Boy gets €70,000 for Hot Chocolate Burn

oLoonatic

I'm getting on a flight later, in need of a few bob........

Cienciano

Pops_20 wrote: »

Came across this just minutes ago, and I can't believe it.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/boy-who-claimed-hot-chocolate-burn-on-aer-lingus-flight-settles-for-70-000-1.3785973

I clicked the link assuming the flight attendant spilled the drink on him, but no... The child spilled the drink on himself after removing the lid!

This reminds of the girl who tagged along the side of the Luas and got some ridiculous settlement.

Can someone more familiar with the law than me explain why are people getting awarded money for something that was their own fault?

Why should Aer Lingus have to pay when they didn't do anything that contributed to the incident?

Add this one to the collection:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/dublin-girl-5-awarded-50-000-after-tripping-over-ikea-trolley-1.2967090

Keyzer

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

Selling drinks that are warm but won't cause serious burns isn't that complicated.

Jesus wept.... SERIOUSLY?

Its not called warm chocolate or tepid chocolate - its called HOT CHOCOLATE - for a good reason. Its hot.

Is the air hostess supposed to help him drink the drink too? Stand there supervising him?

There has to be a line in the sand on these cases - do something stupid or irresponsible and its your own fault, end of.

Spill a hot drink on yourself - tough sh1t...
Scut on the back of a Luas and fall off - tough sh1t...
Break your knee cap on a table - tough sh1t...

This compo culture needs to be wiped out ASAP. How these judges award these cases is utterly mind boggling.

eagle eye

I hate very hot drinks. Hopefully this means they'll be a bit cooler in future.

RWCNT

Little Less Conversation wrote: »

This will be the reason why we will end up with cold tea, coffee, hot chocolate and soup.

Am I wrong or was something like this not the reason they stopped serving hot buttered popcorn at the cinema?

biko

The boy is not to blame at all here. It's the parents who saw easy money.

Dakota Dan

For Forks Sake wrote: »

Aer Lingus settled for the amount. Nowt to do with the judge.

It had everything to do with the judge as they were afraid of how much they would have to pay after his decision.

Captain Flaps

Fractured my skull playing a game in scouts when I was 12 (back in 2000) and spent 2 weeks in hospital. My parents later told me they were horrified by the number of people who advised them to sue, asked them if they were going to sue, or started suggesting how much they might get. There was enough talk of it going around that they actually rang up the leaders to say that I was going to be fine and looking forward to going back to scouts and that was the end of it. This isn't a new phenomenon.

dermo888

Does anyone notice that many of these claims come from certain areas of the country. Mulhuddart. Darndale. Jobstown. Gardiner Street. Sean Mac Dermott Street.

The next bit - the ethnicity, or......

Most of us 'normals' would'nt consider sueing unless in exceptional circumstances

Dr Turk Turkelton

eagle eye wrote: »

I hate very hot drinks. Hopefully this means they'll be a bit cooler in future.

Agreed,I got a latte in a cafe a couple of weeks ago and took a sip and it was like licking the sun.
Took about three days for my tastebuds to come back.

Keyzer

Dr Turk Turkelton wrote: »

Agreed,I got a latte in a cafe a couple of weeks ago and took a sip and it was like licking the sun.
Took about three days for my tastebuds to come back.

Each to their own - when I order a latte I ask for it extra hot.

And if I take the lid off and pour it over my head, that's on me (literally), that's my fault...

Tweeter

Aer Lingus should ban children from all their flights. Problem solved

LirW

The average person enjoys their hot drink most between 50-60C.
70C can already give you proper burns because it is too hot.
I'd like to believe that in a "bumpy" environment like a plane where unpredictable movements for the staff of the plane are the normal working environment, therefore there should be precautions met that drinks are served in a way that even in the case of a slightly turbulent flight people aren't burnt by accident.
If a flight attendant hands a cup to a window seat and spills some because the plane experiences unforseen movements and it's spilled on your lap, head or wherever and gives you second degree burns, I doubt that most people here would not shrug it off. If a drink is served just a few degrees "colder" you still have an enjoyable hot drink that doesn't burn away your taste buds or skin layers.

