Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Luas Surfing

Options
1246789

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    ZX7R
    Registered Users Posts: 3,426 ✭✭✭ZX7R


    Greyfox wrote: »
    People who share this opinion are horrble people who ruin society. If I decide to stick a screwdriver in my eye should we blame the people who make the screwdriver. Disgusting payout!

    Part o life like them or not , health and safety is here to stay and will get a lot more strict.
    For me health and safety was introduced to save lives,but sadly now most implementation is to reduce ingury clams.
    And if they don't have all possible risk assessments ect.
    Pay outs will be big


  • Options
    #93
    na1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 921 ✭✭✭na1


    ZX7R wrote: »
    Most posters here don't realise that she admitted liability for her actions.
    The awarded payment is in relation to health and safety failure's and no risk assessment been carried out before this indecent.
    All Luis trams now haw cameras over door due to this.

    If you put your head on the ground behind the back wheel of the reversing truck - this is not a health and safety failure its rather a mental health and instinct of self-preservation failure.


  • Options
    #94
    na1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 921 ✭✭✭na1


    ZX7R wrote: »
    But the payment was given in relation to health and safety reasons
    How the payment to this private person can improve the health and safety?


  • Options
    #95
    na1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 921 ✭✭✭na1


    Greyfox wrote: »
    People who share this opinion are horrble people who ruin society. If I decide to stick a screwdriver in my eye should we blame the people who make the screwdriver. Disgusting payout!

    Each screwdriver should be equipped with an anti eye sticking guard. Or you can sue them!


  • Options
    #96
    na1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 921 ✭✭✭na1


    ZX7R wrote: »
    Part o life like them or not , health and safety is here to stay and will get a lot more strict.
    For me health and safety was introduced to save lives,but sadly now most implementation is to reduce ingury clams.
    And if they don't have all possible risk assessments ect.
    Pay outs will be big

    Current implementation is: find the richest company and try to sue them for anything.
    When the travellers started a sulky racing on the national road they put the lives of tens of drives at serious risk. Wonder how much of compensation did the drivers get from any of the racers?
    If any state company like Irish Rail would introduce similar level of a danger to the many drivers they will be paying many millions in claims.

    Its not the "save the lives" it is "sue the richest"


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    ZX7R
    Registered Users Posts: 3,426 ✭✭✭ZX7R


    na1 wrote: »
    How the payment to this private person can improve the health and safety?

    Probably make companies implement there proseigures
    Better.
    I don't know ?


  • Options
    #98
    claiomh solais
    Registered Users Posts: 140 ✭✭claiomh solais


    C'mon lads lets just find the closest Bus Éireann bus and jump in front of it! Only way we'll get a house in this market


  • Options
    #99
    McCrack
    Registered Users Posts: 2,968 ✭✭✭McCrack


    I always get a giggle at these threads at all the bitter cnuts who I know would be straight down themselves to a solicitor if they suffered an injury


  • Options
    #100
    hullaballoo
    Administrators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,712 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭hullaballoo


    The company was aware children were hanging onto the outside of trams while in motion for 5 years prior to this incident and did nothing to prevent it.

    It took a child to get brain damage for them to address the issue. When they did address it, all it took was a bit of metal over the gap in the doors.

    It was a stupid thing for the child to do but children do not appreciate risks and do stupid things all the time. It doesn't usually take 5 years and a brain injury to a child for responsible adults to implement a very simple safety precaution when they become aware of a risk of serious injury or death.

    I think that's maybe why they thought they'd end up on the hook.


  • Options
    #101
    na1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 921 ✭✭✭na1


    ZX7R wrote: »
    Probably make companies implement there proseigures
    Better.
    I don't know ?
    So giving $550k to some lowlife scumbag makes the safety better than spending the same amount of money (by court order) on installing the new safety equipment?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Working class heroes
    Registered Users Posts: 3,507 ✭✭✭Working class heroes


    na1 wrote: »
    So giving $550k to some lowlife scumbag makes the safety better than spending the same amount of money (by court order) on installing the new safety equipment?

    €

    Racism is now hiding behind the cloak of Community activism.



