London & South East Cold Spell Discussion

[snow raven]

hey, you keep on posting in here with post's like that

came into work tonight from a foggy/frosty SE London to a mild and damp Central London. i hope the winter doesn't end here as i would love to see one more blast as we had in feb '09

As much as I welcome this thaw and break with the cold, I do, deep down echo those sentiments Mick. I wouldnt mind some more of what we have had for the past few weeks - just with a break!!!

And I would defo welcome another Feb 09. No chance of getting into work! I think I pinned my hopes on that sent up this time around, only to be disapointed that there wasnt enough snow to stop me getting into work, but enough to cause me major problems getting into and home from work (but hey, thats Southeastern trains for you )

[MAF]

quiet in here tonight lets hope next week sees a return to frenzied posting

Edited January 15, 2010 by MAF

[Updraft]

I must say, Even if we don't get another cold spell this winter (I think we will see more) this winter has already been the best I've seen (only being 17) the foot of snow that fell last week was the most I've seen.

Here's to more cold spells and snow!

Edited January 15, 2010 by Updraft

[Jan_Bromley]

Cold, grey and damp morning. Postie broke his leg on the path outside my house yesterday. Took him inside and called ambulance. Man from post office called round this morning to thank me. bloody slush!!!

Jan

[Brocken Spectre]

Cold, grey and damp morning. Postie broke his leg on the path outside my house yesterday. Took him inside and called ambulance. Man from post office called round this morning to thank me. bloody slush!!!

Jan

Was it your path, on your property???? If so I hope you have adequate house insurance. Sorry to sound like a doom monger but I heard the very same scenario on the radio the other day, and if it's yours insurance is the word here!

[Snow Queen one]

If you cleared the path then he slipped and it was on a public highway you are responsable. Don't know if you are on your own property. I think it depends on whether you created the risk by clearing your path.

[Jimmyh]

This is so very sad of our litigation society now. Do you think in 63 or 87 in fact people sued each other for cleaning your path it is crazy and really gets on my wick

[Jan_Bromley]

No I didn't clear the path for that very reason. I have Insurance, but I don't think he'll sue. I am a nurse, and he was just grateful that I looked after him. I also have my own Insurance as a nurse, so should be ok

Jan

[Timmytour]

If you cleared the path then he slipped and it was on a public highway you are responsable. Don't know if you are on your own property. I think it depends on whether you created the risk by clearing your path.

I think whoever sues you would have to show negligence and a failure to act upon a "duty to care". I think that would create a problem for them as in clearing the path you have demonstrated a duty of care rather than the other way around.

I've a feeling something of an Urban Legend is springing up around this issue, and it's promulgated mostly by the lazy attitude of councils who use it as a convenient get-out.

[osmposm]

Was it your path, on your property???? If so I hope you have adequate house insurance. Sorry to sound like a doom monger but I heard the very same scenario on the radio the other day, and if it's yours insurance is the word here!

Even if it was on jan's property, I shouldn't worry too much - I imagine the Post Office has its own insurance, unlike many casual visitors. Unlike last February when my deliveries were suspended for three days for 'elfnsafety (in inner London!), my posties were out straight away this year - they had sensibly been issued with good high-grip boots (though I'd have thought studded over-shoes would be even better). I was grateful, and thanked them warmly, and I feel very sorry for this postie who came a cropper.

But the sensible - and obvious - way to prevent it happening on people's own patch is to clear, and keep clearing the snow/ice/slush from their path. It's not so hard, and quite apart from any legal questions seems the kind and responsible thing to do. Temps in the south have not been severe, and after clearing at night or first thing in the morning, a scattering of salt (and gritty sand or cat litter) should keep it safe for a while.

The question of the pavement outside your house is more complex - I've heard lawyers argue that if you effectively accept responsibility for its safety by voluntarily clearing it, you could be asking for legal trouble. Well, lawyers like to make trouble, and a government minister on television said this was nonsense. I agree - and besides, even if it is technically risky in law, in my book the higher law of kindness and good citizenship trumps it. In Germany I believe it's a legal requirement for every householder. If people are too lazy - or too accustomed to the modern idea that everything is someone else's responsibility - then we need a law too. If someone is genuinely physically unable to do it (and not just reluctant to miss 'