Nuffles
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 177
- Name
- Jack
- Edit My Images
- Yes
clearly you'd have a case - its their responsibility because they didnt put up a warning sign telling you not to munch your finger open in spokes/ failed to provide you with adequate training in how not to munch your fingers/ were negligent in hiring someone stupid enough to munch their fingers in the spokes in the first place:nuts:
mind you although we laugh there was that woman who succesfully sued macdonalds (I think) after tripping over her own child , and the other one who sued because she scalded herself with coffee and they hadnt warned that it would be hot. :shrug:
I was also once a witness (for the landowner) in a case where someone walked out onto thin ice , fell through it, and nearly died - despite the landowner having errected a sign saying "warning - thin ice" - the substance of the claim was that the sign didnt give a specific hazard (ie that it should have said "warning thin ice, if you walk on it you'll fall through and potentially drown") - the claimant lost but defending the claim cost over £10K and the landowner didnt recover all of it. :bang:
Shocking really isn't it? I heard about something from America where somebody tried (possibly succeeded?) suing MacDonalds for not warning customers that their foods lead to obesity if eaten in excess. I don't know how true it is but there you go, it wouldn't surprise me.
:nuts: