Your thoughts on an incident
Comments
-
Not off topic. In case you missed it I was using it to show similarities under common law and yes the storage owner would have been negligent by allowing your caravan to be stolen no matter what their T&Cs say.
Your insurance company would recover the costs from their insurance company. The owner by law has a duty of care as you paid for a service.
Can you or any one define reasonable care? In this case the OP needs to demonstrate whether the owner of the site took reasonable care to ensure that the barrier would not cause any damage should it come down while there was a vehicle in the space.
If the OP tries any other tactic that they have suggested they will lose big time as they will be show to be at fault!
0 -
Can you or any one define reasonable care?
Yes the court can and will in individual cases.
In this case the OP needs to demonstrate whether the owner of the site took reasonable care to ensure that the barrier would not cause any damage should it come down while there was a vehicle in the space.
A bit unusual as there was no vehicle in the space occupied by the barrier when it completed its downward movement. The caravan hit the already closed barrier.
0 -
Easy T, as stated i did not see the barrier, Without making excuses, but thoughts as to why i can only presume the following.
If you look at the CCTV you will see the angle i am at relevant to the barrier, within that angle i have my A pillar, as i look around inside the car i can only presume it was missed for this reason, As i set off, i start moving before the barrier starts its descent. As i was unaware that they were in operation I did check around, the road ahead was clear and i made a decision.
Now as you can see it was somewhat of a sunny day as can be seen by the shadows on the ground, I had my visor down and I am tall so sit higher up in the vehicle, my view is looking straight ahead, say I could see the barrier base and not the arm, there would be no indication that it was in movement unless i crouched down and looked upto the sky.
As i believe it is clear I am glancing ahead, and looking into my mirrors. I wasnt expecting the barrier to come down and it could be put down to an unfortunate accident, but could have been prevented from my view with the said crucial devices.
Now thinking about the scenario further should he have not stopped me at the Stop sign next to his gatehouse?
These are just my thoughts as to why i did not see it and not excuses.
EasyT sorry if I said legal team i didn't mean myself, although i have a family solicitor who has drafted all my paperwork up for me, they work in health and safety and do work for the named company hence why they cannot be with me at court. Wthout there paperwork skills I think the judge would recommend me to go back to school and learn grammer and so on.
0 -
The barrier looks either almost or fully down to me but as neither of us saw it directly at the time I suppose that we are judging from the same video. From the same video it seems to me that the barrier started its decent at the moment you started moving. As you did not see the barriers decent at that time I assume that we are again both judging from the same video.
Did the barrier strike the front of the caravan as it seems to me that the caravan was still moving across and that impact was on the side close to the front corner.
0 -
Just a bit of further advice for you Ian, As I stated earlier I have a professional qualification for Health and Safety and you need to be very careful with what you say in court and be fully aware of the current requirements, In the legislation there are various terms used like "So far as is reasonably practicable" Or as I said earlier if the cost of something is excessive compared to the risk and the likelihood of it happening then it may be omitted or other control measures applied (Man in Hi Vis ?). Have you seen a copy of the companies own risk assessment ?
H&S is a legal minefield and you need to be 100% sure of the law when questioning it.
HSE inspectors have to train for 7 years before they are allowed to act on their own when bringing a prosecution.
0 -
7 years training?😱, they need to be more selective in the folk they employ☹️
0 -
Thankyou Milothedog,
I have mentioned the installation companies risk assessment in my defence to counterclaim and the devices they have stated. The company advised that as part of their risk assessment and with the site taking large and wide loads through they recommended for these such devices to be installed.
A statement has been put forward to the courts, note this is hear say, the security manager asked the installation company why the site did not receive the risk assessment, the installation company according to his witness statement replied that there was never one done and it was done as part of the installation.
0 -
if the cost of something is excessive compared to the risk and the likelihood of it happening then it may be omitted or other control measures applied (Man in Hi Vis ?).
Milothedog, The cost of such devices were £360. Damage to my caravan alone was £860.
EasyT the barrier hit the front corner pillar 2 inches into the front panel but only damages the pillar cover along with a dent to the side of the caravan
0 -
What you have to remember R2b is they have to have the widest knowledge and understanding possible of different workplaces and industries as well as the legislation in place.
A coal mine (not that we have any now) is a very different working environment to, lets say a supermarkets warehouse.
Did you know a HSE inspector has more powers than the police when it comes to things like gaining entry or shutting something down if they deem it a high risk.
