Ford Focus ST Forum banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,437 Posts
I've just spent a couple of hours researching 'clearing snow', on the back end of a debate in work today, thought I'd share my findings here.

If you clear snow, and leave the path in a worse condition than it was in before you are left would leave you open to being sued.
Example of this, Using a gallon of boiling water - which then freezes, causing a much more dangerous surface.

If you clear snow with a shovel and brush, moving the snow to an area which wouldn't be walked on, you leave the area completely clear and use grit - noboby would realistically be able to sue you.

An interesting quote i've found.
''You can sue for anything you like. The question is whether or not it will be successful''

In America you will be fined $500 if you don't clear the snow within a certain time.
In Germany, it's also the law that you clear your area.

A couple of links with interesting debates / stories.

A full debate
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/20/33659...can-i-sued.html

Council tell a man not to use the grit (they leave at the end of his road in a big yellow bin).
http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/cn_news_ho...e.asp?ID=475596

A similar debate.
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index...09110429AAzUzQK

SO, Lets all get those pathways clear.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,917 Posts
Mmmm.... fancy goin out in the snow and expecting NOT to end up on your RS atleast once....


Blame culture gettin out of hand ... just like the politically correct idiots !!!! I mean wheres the harm in Baa Baa Black Sheep ????
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,264 Posts
QUOTE(Russeh @ 10 Jan 2010, 06:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>oh its rediculas now with what you can be sued for. we need to stop this dam litigation culture and replace it with common sense.

Strangely common sense is the first not the last.

English law has various tests within, so much of the "litigation" culture is simply tittle tattle of those that actually have little exposure to it.

The government screwed the system when they to save money, cut back on Civil legal aid in preference to the Conditional Fee Arrangement, no win no fee. This saved them 180 million a year in Legal Aid and now cost them 3 Billion a year in the settlement and cost of fighting spurious litigation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,085 Posts
I did find it quite funny that a council/person/etc is in no way liable if they don't attempt to clear a pathway, but if you attempt and make it safer yet someone still falls over, you then become liable.
There was a great video on utoob doing the rounds recently where the news crew were filming and some dude walked into shot at 344580705872 miles an hour and can you believe, slipped and fell on the ice on the pavement. Some people would try to sue for that instead of possibly walking a little bit slower ... common sense eh, all but evapourated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
773 Posts
It was in our Home Owners Association contract in the USA that you had to clear your driveway and ALL the pathway attached to your property (so from fence line to fence line, which was a pain living on the corner as we had to do the front and side of our property!!) within 1 hour of the snow stopping or of getting home from work, whichever was first. You could and would be fined if it wasn't done. If you were away then it was your responsibility to arrange for a neighbour to do it.

I thought it was a fantastic idea as it made getting around so much easier and I felt safer walking to get my mail from the box up the street. The roads were done by the City but if you have a vehicle that you can fit a snowplough to then you get a discount on your road tax but are expected to pop out when the snow had stopped and clear your street - tax reduction was a nice incentive for those with the typical American truck and also helpful.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,704 Posts
QUOTE(Si @ 10 Jan 2010, 06:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Strangely common sense is the first not the last.

English law has various tests within, so much of the "litigation" culture is simply tittle tattle of those that actually have little exposure to it.

The government screwed the system when they to save money, cut back on Civil legal aid in preference to the Conditional Fee Arrangement, no win no fee. This saved them 180 million a year in Legal Aid and now cost them 3 Billion a year in the settlement and cost of fighting spurious litigation.

makes sense, these no win no fee companies only seem to have popped up in the last 4-5 years. In which case they need to change the system back then
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,264 Posts
QUOTE(Russeh @ 10 Jan 2010, 07:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>makes sense, these no win no fee companies only seem to have popped up in the last 4-5 years. In which case they need to change the system back then

It is currently under review, we all hope that it will be curbed
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
825 Posts
You dont know what to believe to be honest, you get the impression that people claim for anything and get paid out if your read the newspapers. My gf fell down the stairs in the jobcentre.... the stairs were dry and she was wearing a walking type boot.... got some advice.... dry stairs and good shoes.... no case... now if the stairs was wet then that is another matter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,821 Posts
Anyone good at legal terms-style writing able to come up with a sign for people to put on the pavement outside their homes along the jist of "I've chosen to clear this area, it may still be unsafe, your own risk, I take no responsibility etc bla bla bla"

It may well come to that!