  • Options
    #103
    na1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 921 ✭✭✭na1


    hullaballoo wrote: »
    The company was aware children were hanging onto the outside of trams while in motion for 5 years prior to this incident and did nothing to prevent it.
    Imagine you have a car outside the house each night, and every week for 5 years some "children" cut you tyres, and you do nothing to prevent it. At one night they cut off their fingers with a sharp knife while trying to cut your tyre - because there were no lights in the area (you didn't repair the outdoor lights). And they sue you for a health and safety issue.


  • Options
    #104
    ZX7R
    Registered Users Posts: 3,426 ✭✭✭ZX7R


    na1 wrote: »
    So giving $550k to some lowlife scumbag makes the safety better than spending the same amount of money (by court order) on installing the new safety equipment?

    Money was paid because the company messed up big time,the company did not do a proper risk assessment and did not implement proper health and safety protocol,in full knowledge that there was privous instance of the action taken place.
    If they did there job properly, they would not have to pay out anything.
    The girl was given a settlement due to negligence.
    Not because she was looking for compo


  • Options
    #105
    bucketybuck
    Registered Users Posts: 18,132 ✭✭✭✭bucketybuck


    hullaballoo wrote: »
    The company was aware children were hanging onto the outside of trams while in motion for 5 years prior to this incident and did nothing to prevent it.

    It took a child to get brain damage for them to address the issue. When they did address it, all it took was a bit of metal over the gap in the doors.

    It was a stupid thing for the child to do but children do not appreciate risks and do stupid things all the time. It doesn't usually take 5 years and a brain injury to a child for responsible adults to implement a very simple safety precaution when they become aware of a risk of serious injury or death.

    I think that's maybe why they thought they'd end up on the hook.
    Wasn't the brain injury before the incident?

    After all, nobody with a functioning brain thinks its a good idea to hang from a moving train.


  • Options
    #106
    Galwayguy35
    Registered Users Posts: 16,293 ✭✭✭✭Galwayguy35


    hullaballoo wrote: »
    The company was aware children were hanging onto the outside of trams while in motion for 5 years prior to this incident and did nothing to prevent it.

    It took a child to get brain damage for them to address the issue. When they did address it, all it took was a bit of metal over the gap in the doors.

    It was a stupid thing for the child to do but children do not appreciate risks and do stupid things all the time. It doesn't usually take 5 years and a brain injury to a child for responsible adults to implement a very simple safety precaution when they become aware of a risk of serious injury or death.

    I think that's maybe why they thought they'd end up on the hook.

    Ah get away out of it, at 13 she should have known it was a stupid thing to do and what happened is her own fault.


    Her sister was giving it large on the comments section on FB earlier, she was abusing everyone there and couldn't string a sentence together to save her life.

    Skangers is all they are.


  • Options
    #107
    na1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 921 ✭✭✭na1


    ZX7R wrote: »
    The girl was given a settlement due to negligence.
    Not because she was looking for compo
    ZX7R wrote: »
    Probably make companies implement there proseigures

    You're changing your mind:

    So the money were given due to negligence or to implement new H&S measures?


  • Options
    #108
    ZX7R
    Registered Users Posts: 3,426 ✭✭✭ZX7R


    na1 wrote: »
    Imagine you have a car outside the house each night, and every week for 5 years some "children" cut you tyres, and you do nothing to prevent it. At one night they cut off their fingers with a sharp knife while trying to cut your tyre - because there were no lights in the area (you didn't repair the outdoor lights). And they sue you for a health and safety issue.

    Car is on private property , your argument doesn't relate in any way to business health and safety of the original post


  • Options
    #109
    prinzeugen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,891 ✭✭✭prinzeugen


    hullaballoo wrote: »
    The company was aware children were hanging onto the outside of trams while in motion for 5 years prior to this incident and did nothing to prevent it.

    It took a child to get brain damage for them to address the issue. When they did address it, all it took was a bit of metal over the gap in the doors.

    It was a stupid thing for the child to do but children do not appreciate risks and do stupid things all the time. It doesn't usually take 5 years and a brain injury to a child for responsible adults to implement a very simple safety precaution when they become aware of a risk of serious injury or death.

    I think that's maybe why they thought they'd end up on the hook.

    Its not as simple as adding a bit metal. There have been similar issues in the UK.

    The Luas can not go adding bits to the trams here and there. While they may own them, Alstolm are responsible for modifications etc as the trams are still under warranty.

