Aer Lingus sued after child 'disfigured and scarred' by hot tea

duffman3833

Seen this on independent.ie website today and i didn't think you could sue because tea is too hot. Is it just me or does this seem daft. How else do you make tea, with cold water? She had the cup in cup holder but that doesn't guarantee it will stay still. a plane does move. You can sue for anything these days by sounds of it.



"It is claimed that the 10-year-old girl suffered disfigurement and permanent scarring following the incident on a flight from Dublin to Orlando, Florida last month.

The national flag carrier is being sued by the parents of the girl, who cannot be named. The girl was described in court documents as "a successful amateur competitive surfer".

Her parents are seeking damages in excess of $75,000 (€65,700) and have claimed that the girl experienced pain and suffering, as well as mental anguish and embarrassment as a result of the incident.
She was asked by a flight attendant if she would like anything to drink and asked for hot tea.

The court filing said the flight attendant placed the tea in a cup holder on the girl's tray.

However, a few minutes later the cup of tea "came out of the cup holder and came off the tray" pouring out on the girl.

This left her with "severe burns to her upper thighs and lower torso that required medical attention".

The complaint said that when the aircraft landed there was no available medical treatment for her.

The parents of the girl have alleged that Aer Lingus failed to serve the tea "at a safe temperature" and failed to warn passengers of the "known dangers and the excessive and unreasonable temperature of the hot tea".

They claim that the airline failed "to properly train flight attendants of the dangers of serving excessively hot tea to its passengers".

The parents also said they would have to spend "great sums of money" on medical care and treatment for their daughter in the future."




*Not sure if this is in Correct topic/category*

seamus

Well there's the famous case of the McDonald's woman who successfully sued after she was burned by coffee served at something insane like 90 degrees.

I would tend to agree that the tea/coffee you get on a flight seems exceptionally hot given the fact that it could be spilled by turbulence at any time. But personal responsibility has to come into play.

I guess you could reasonably argue that a 10 year old wouldn't have the foresight to consider that the tea might spill.

The relatively low sum of $75,000 rather than multiple millions suggests to me that it might be pretty legitimate, and the parents are mainly just looking to recoup medical costs.

duffman3833

just seems common sense is becoming less and less these days

FreudianSlippers

The parents of the girl have alleged that Aer Lingus failed to serve the tea "at a safe temperature" and failed to warn passengers of the "known dangers and the excessive and unreasonable temperature of the hot tea".

Seems a bit of an own goal there?

the world wonders

duffman3833 wrote: »

just seems common sense is becoming less and less these days

yep common sense like not handing out easily-spilled containers of scalding hot liquid inside an unstable moving vehicle.

punisher5112

They will probably win too.

How stupid can people be.

Saying they should have been warned it was hot when they asked for hot tea seems daft.

Should walls come with a notice please do not walk or run into said wall.

I'm surprised more people don't die from stupid.
It can be they are born stupid so maybe no hope for those.

Mr. Incognito

They are probably banking on the fact a week in the High Court would run into hundreds of Thousands and its easier to pay €50K and avoid the publicity.

They'll probably get a settlement

zeffabelli

Once upon a time, if I were walking along and fell into a manhole, I was the stupid one for not looking where I was going.

Today the person who leaves it uncovered is the stupid one and I can sue them.

Subcomandante Marcos

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Seems a bit of an own goal there?

The bit you bolded is the "known dangers" of serving drinks at stupidly high temperatures, not of drinking tea.

FreudianSlippers

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

The bit you bolded is the "known dangers" of serving drinks at stupidly high temperatures, not of drinking tea.

The sentence is clear:

"known dangers and the excessive and unreasonable temperature of the hot tea"

not:

"known dangers of the excessive and unreasonable temperature of the hot tea"

thegreatgonzo

If it spilled on her a few minutes after she'd received it and possibly put milk in it could it have really been that hot?

dutopia

There is a risk of serving/drinking hot beverages on an aircraft but a little thing called taking responsibility for yourself comes in to play. If you decide to order said beverage you have decided to take the personal risk.

