Accident Group, oops!

[Stu]

He was a crook, just like drug pushers, people traffickers etc. etc.

Fact that he was a "white collar" criminal seems to gain him some sympathy in certain quarters...

He ripped poorer people off and somehow escaped justice - just how did he afford that ferrari when his company went bankrupt owing people wages.....????

So I've no sympathy for him. As for sympathy for his wife and family - well they chose to live with a criminal and benefit from the gains he made - so no sympathy for them either.

Sympathy - do you think that's true? I feel he got off lightly by not having to face justice.

As for his family/wife - none of us know the circumstances so we're really not in a position to judge, are we?

 

[mak]

I for one wanted him to suffer badly.... You should be ashamed of yourselves. 

Strangely, I have/had no axe to grind over this person and I wished him no ill will, unlike Anfieldman. I'm not ashamed either; however now that he is dead and as an ex-ill-wisher, perhaps you are. The thread was started because of the massive irony behind this whole sorry story and its relevance to the sue-now-think-later culture which threatens caving seemingly at every turn.

Threatens!! - it is already impacting caving - see thread http://ukcaving.com/board/index.php/topic,3697.0.html for how Mendip caves are being shut as a result of this fear of the sue-now-think-later culture.

 

[Stu]

I for one wanted him to suffer badly.... You should be ashamed of yourselves. 

Strangely, I have/had no axe to grind over this person and I wished him no ill will, unlike Anfieldman. I'm not ashamed either; however now that he is dead and as an ex-ill-wisher, perhaps you are. The thread was started because of the massive irony behind this whole sorry story and its relevance to the sue-now-think-later culture which threatens caving seemingly at every turn.

Threatens!! - it is already impacting caving - see thread http://ukcaving.com/board/index.php/topic,3697.0.html for how Mendip caves are being shut as a result of this fear of the sue-now-think-later culture.

Oh... I thought they were doing it because if a bolt that they (regional body) knew was faulty and someone got hurt then they could be held responsible. It's reasonable, not perfect of course - left to our own devices I'm sure we'd be ok and could find many and ingenious ways to hurt ourselves  . But this is the path (i.e. the bolting and responsibility undertaken by the regional bodies) that was chosen. This isn't the same as some shyster "tripping" over a pebble and trying to sue the council - this is about a reasoned approach and response, by a regional body.

 

[anfieldman]

I for one wanted him to suffer badly.... You should be ashamed of yourselves. 

Yes I wanted him to suffer badly, financially like the poor buggers he stiched up in his company but wishing that he suffered in great pain until the end? I would not wish that on him. Maybe some child killer but you cannot compare what he has done with that or even Saddam Hussain. As for free speech I am all for it but I too have a right to criticise comments as well or is that not free speech?
As for his family AndyF, I don't think that people actually get to choose what family they are born into do they?

Thank you Stu for some rational thinking in this thread.

 

[mak]

I for one wanted him to suffer badly.... You should be ashamed of yourselves. 

Strangely, I have/had no axe to grind over this person and I wished him no ill will, unlike Anfieldman. I'm not ashamed either; however now that he is dead and as an ex-ill-wisher, perhaps you are. The thread was started because of the massive irony behind this whole sorry story and its relevance to the sue-now-think-later culture which threatens caving seemingly at every turn.

Threatens!! - it is already impacting caving - see thread http://ukcaving.com/board/index.php/topic,3697.0.html for how Mendip caves are being shut as a result of this fear of the sue-now-think-later culture.

Oh... I thought they were doing it because if a bolt that they (regional body) knew was faulty and someone got hurt then they could be held responsible. It's reasonable, not perfect of course - left to our own devices I'm sure we'd be ok and could find many and ingenious ways to hurt ourselves  . But this is the path (i.e. the bolting and responsibility undertaken by the regional bodies) that was chosen. This isn't the same as some shyster "tripping" over a pebble and trying to sue the council - this is about a reasoned approach and response, by a regional body.

But surely it's about how to discharge that responsibility - notify and place signs allowing cavers to make their own judgements, there are other routes available or alternatives such as good old fashioned spits to fall back on - but that decision has been taken out of the hands of cavers because they have just shut the caves.

 

[cap n chris]

But signs get ripped off and then subsequent groups are put at risk.

Also the LHS spits in Rhino are unusable (checked recently). This is a bit off thread.

 

[Mark]

But signs get ripped off

GOOD!

There are two many signs on the planet telling motorcyclists to slow down etc or 30mph in 400 - 300 - 200 yds Im sure people are capable of thinking for themselves, and all a sign does is allow the person who put it there to say "well they were warned"

I hate sign pollution

 

[cap n chris]

Thanks, Mark; you've neatly explained why some caves are presently locked.  :read:

BTW; many people are not capable of thinking for themselves.

e.g.

1) On Wednesday I saw two (UK plated) sepatate examples of people driving on the wrong side of the road, mid morning.
2) People persist in hanging their safety line from a single bolt at Swildon's Hole - it's such a frequent occurrence to witness this that there's a strong argument for installing a stainless steel y-hang assembly such as climbers use. Also it's exceptionally common to see just a ladder (no safety line) hanging off a single bolt there.

 

[damian]

2) People persist in hanging their safety line from a single bolt at Swildon's Hole - it's such a frequent occurrence to witness this that there's a strong argument for installing a stainless steel y-hang assembly such as climbers use. Also it's exceptionally common to see just a ladder (no safety line) hanging off a single bolt there.

You're a brave man, CnC!

