Sad- but then again!

[discowoman]

just read this:- and my sympathies go out to the family
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20090922/tuk-boy-four-dies-in-somerfield-supermar-45dbed5.html
BUT
while reading it this line jumped out at me

The distraught parents, who have four daughters, are now suing the supermarket giant for negligence
Now forgive me for being a little naive, but if I'd just lost my child, the last thing I'd want to do is see a laywer about suing - that would surely come AFTER the grieving process, not during?
Smacks of 'ambulance chaser' to me.......

[karlo]

"His devastated mother was shopping just yards away when the tragedy happened."

Obviously not supervising the child properly!

[trecfive]

Lack of parental guidance, he was swinging on a rail. [-X Sad at the loss of a youngster, but parents are responsable for their kids not the shop. we see it all the time, no don't mean no nowadays.

[age]

ambulance chaser???  - you might level that at Rex Makin - I could not possibly comment.......... (but the name will be very familiar to many defendants........)

Didn't really cotton on to what the store was supposed to have done, sounds like a dreadful accident that may happen to any of our kids swinging on any rail, branch, climbing frame etc etc - mine don't get wrapped in cotton wool I'm afraid.
 A

[V8MoneyPit]

Mmmm..... first thought.....

Here we go again  :roll: It's never their own fault. Blame must always lie with someone else. Of course, sometimes it does, but all too often the sueing process is assumed to be the way to go. I wonder if there were any outside forces in play to push the family down the legal action route?

[Hightower]

I know it's tragic to lose anybody like this, but why is it that people cannot take responsibility for their own actions?

If that rail had not been there and the kid had run into the car park and got run over it would be the supermarkets fault.
The rail is there and the kid was playing on it, fell off and died.  It's the supermarkets fault. 
When will this stupidity end . . . . . ?

I think I'm going to trip over my laces on the way home, break a few bones and then sue the laces manufacturers for not tieing them up properly.  Oh no, that would be my fault, wouldn't it  :doh:

[littlepow]

Unfortunately the government has enabled the ability for the cutural responsibility to change. (not completely blaming the government but the welfare state changes have only help compound the problem!)
But we now live in a soceity where responsibility no longer rests with ourselves but on the shoulders of strangers and companies.

But soon enough people will be forced to retake responsibility for there actions and reclaim the ability to make decisions and understand the risks they wish to take.
Then maybe all this just sue business will be left only to real cases and less of just money grabbing!!!

[Saffy]

I think I'm going to trip over my laces on the way home, break a few bones and then sue the laces manufacturers for not tieing them up properly.  Oh no, that would be my fault, wouldn't it  :doh:

well.... did the shoe box and instructions clearly state...

A) The laces must be tied before travel.
b) Laces need constant visual checks during travel to ensure they have remained tied.
c) How to tie an effective shoe lace knot as per manufactures requirements.
d) The laces must be periodical checked for wear and tear defects and replaced immediately.
d) That serious injury may occur if the above is observed.

I am guessing not... so you might have a case  

It might be time to leave the planet if we start seeing safety notes inside our shoe boxes.

[Skibum346]

The family said they were "so protective" over their son who was growing into a "proper little boy".

Not so protective that they were aware what he was up to or where he was though....

Skibum

[muddyoffroader]

if it was my kids i wouldnt let em swing away anyway, i wonder if the football will go on ebay,
theres a guy near me who's little en dies after getting 'mrsa' they said he had caught it from the hospital but the little en had a string of other things wrong with him that were all life threatening, and the kiddies parents are suing the hospital, thing is iv been in there house once and would never go in there again if ye get what im saying. i wiped my shoes on the way out! the kid more than likely caught from home.

[Gordo]

I worked for a supermarket chain and spent some time in their shops. One branch had a metal rail beside the end checkout, and children did like to swing on it. Most parents stopped them doing it, but one family never would bother, and if any of us suggested that they stop the child swinging on it, we were interfering.

One day, said child falls off the rail and lands on the floor - suddenly it's our fault for having the rail there in the first place  :doh:

[Mutz]

"Family Solicitor" makes me think they sue for anything they can and have tried before!!!!

Tragic accident, no one to blame.

But parents should take responsibility for their children, and if they think they are in any danger stop them before they get hurt.

[Bishops Finger]

Whos looking after the 4 daughters whilst all this is going on??????

What a bunch of RS...

[Range Rover Blues]

It's because of things like this that the fun police have banned anything that's fun to do.

I feel really bad about their loss, but trying to make out it's someone else's fault for having a railing outside their store is ludicrous.

[Smego]

Sorry no sympathy, they took him to a football club to stop him playing in the street!!!  at his age!  Why would he be in the bloody street, parants probably to p!55ed of stoned to look after the kids!

The safety of the kids is with the parants NOT the store!

Some pikey parants just should not have kids!