    The bit metal would need to be designed, tested and get certification before it could be fitted. It may have required a new door design. That is Alstolms responsibility not the NTA/Luas.

    But kids and adults need to start taking responsibility for their actions. Its always somebody elses fault when something happens.


  • Options
    #110
    ZX7R
    Registered Users Posts: 3,426 ✭✭✭ZX7R


    na1 wrote: »
    You're changing your mind:

    So the money were given due to negligence or to implement new H&S measures?

    If you read my original post properly,
    I said she got the payment due to health and safety reasons.

    Health and safety procedures where not carried out thats negligence.

    So payment that was made did in a way interduce new h/a measures, the one's that should have been in place , where interduced


  • Options
    #111
    na1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 921 ✭✭✭na1


    ZX7R wrote: »
    Car is on private property , your argument doesn't relate in any way to business health and safety of the original post

    You said the target is to "save the lives".

    So people can be killed by neglect on a private property for no cost, if the property owner is a bankrupt?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    ZX7R
    Registered Users Posts: 3,426 ✭✭✭ZX7R


    na1 wrote: »
    You said the target is to "save the lives".

    So people can be killed by neglect on a private property for no cost, if the property owner is a bankrupt?

    No I said in my view health and safety is to save lives.

    A person could die on private property due to negligence and owner be held accountable, but that's not a health and safety matter, that would be a civil matter


  • Options
    #113
    na1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 921 ✭✭✭na1


    ZX7R wrote: »
    If you read my original post properly,
    I said she got the payment due to health and safety reasons.

    Health and safety procedures where not carried out thats negligence.

    So payment that was made did in a way interduce new h/a measures, the one's that should have been in place , where interduced

    Again how exactly payments to that person can force the new measures to be introduced?
    The could pay the same amount to the state or any other person - this will make no difference.
    What exactly this means:"she got the payment due to health and safety reasons."


  • Options
    #114
    Dr. Bre
    Registered Users Posts: 7,542 ✭✭✭Dr. Bre


    ZX7R wrote: »
    No I said in my view health and safety is to save lives.

    A person could die on private property due to negligence and owner be held accountable, but that's not a health and safety matter, that would be a civil matter

    That would be an ecumenical matter


  • Options
    #115
    na1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 921 ✭✭✭na1


    ZX7R wrote: »
    No I said in my view health and safety is to save lives.

    A person could die on private property due to negligence and owner be held accountable, but that's not a health and safety matter, that would be a civil matter
    So does the private person violates the health and safety regulations or not?
    Or private person's property is excluded from the health and safety?


  • Options
    #116
    ZX7R
    Registered Users Posts: 3,426 ✭✭✭ZX7R


    na1 wrote: »
    So does the private person violates the health and safety regulations or not?
    Or private person's property is excluded from the health and safety?

    Private person property is excluded from health and safety
    Normally but if you have a person /company enter your house property to do work then technically you are classified as an employer and then you are.
    But that is a grey area of cross overs and a different kettle of fish


  • Options
    #117
    Topdolla
    Registered Users Posts: 129 ✭✭Topdolla


    Kilometres na gcopaleen wrote: »
    Did you ever see anyone do it or did you ever do it yourself??

    You must of seen me surfing while it was stopping at the museum earlier :cool:


  • Options
    #118
    buried
    Registered Users Posts: 9,681 ✭✭✭buried


    lol This country is F**ked man. Skangers and lowlives keeping the law racket in plenty of the greasy cash money, while everybody else, the majority of the country, the ones who abide by the f**king rules, they're treated like the suspicious ones out to do no good.

    "You have disgraced yourselves again" - W. B. Yeats



  • Options
    #119
    archer22
    Registered Users Posts: 2,116 ✭✭✭archer22


    Right I'm off to the airport to surf on the wings of the aircraft taking off.

    A fall off of one of them must be worth at least 10 million :cool:


  • Options
    #120
    Cienciano
    Registered Users Posts: 14,228 ✭✭✭✭Cienciano


    Of course it was the red line. Some serious scum on the red line.

    Source: I live on the red line


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    Hoboo
    Registered Users Posts: 3,522 ✭✭✭Hoboo


    Cienciano wrote: »
    Of course it was the red line. Some serious scum on the red line.

    Source: I live on the red line

    Pondlife


Advertisement