what would you do?
#31
For peace of mind, when you get it repaired, get it thoroughly checked over by an expert before using it again. Hope your mate's lad recovers soon and isn't put off by the nasty experience.
#34
GC8 is correct, a civil case is judged on the balance of probabilities, and from what you have said you would have a good case, it just depends whether or not you want to take it further.
Some of the other advice you have received, from the resident Scoobynet 'experts', is absolute twaddle
Some of the other advice you have received, from the resident Scoobynet 'experts', is absolute twaddle
#35
Moderator
iTrader: (1)
Who made the cage? Was it a manufacturers or home made affair?
A weak weld is easy to do...they can look perfect, but if the metal addded has not penetrated and become part of the structure, the weld metal is essentially lying on top of the joint, rather than actually being part of it...the result is it just snaps like a dead branch of wood.
The dead engine is another matter.....is it 2 stroke? I'd guess it is, in which case strokers are like that, run them lean or mix teh oil wrong, or an oil pump fault (with oil injection strokers) and they don't last long at all.
If it's a 4 stroke, then they don't usually seize for no reason (except lack of oil) - so suspect blatent neglect or abuse...especially if it's a Honda or Briggs and stratton
A weak weld is easy to do...they can look perfect, but if the metal addded has not penetrated and become part of the structure, the weld metal is essentially lying on top of the joint, rather than actually being part of it...the result is it just snaps like a dead branch of wood.
The dead engine is another matter.....is it 2 stroke? I'd guess it is, in which case strokers are like that, run them lean or mix teh oil wrong, or an oil pump fault (with oil injection strokers) and they don't last long at all.
If it's a 4 stroke, then they don't usually seize for no reason (except lack of oil) - so suspect blatent neglect or abuse...especially if it's a Honda or Briggs and stratton
#37
Scooby Regular
Originally Posted by Daryl
GC8 is correct, a civil case is judged on the balance of probabilities, and from what you have said you would have a good case, it just depends whether or not you want to take it further.
Some of the other advice you have received, from the resident Scoobynet 'experts', is absolute twaddle
Some of the other advice you have received, from the resident Scoobynet 'experts', is absolute twaddle
I can't see ANY judge whatsoever finding for the plaintif!! The defendant will be a 16 year old boy ..... who had some 'opinions' that he thought the kart was safe.
Also, to offer to pay ANYTHING is an admission of guilt ...... they may well feel awful about what has happened - but - legal advice would be to not pay ANYTHING ...... which is what has come back.
Court is always an option, but I don't feel that you would stand a chance .... who knows what stresses the kart was put through in 2 weeks???
Pete
#38
Originally Posted by pslewis
HA HA HA HA Yeah, right!!
I can't see ANY judge whatsoever finding for the plaintif!!
I can't see ANY judge whatsoever finding for the plaintif!!
#39
Scooby Regular
Originally Posted by Daryl
And what experience of civil court hearings do you have then Pete? Absolutely none would be my guess
Guess again, halfwit!!
Pete
#41
Originally Posted by pslewis
Really??
Anyway, if you're such an expert, you should really know how to spell plaintiff, even though the proper term these days is 'claimant'
#42
Originally Posted by Brendan Hughes
Would a statement made by a 16 yr old be part of a binding contract?
I'm not suggesting that shaggy should take out a case, although the injured child's parents might consider it.
#43
Scooby Regular
They would have to PROVE that the item was dangerous!!
The defence would counter with the fact that in 2 weeks it could have been damaged/abused thus making it dangerous!!
Pete
The defence would counter with the fact that in 2 weeks it could have been damaged/abused thus making it dangerous!!
Pete
#44
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sheffield; Rome of the North
Posts: 17,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
James; I can see that this thread has degenerated in typical ScoobyNet fashion.....
The advice that I gave you initially is totally correct, however: the vendors age is an issue. Had he been eighteen, then you would have ample grounds to take him to court, with him being younger, Im not sure that its such a good idea (if its possible at all). It makes no difference at all whether the vendor was an expert as has been suggested. He is bound by his statement, Pete plainly has no idea what he is talking about btw; there wont be a defence counsel in the small claims track of the County Court.....
One further point; only you can litigate with the vendor. Had the child been injured then his parents would have been able to act against you, but not the vendor.
Simon
The advice that I gave you initially is totally correct, however: the vendors age is an issue. Had he been eighteen, then you would have ample grounds to take him to court, with him being younger, Im not sure that its such a good idea (if its possible at all). It makes no difference at all whether the vendor was an expert as has been suggested. He is bound by his statement, Pete plainly has no idea what he is talking about btw; there wont be a defence counsel in the small claims track of the County Court.....
One further point; only you can litigate with the vendor. Had the child been injured then his parents would have been able to act against you, but not the vendor.
Simon