My opinion would be if the cabin crew safely give you a hot beverage (pass it to you safely, lid fully sealed, etc) then it's no longer their responsibility. In this case the parents probably shouldn't have let the young girl have the hot tea since she might not have been as aware of the dangers as her parents would be. It sounds like an unfortunate accident and not anything that Aer Lingus did wrong.

TheChizler

How do you prove the temperature was excessive? Recommended serving temperature is 85 degrees Celsius, drinking 60. 85 can cause scalds easily but I don't think you could call the recommended temperature excessive.

K.Flyer

Hmm.. should the cabin crew not have asked the parent first if was ok to serve the minor a (usually) very hot cup of tea. And if the parent was asked, and the parent said yes, shouldn't the onus of responsibility have then passed to the parent to supervise the minor to ensure the safety of the child with the tea.
However if the staff just handed tea to the child without first asking the parent or gaurdian, then I would think that they are somewhat to blame.

duffman3833

K.Flyer wrote: »

Hmm.. should the cabin crew not have asked the parent first if was ok to serve the minor a (usually) very hot cup of tea. And if the parent was asked, and the parent said yes, shouldn't the onus of responsibility have then passed to the parent to supervise the minor to ensure the safety of the child with the tea.
However if the staff just handed tea to the child without first asking the parent or gaurdian, then I would think that they are somewhat to blame.

It doesn't specify if the parent asked for the tea or the child, but even if it was the child, the parent should be sitting next to them and see that the child was getting tea and could have stopped it at that point

nuac

Tea is made with boiling water

Many parents would not allow their tenyear old have tea, especially on a 'plane.

cod action imho

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

dutopia

K.Flyer wrote: »

Hmm.. should the cabin crew not have asked the parent first if was ok to serve the minor a (usually) very hot cup of tea. And if the parent was asked, and the parent said yes, shouldn't the onus of responsibility have then passed to the parent to supervise the minor to ensure the safety of the child with the tea.
However if the staff just handed tea to the child without first asking the parent or guardian, then I would think that they are somewhat to blame.

This is where there is a bit of a grey area.

IMO, if the parents were sitting around where the child was sitting and they chose to either ignore what she ordered, or didn't stop her ordering the hot drink, I would imagine the blame lies with the parents. However, if the child was for some reason not sitting with her parents and ordered the drink, it seems sensible the cabin crew would check she was allowed order it. Saying that though, it seems unreasonable to expect the cabin crew to have to make decisions on who should/shouldn't be able to order drinks etc (except for alcohol, obviously) as they are under pressure to get multiple services through the cabin and complete their other work.

Paulw

thegreatgonzo wrote: »

If it spilled on her a few minutes after she'd received it and possibly put milk in it could it have really been that hot?

Milk on flights is UHT milk, so is not cold, so would not help cool it. Also, the cups on flights are fairly well insulated, so it would retain the heat fairly well.

Tea is made with boiling water. The child's parents should have paid more attention.

dutopia

Paulw wrote: »

Milk on flights is UHT milk, so is not cold, so would not help cool it. Also, the cups on flights are fairly well insulated, so it would retain the heat fairly well.

Tea is made with boiling water. The child's parents should have paid more attention.

Technically, the UHT milk would reduce the temperature slightly, as it's room temperature going into a much higher temperature liquid. Some airlines cool the UHT milk as well, although not sure if Aer Lingus do. Either way, it probably wouldn't be enough to reduce the temperature to prevent a scald.

seamus

TheChizler wrote: »

How do you prove the temperature was excessive? Recommended serving temperature is 85 degrees Celsius, drinking 60. 85 can cause scalds easily but I don't think you could call the recommended temperature excessive.

Recommended by whom? I don't believe there is a legal recommended temperature.

Common sense would dictate that if you are going to serve hot liquids in an unstable environment that you ensure that heat is not enough to cause serious burns when spilled

The McDonald's hot coffee case is often misrepresented as the ultimate example of litigation gone mad, but reading the actual details shows that the woman's case was very legitimate.