The pilot considered diverting the plane, that's not a decision a pilot makes lightly.
I'm not saying that the payout is justified but that's what the company settled for and in fairness, I do understand where the parents come from by taking legal actions, burns are a bit unpredictable in their healing process.
Also keep in mind, often people aren't going in demanding 70k but they have a solicitor that recommends a figure and tries to settle that with the company or in court. They could have gotten nothing, 5k or 70. It's not really up to the parents to decide that.

jay0109

LirW wrote: »

If a flight attendant hands a cup to a window seat and spills some because the plane experiences unforseen movements and it's spilled on your lap, head or wherever and gives you second degree burns, I doubt that most people here would not shrug it off. If a drink is served just a few degrees "colder" you still have an enjoyable hot drink that doesn't burn away your taste buds or skin layers.

The flight attendant didn't spill the drink. It was handed to the boy with the lid on perfectly.
The boy opened it, with his parents sitting beside him, and poured milk in. Before attempting to drink from it without having properly secured the lid.

AL should sue his parents now for not properly supervising a minor and recover the 70k.
Whats good for the goose, is good for the gander

whisky_galore

What was in the cup, lava from a fcuking volcano?

Zorya

Have a friend who had a horrible life changing accident last year.

That was horrid but it was dreadful the amount of people who started a conversation on the event with lurid speculation of how much they would get in compensation. Like it would make anything better!

Always amazes me how people adore money.

The Bishop Basher

LirW wrote: »

If a flight attendant hands a cup to a window seat and spills some because the plane experiences unforseen movements and it's spilled on your lap, head or wherever and gives you second degree burns, I doubt that most people here would not shrug it off.

I'd get over it. Accidents happen. But i suppose i'm just lucky to have been raised by parents who think that way and passed it onto us.

LirW wrote: »

I do understand where the parents come from by taking legal actions, burns are a bit unpredictable in their healing process.

Bollix. They saw an easy route to a few quid and greed got the better of them.

I hope it brings them nothing but misfortune.

dermo888

Captain Flaps wrote: »

Fractured my skull playing a game in scouts when I was 12 (back in 2000) and spent 2 weeks in hospital. My parents later told me they were horrified by the number of people who advised them to sue, asked them if they were going to sue, or started suggesting how much they might get. There was enough talk of it going around that they actually rang up the leaders to say that I was going to be fine and looking forward to going back to scouts and that was the end of it. This isn't a new phenomenon.

1998 - I got knocked down on Eden Quay. I was'nt injured, got treated for shock, and went on my merry way home. I phoned the driver - and stated 'its my fault, I'm going to be fine, and I was rushing to get the bus home'. The following day, I gave a statement at Store Street Garda Station.

Garda C was somewhat bemused. He said it was the first time he'd known anyone say what I said. As in state clearly 'my fault, admit it, move on'.

I was asked - 'Why did'nt you claim', and I replied 'Its not how I operate. I'm not injured, I pick myself up and get on with it. There is such a thing as Karma'

Of course, you'll think this is whats now termed 'virtue signalling' or something. Just I dislike opportunism, and chancers, and if I see one, I'll call it out and say it as it is. It does'nt make me friends at times, but frankly I could'nt give a damn.

Infini

They really need to change the law to stop rewarding idiocy and blatant greed.

If its something that's not your fault fair enough, if there's been ample warning also fair, what isn't however is when it's either through their own negligence or the lawsuit is obviously not justice but a cash grab plain and simple.

LirW

jay0109 wrote: »

The flight attendant didn't spill the drink. It was handed to the boy with the lid on perfectly.
The boy opened it, with his parents sitting beside him, and poured milk in. Before attempting to drink from it without having properly secured the lid.