I was wondering the other day how long it would be before we ended up with these on pull-thru trips (e.g. Simpson's, Swinsto), but I guess it's a logical extension to put them on the 20' too.

I'm glad I wasn't the one to suggest it, though!

 

[cap n chris]

Not brave. Stoooooopid; stoooopid to the max, mate.

 

[Wolfart]

As for him ,glad he is gone ,as for wife and family they must of had some idea what he was up to and no dowt they will be left well off unlike some poorer people that have barley got a roof over there head.
Suing and litigation i detest and hate if i trip or fall its my bloody fault
TO ERR IS TO BE HUMAN

 

[Deeply Mendippy]

As for him ,glad he is gone ,as for wife and family they must of had some idea what he was up to and no dowt they will be left well off unlike some poorer people that have barley got a roof over there head.
Suing and litigation i detest and hate if i trip or fall its my bloody fault
TO ERR IS TO BE HUMAN

And to forgive is divine.

I am slightly suprised by some of the comments on this thread. I will confess an interest in that I was once an ambulance chasing lawyer (boo hiss etc) but I still can't but help feel that some of the views are a little extreme.

He ran a perfectly legal and legitimate business. His crime was to take on too many rubbish claims - which the courts then rightly dismissed - and so he got no money and went bust. To my mind that makes him a poor businessman but it does not make him evil and it does not make him single-handedly responsible for all the perceived wrongs caused by litigation. TAG was just one of many claims firms that sprung up when the government deregulated the advertising rules.

Many people (myself included) agree that the pendulum has swung too far and that the compensation culture is too prevalent, and yes, in my time in practice I saw many cases that I thought were spurious and almost invariably they failed. But at the same time I also saw plenty of examples of breath-taking negligence and people with horrific injuries as a result. It is ultimately the job of the courts to apply the law to sort one group from the other and they do so very well.

Fear of litigation is often quoted as the reason why something is done but it is frequently just a convenient excuse. Insurance companies are happy to promote this idea of a litigation culture as it strengthens their lobbying position and helps justify a rise in premiums. Councils are happy to close playgrounds and save costs and blame it on fear of litigation. In actual fact the number of personal injury claims has fallen over the last five years.

 

[Elaine]

There are some circumstances in which I would consider trying to get compensation for an accident I suffered as a result of someone elses mistake. If I was unable to work (being self employed I would then get no income) and the accident was clearly someone else's responsibility, then I would want to be able to regain what I had lost by being unable to work. I would only want the money that I would otherwise have earned in that period. I could see a scenario where I would get into serious finacial difficulty due to something like that, and although I would want to be able to say that I would never go for compensation, I would have to be honest and say that there are circumstances in which I would.

An extreme example: I am walking along the pavement and a car hits me rendering me paralysed for life. Then some compensation to help pay for all the changes I would have to make would be very useful.

I know someone who sued when she had a car accident, and her child got £1000 just for a little bruise. That is all it was too, a bruise. That is ludicrous and wrong.

Someone wrote my parked car off two years ago. It was an old but totally reliable car and therefore I got next to nothing for it. I was the only one who lost out in that claim but it was just one of those things one has to accept. Life is not fair sometimes.

So, lawyers who try and get £1000 for children who suffer a little bruise are wrong. Ones who try to get reasonable compensation in exceptional circumstances are probably quite ok. Notice I say 'reasonable'.

 

[ChrisB]

His crime was to take on too many rubbish claims

I don't think that's the crime which resulted in the comments on this thread.

He treated his employees, clients and suppliers very badly, by taking the business much too far into debt before winding it up, which is certainly deeply immoral if not illegal, he allegedly owed the taxman £4.1M (ie, defrauding all the rest of us who pay tax), and went abroad to escape justice. He was the kind of greedy businessman who gives ambulance chasing lawyers a bad name!

 

[Hughie]

Good riddance.

 

[cap n chris]

But what about his family?

 

[Hughie]

But what about his family?

Presumably they can sue someone. And I expect they're probably morally better off without him.

 

[paul]

1) On Wednesday I saw two (UK plated) sepatate examples of people driving on the wrong side of the road, mid morning.

Could be rental cars driven by foreign visitors...

 

[mak]

Thanks, Mark; you've neatly explained why some caves are presently locked.  :read:

BTW; many people are not capable of thinking for themselves.

my point exactly - the decision to shut is based on the assumption by the body in question that most cavers can't think for themselves and would rip signs off anyway.

e.g.

1) On Wednesday I saw two (UK plated) sepatate examples of people driving on the wrong side of the road, mid morning.

So despite the millions of cars on the road you are happy to condemn all drivers on the evidence of two examples?

2) People persist in hanging their safety line from a single bolt at Swildon's Hole - it's such a frequent occurrence to witness this that there's a strong argument for installing a stainless steel y-hang assembly such as climbers use. Also it's exceptionally common to see just a ladder (no safety line) hanging off a single bolt there.

Is swildons to be the next cave to shut because people aren't caving properly?

But seriously - having placed three bolts to allow for ladder, lifeline and traverse/backup how much further do you think your responsibility goes, do you think you should re-rig the cave to take account of others poor technique?

There has to be a limit to responsibilities beyond which it becomes the responsibility of the individual to look after themselves.
It would appear from comments earlier on this thread and the MRO legal advisor talks at the hunters that the legal profession appears to be in line with this, and will happily throw out nonsense cases.

It seems to me that only the insurance companies benefit from this spread of the "fear of litigation" as it sells expensive insurance policies, and we suffer as people act to deny or limit us in response to this fear.

 

[menacer]

:bow: Mak, you rock  Well Put