1 -
Milothedog, The cost of such devices were £360. Damage to my caravan alone was £860.
So what if they say tomorrow, that's why we had a man on duty but he didn't expect the driver to cross the center line?
Or, we have the barriers forming a complete barricade to stop pedestrians and cyclist squeezing through which makes them use the designated systems and routes provided.
Your not looking at the bigger picture my friend
If they have a good Manager / H&S person give evidence and they know their stuff he/she will tie you up in knots I'm afraid.2 -
Maybe you are correct about access, but the white lines painted on the ground are still graffiti, with no obligation to abide by them. Once you have paid to enter the establishment surely that changes your status? If you have paid to stay in an hotel and get drunk in your room, can the police arrest you as the public have access to that room? Just asking?
0 -
Yes that is correct, although from the offset i take a direction/heading, he notes this change by looking at my position and knows something is wrong by him doing that action to me.
He has said that he didnt expect me to vere over, but it is plain as day he see's, likewise could be said that i never expected the barrier to come down as it never moved.
I take on board what you have said
0 -
No wind up, MTD has just educated me, for that I am grateful. Every day is a schoolday👍🏻😊
2 -
A little more for you R2b
If prosecuted under H&S legislation, unlike a criminal or other offence, the burden of proof is on you, not the prosecution. i.e. you have to prove you not guilty in effect.
Section 40 of the HASWA 1974 states…..
In any proceedings for an offence under any of the relevant statutory provisions consisting of a failure to comply with a duty or requirement to do something so far as is practicable or so far as is reasonably practicable, or to use the best practicable means to do something, it shall be for the accused to prove (as the case may be) that it was not practicable or not reasonably practicable to do more than was in fact done to satisfy the duty or requirement, or that there was no better practicable means than was in fact used to satisfy the duty or requirement.
0 -
But your not a HSE inspector bringing a criminal case against them .
Be very careful going down this route you will just dig yourself a bigger hole to have to climb out of,
From what you have said your are just a Lay person defending your self for your loss. the Company are business professionals, The person hearing the case will have legal training and understanding or access to someone who is, I think they are called a stipendiary in such courts IIRC.
0 -
DD - I would argue, based on my previous knowledge of road traffic law that your final sentence is incorrect. The road is a road within the meaning of the RTA up until the barrier. Up to that point, the public do have legitimate access. However, after that point, the public are not permitted to pass - only certain sections of them - i.e. those who have paid for a pitch or have legitimate business on the site and are allowed to pass on permission of the site owner / operator. The owner / operator has every right to deny access to anyone they do not wish to enter. Therefore the public do not have 'access'.
That said, these arguments have resulted in many decided cases on this issue over the years and on which lawyers have made a lot of money!
0 -
Regarding the status of a private road I found this article interesting. See HERE. Unless I misunderstood it, also seems that on a private road the police would have no jurisdiction unless it is a serious offence like drink driving and even that is debatable if the road is gated.
The OP may be able to use this to their advantage if the camp site solicitors decide to pursue this line of action as there is no requirement to use extender mirrors on private land or to stop at the stop sign or to stay within the white lines.
Although the OP would be in the wrong if it was a true public road or highway, on this occasion as it is private land the owner has not complied with due diligence and taken reasonable care.
0 -
You only really seem to start significantly veering over and cutting the curve in the last 5 metres before the barrier but appear to me to be continuing to do so as you go through. I suspect by the time the guy in the yellow jacket realised he felt it too late.
The barrier started to descend as you drove forward.
0 -
So if it is thrown at me about my mirrors and I gave the reasonable answer to what i done, with in mind that the mirror on or not made no difference to my view of what i was able to view, is this something I should ask to the defendants solicitor rather than presuming it is a private road?
I obviously dont want to come across like I have on here as it is a judge I will in front of.
0 -
From the immediately above posts it can be inferred that The Caravan Club has no legal right to enforce any of the traffic regulation measures on their sites, such as one-way and speed. Their sole sanction is through the individual's membership.
0 -
One good thing Ian, over 300 post on one topic, nobody being nasty to anyone generally, and the thread is still running and open.
Got to be a record, well done.
Win or loose, if ever I have the good fortune to meet on a site somewhere I'd love to buy you a beer for sticking to your guns and the polite way in which you have replied to so many post despite them not saying what you want to hear.
Again the very, very, very best of British for tomorrow
I'm an Ian BTW.
0
