued but, knew it was possible to be.

Is it? That crappy article doesn't even state the law as it stands.

I imagine (not being a legal type) that in the current situation normal negligence rules apply, in which case you can't be successfully sued for making the path safer (shovel), but can be for making it more dangerous (hot water). Which would be completely logical and reasonable.

The only unclear bit currently is whether anyone is negligent if no-one clears the snow.

Is this proposed "snow code" just an idiots guide to the current law?

[F i F]

Probably the whole article has been prompted by somebody who has gone long on rock salt futures, so hoping a bit of increased summer interest might drum some sales down at B&Q wehouse and thus push the prices back up.

[Laurel Green]

HundredthIdiot said:

Laurel Green said:

I don't know if anyone was actually sued but, knew it was possible to be.

Is it? That crappy article doesn't even state the law as it stands.

I imagine (not being a legal type) that in the current situation normal negligence rules apply, in which case you can't be successfully sued for making the path safer (shovel), but can be for making it more dangerous (hot water). Which would be completely logical and reasonable.

The only unclear bit currently is whether anyone is negligent if no-one clears the snow.

Is this proposed "snow code" just an idiots guide to the current law?

The local authority is responsible for clearing the snow. If I was to clear the snow and, someone was to trip on the snow that I had cleared then I am liable.

Perhaps it's time to manufacture some signs, not unlike the 'floor is wet' signs, only with 'slippery when white' on them instead. Could make a fortune from others stupidity.

[blindswelledrat]

st thread and st article.

"It follows two of the worst winters in recent memories when many householders refused to clear snow from the pavement outside their homes fearing they could be taken to court if somebody fell over"

Biggest pile of tripe Ive ever seen. Well nearly.
Course thats what happened.

[carmonk]

In town last winter a shopkeep had a leaking gutter which had frozen over the pavement. Instead of putting salt on it he actually put up a barrier around the area, forcing people to walk in the road, and stood there shouting, "Sorry about this, I can't legally clear the pavement or I'll be sued." Stupid bd. The whole thing is an urban myth.