are you about to be sued???

[snowleopard]

the question arose in a thread which was getting very eggy today- dare you give advice in this forum in case someone injures themself following it and sues you?

leaving aside the anonymity of the forum which i guess can easily be got round, should we (a) add a disclaimer to every post (b) restrict posts to general chat and never offer advice (c) shut up altogether (d) ignore the issue and hope the ambulance chasers stay away?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[l'escargot]

No one is forced to act on any advice given in good faith, they wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

"Yes your honour, he told me to set light to it, so I did and it's burnt. It's not my fault I did what an absolute stranger told me to do. No I have no idea whether he was qualified to give any advice.....No I didn't know he was a train spotter from Birmingham and not a marine engineer in Poole. What do you mean I should seek legal advice, a chap on a legal forum told me I have a very good case. Oh, don't you think he was a genuine barrister then? But he did say no judge would be stupid enough to find against me....."

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Birdseye]

Difficult one this, isnt it? The only rational thing to do is never to give advice, never to comment, never take passengers, etc. The chances of getting sued are probably small, but the law is capricious and unreliable, and the consequences of being sued are not good. even if you win, you will have been through a thoroughly miserable experience, probably expensive and certainly stressful.

But its so difficult to be that rational and to resist giving your opinion about something you know b**er all about in reality.

Anyway, for the benefit of anyone even the slightest bit inclined to take note of any of my posts - ITS ALL BALLS, HE DOESNT KNOW HIS A** FROM HIS ELBOW, HE'S NOT AN EXPERT ON ANYTHING AT ALL AND YOU SHOULD TOTALLY IGNORE ANYTHING HE WRITES ON THIS OR ANY OTHER FORUM.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ubuysa]

<font size=1>leaving aside the anonymity of the forum which i guess can easily be got round, should we (a) add a disclaimer to every post (b) restrict posts to general chat and never offer advice (c) shut up altogether (d) ignore the issue and hope the ambulance chasers stay away?</font size=1>

Well I'd really like to give you some good advice on this, but I'm scared you'll sue me if I do, so I won't /forums/images/icons/blush.gif

Tony C. (Darn! Now you know who I am....)

<hr width=100% size=1>There are 10 kinds of people, those who understand binary and those who don't.

 

[domlee]

Just put 'E&OE' (errors and omissions ecluded) at the end of your posts - this seems to cover the Swindleries when the advertised price of their products seem to have no bearing on the prices they actually charge....

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[claymore]

Oh Dear - what ever happened to taking responsibility for one's own actions?
If someone sued me based on advice I'd handed out - I'd think they were a pillock for taking it in the first place.
Time to grow up I think

<hr width=100% size=1>regards
Claymore
/forums/images/icons/smile.gif

 

[longjohnsilver]

Well you advised me to send No 1 brat to Uni without telling me it would cost me a fortune - the writ is on its way!!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[gjeffery]

I suspect that the unpleasant truth may be that if you know what you are talking about, or purport to, then you owe a duty of care, and may be liable.

Beware the No win-No Fee solicitor. Interesting write up of a libel case last week. The person who claimed to have been libelled engaged a No Win-No Fee lawyer. The case became prohibitively expensive for the alleged libellor, who would have had to pay costs had he lost. He cut his losses and settled out of court, the lawyer charging his time at £650 per hour - to be paid by the alleged libellor.


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Althorne]

Being the instigator of this post from snowleopard which I think was a just and interesting post to write (so maybe I won't sue him) I have to say that I whole hearted agree with all that say you have to accept responsibility for your own actions but would point you to gjeffery's post to the probably results. I deplore this kind of thing totally but anyone thinking they can get something for nothing with no thread of cost to themselves will have a go.
Sad world.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[l'escargot]

I think you will find that costs can only be awarded by the court - they are not a feature of out of court settlements.

Anyway what about the opposite - you had good advice which you did not offer and you allowed an individual to foul up totally unassisted but you could have stopped it. Were you negligent in allowing him to. Could he sue you?

Don't panic, the answer is no.

There is an increase in people seemingly being sued for inconsequential reasons but not to any great extent. The tag "compensation-culture" is a creation of government/councils who are increasingly being sued for their negligence (cost cutting) and would love to limit litigation to reduce their own costs.

No win No fee lawyers don't tell you about all the cases they lose where they still get paid by the insurance policy that they sold the claimant (and got the commission on). No win No fee is not free.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[claymore]

Pillock - fancy listening to me!

<hr width=100% size=1>regards
Claymore
/forums/images/icons/smile.gif

 

[oldsaltoz]

G'day Chris [Snowleopard],

It was a wise man who said "if you want to bring a countries economy to it's knees, send in a couple of Philadelphia lawyers" how true is that......

Avagoodweekend.


<hr width=100% size=1> Old Salt Oz /forums/images/icons/cool.gif Growing old is unavoidable. However, growing up is still optional.

 

[Metabarca]

Well, I hope we have no boaty Philadelphia lawyers aboard the forum or oldsaltoz is facing a HUGE libel suit...!! 'Jaws' has nothing on 'Laws' when it comes to taking large chunks out of you!

<hr width=100% size=1>Adriatic links here: <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.comoy.com/saillinks.html>http://www.comoy.com/saillinks.html</A>

 

[snowleopard]

Kim????

what do you think? presumably you've looked at this from the web host's point of view at least.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[duncan]

One further point - I believe that there is some factor around 'advice freely given' that makes it difficult to pursue (never impossible!). If however any consideration for the advice was given and accepted then that would of course change things - however the currency of this forum being scallops / beer / wine etc tends to result in the evidence disappearing quickly!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[AndrewB]

Get real !!!

You may sue me for this advice if you wish!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[gjeffery]

I guess that agreement is a prerequisite to settlement out of court. The alternative is that the case is heard - and costs imposed. Disturbing aspects about the case reported in the Telegraph were that the costs far exceeded the damages agreed, and that contingency fee lawyers are apparantly permitted to top load their fees, by as much as 100%, to pay for those that they lose. I found this difficult to believe. The article was in the Telegraph, a couple of weeks ago, and concerned the burning of a restored slipper launch, on the Thames, and the reaction of the launch owner.



<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[tcm]

I\'m in the clear

I am pretty sure that i am in the clear. The reason being that all the people who have followed my advice are EITHER long dead (especially if they followed the bit about lashing yourself to the outboard before moving it when i should have said lash it to the boat, or the bit about cleaning bits of the boat with petrol which works but is incredibly dangerous) OR they have given up boating altogether as a bad job following all the rubbish places that i have suggested that they visit.

 

[LORDNELSON]

The danger is not someone successfully sueing you; but just being sued even if you win. A little insurance seems to be inorder. My insurer offers "Marine Legal Cover" which, inter alia, appears to cover £100,000 to cover my and opponents lawyer's costs. It costs about £12 a year. The premium does not seem large which would seem to indicate that the risk of being sued are not great!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ongolo]

Re: Kim????

Snowlepard,

You were the first to suggest to take the injectors out and spray test them.

I seconded you and elaborated.

Who is going to be guilty? you or me?

Send them to me, here, with a case like this, any lawyer approached with such a case will send the client go packing.

Sueing is something of the sick american way of life that seems to be catching on. I truly could do without the yankees.

Any of them around? go and sue me.

regards ongolo

<hr width=100% size=1>1000 dream about it, 100 talk about it, 10 start and 1 completes it