The argument in that case was that McDonald's procedures at the time were to serve takeaway coffees at 82–88°C. This was based on the idea that the coffee would be at the optimum temperature by the time the customer drank it ten minutes later.
But the defence showed that coffee at 88°C will cause serious burns in a couple of seconds. Whereas coffee 10 or 15 degrees lower won't burn you before you can manage to get to the wet clothes.

In this case, it would seem that if they do indeed serve tea on an aircraft at 85°C as you say, then that's pretty negligent on their part. There's no need for the tea to be that hot since passengers are presumably intending to consume it straight away. So 60-70°C would seem more appropriate.

HIB

The only bit of this that sounds like it deserves any kind of hearing is the fact that medical attention seemed to be unavailable. They're not really clear on whether first aid was administered, but it definitely should have been, and that would be the airlines responsibility.
Apart from that... Tea is hot. Duh!!!
Surely the airline can argue that it is reasonable to assume that freshly prepared tea will be hot. Surely it's not negligent to provide a customer with a product tget requested, and which they fully understand the dangers of. Otherwise, surely every accidental gun death would result in a law suit??? Or do they??!

duffman3833

could also be the child skin had a different reaction to the hot water than anyone else as it says "The parents also said they would have to spend "great sums of money" on medical care and treatment for their daughter in the future" so a burn wouldn't need great sums of money to treat, would it???

otwb1

From the article the suit was filed two days after the incident? I'm wondering about the concept of permanent disfigurement being assessed after two days..

dutopia

otwb1 wrote: »

From the article the suit was filed two days after the incident? I'm wondering about the concept of permanent disfigurement being assessed after two days..

The girl may have been assessed by a dermatologist/medical professional who could analysis the depth of the burns and determined the likelihood of permanent scarring (or 'disfigurement' as it was put).

Boskowski

All it takes is a judge with half a brain to throw the case out and process costs to the claimant. That would end that kind of nonsense.

The neck of it. Permanent disfigurement. From a cup of tea. Parents should be tarred and feathered. Times being what they are I predict they're going to get money though.

syklops

Boskowski wrote: »

All it takes is a judge with half a brain to throw the case out and process costs to the claimant. That would end that kind of nonsense.

The neck of it. Permanent disfigurement. From a cup of tea. Parents should be tarred and feathered. Times being what they are I predict they're going to get money though.

In that case expect a big payout.

BeatBoxing Blowfish

Boskowski wrote: »

All it takes is a judge with half a brain to throw the case out and process costs to the claimant . That would end that kind of nonsense.

The neck of it. Permanent disfigurement. From a cup of tea. Parents should be tarred and feathered. Times being what they are I predict they're going to get money though.

That would be a great idea, set a precedent that those filing spurious legal suits will be charged accordingly.
Perhaps might stop this BS of slight personal injury being akin to winning a small lotto.

Sam Kade

seamus wrote: »

Well there's the famous case of the McDonald's woman who successfully sued after she was burned by coffee served at something insane like 90 degrees.

I would tend to agree that the tea/coffee you get on a flight seems exceptionally hot given the fact that it could be spilled by turbulence at any time. But personal responsibility has to come into play.

I guess you could reasonably argue that a 10 year old wouldn't have the foresight to consider that the tea might spill.

The relatively low sum of $75,000 rather than multiple millions suggests to me that it might be pretty legitimate, and the parents are mainly just looking to recoup medical costs.

My son got scalded with a full pot of freshly made tea when he was four years old apart from covering the wound and putting cream on it for about a week there were no other issues after that. For a 10 year old and only a cup of tea iId say they are only looking for easy money.

dutopia

Sam Kade wrote: »

My son got scalded with a full pot of freshly made tea when he was four years old apart from covering the wound and putting cream on it for about a week there were no other issues after that. For a 10 year old and only a cup of tea iId say they are only looking for easy money.

Any marks left on skin at all?

Victor

I wonder what temperature water would boil for the cabin pressure that was in the aircraft.

If I'm correct, cabin pressure is kept at the equivalent of about 8,000 feet altitude, where water will boil at about 92 degrees C. So after a few minutes, it's going to be proportionately less than that.

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/boiling-points-water-altitude-d_1344.html