Oh and the sign would have to be yellow, with no sharp edges!

Might need another sign though warning people not to walk into the first sign... oh, I can see how this could go on for a while
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,382 Posts
QUOTE(fahrenheit303 @ 11 Jan 2010, 03:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>You dont know what to believe to be honest, you get the impression that people claim for anything and get paid out if your read the newspapers. My gf fell down the stairs in the jobcentre.... the stairs were dry and she was wearing a walking type boot.... got some advice.... dry stairs and good shoes.... no case... now if the stairs was wet then that is another matter.

Please don't take this the wrong way but....

Why did she even bother/need to take advice in these circumstances?????
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,085 Posts
QUOTE(fahrenheit303 @ 11 Jan 2010, 03:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>You dont know what to believe to be honest, you get the impression that people claim for anything and get paid out if your read the newspapers. My gf fell down the stairs in the jobcentre.... the stairs were dry and she was wearing a walking type boot.... got some advice.... dry stairs and good shoes.... no case... now if the stairs was wet then that is another matter.

I think even if I fell down a wet flight of stairs, I 'd just attempt to laugh off the embarassment of tumbling in front of lots of possible. I'd only consider suing if I was in a bad mood and would only do it because "everyone else is so I'll be damned if I'm going to miss out" and most definitely not because I felt so terribly upset about falling and got bruised.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,768 Posts
The risk of being sued has been exagerated not just in my view but on the local news tonight a solicitor said the chances were 'smaller than zero'. He said theoretically you could be sued but he couldn't imagine a judge agreeing as clearly you were trying to help by clearing the path. Health and Safety gets blamed for a lot of stuff which some people hide behind without engaging brain.

Another duff 'shock' story in some papers and the internet...bet it started with The Daily Mail.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,669 Posts
QUOTE(martine @ 11 Jan 2010, 08:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>The risk of being sued has been exagerated not just in my view but on the local news tonight a solicitor said the chances were 'smaller than zero'. He said theoretically you could be sued but he couldn't imagine a judge agreeing as clearly you were trying to help by clearing the path. Health and Safety gets blamed for a lot of stuff which some people hide behind without engaging brain.

Another duff 'shock' story in some papers and the internet...bet it started with The Daily Mail.


I think the problem is since NWNF, these claims don't seem to get as far as a Judge, or similar. They all seem to be settled prior to common sense prevailing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,264 Posts
QUOTE(Daz07 @ 11 Jan 2010, 03:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Anyone good at legal terms-style writing able to come up with a sign for people to put on the pavement outside their homes along the jist of "I've chosen to clear this area, it may still be unsafe, your own risk, I take no responsibility etc bla bla bla"

It may well come to that!

Oh and the sign would have to be yellow, with no sharp edges!

Might need another sign though warning people not to walk into the first sign... oh, I can see how this could go on for a while

Wouldnt work and in fact posting the sign may in fact show that you recognize the risk and therefore make you more open to be litigated agin lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
825 Posts
QUOTE(Dennis @ 11 Jan 2010, 07:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Please don't take this the wrong way but....

Why did she even bother/need to take advice in these circumstances?????


She was in pain and popping pain killers for over 3/4 weeks, pain down and across her lower back... very sore ribs and a very nasty bruise on her elbow... she still isnt 100% right now, with the odd pain spiking across her back when picking anything heavy. up..... why bother hey...
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top