AL should sue his parents now for not properly supervising a minor and recover the 70k.
Whats good for the goose, is good for the gander

I'm aware that the kid spilled it, it was more about the serving temperature in an environment that's pretty unstable to begin with. A couple of degrees lower and it can make all the difference of getting burned or not while the drink is still perfectly hot to enjoy it as a hot drink.

I have an 8y/o myself and of course I'd supervise him and make sure the drink has the right temperature but even so, I wouldn't think that if a spill happens I can run him to the hospital straight after landing because he has second degree burns.

There are compo cases that are ridiculous like the woman banging her knee in a hotel but then there are some where I can kinda understand where people are coming from, this is one of them. It's not a case of a kid was a bit sore, kid had to go to hospital because it obviously was served at a temperature that melts your skin off.

GreeBo

jay0109

Loads of people go to hospital all the time after 'incidents'. It's the first step in the process of putting in a claim or at least having the backstory ready.
I doubt it was at skin melting. We didn't hear about him being scarred for life.

If you ask for a cup of tea off the trolley, it comes at a temp close to boiling. Otherwise the tea would be tepid and not really worth drinking. This was hot chocolate, not luke warm chocolate.

€70k is madness but not surprising in a country that's run by and for the legal profession

GreeBo

LirW wrote: »

It's not a case of a kid was a bit sore, kid had to go to hospital because it obviously was served at a temperature that melts your skin off.

"melts your skin off"?

tbh I think I'd be more forgiving of the woman who was shown to a seat that was unsuitable for sitting at.

NSAman

Alrigghtythen wrote: »

Hot drinks should be limited to over 18s only.

Agreed, but only on presentation of your FETAC LEVEL 52 HOT MATERIALS HANDLING certification and proof that all health and safety equipment has been checklisted and worn.

Rodin

If someone who spills a hot liquid on themselves can get 70k, how much will a patient denied medical care because of the strike get, were they to sue?

Franz Von Peppercorn

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I’m simply pointing out that people are downplaying how serious the burn was. For a pilot to seriously consider diverting indicates some level of severity.

If it was severe, then that’s something Aer Lingus might need to address. AFAIK, the McDonald’s case was important because it established that the temperature at which beverages were served was far higher than it needed to be. That could be the case here.

I personally find it far more mentally stimulating to look into these cases and the different factors involved rather than just go straight to the trite “people just looking for the compo” conclusion. Maybe this child’s parents are just on the make. But maybe there is some liability on the part of Aer Lingus.

Second degree burns can happen in a second for beverages of 70c.

suicide_circus

There's nothing like 70 grand to heal a burn

suicide_circus

Tweeter wrote: »

Aer Lingus should ban children from all their flights. Problem solved

or ban hot drinks. society needs to move at the pace of the slowest members.

gmisk

CrankyHaus wrote: »

Hot drinks are served hot. If you feel you cannot handle the hazard of burning should you spill one on yourself then order a cold drink. The idea that everyone should be served tepid coffees in perpetuity because a tiny minority cannot take responsibility for their own actions is ridiculous.



The English and Welsh High Court considered this matter and came to a reasonable conclusion.


''I am quite satisfied,'' Justice Richard Field wrote, ''that McDonald's was entitled to assume the consumer would know that the drink was hot, and there are numerous commonplace ways of speeding up cooling, such as stirring and blowing.''




https://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/07/weekinreview/word-for-word-hot-water-for-mcdonald-s-british-justice-is-a-different-cup-of-tea.html

There is a documentary on Netflix called hot coffee which is worth a watch.
In fairness the main case in that and it is mentioned in that article liebeck vs mcdonalds, the award was partially so high (it is as still under 600k) because mcdonalds kept continuously serving there coffee far far too hot (700 incidents as mentioned in article) so they were negligent and knew it was going on.
That doesn't seem to be the case here.

In that case liebeck actually was willing to settle for 20k to cover actual and anticipated expenses.

Ficheall

My phone often makes the distinction between "m" and "rn" unclear - took me a minute to figure out what was going on with the "Boy gets 70,000 for Hote Chocolate Bum"...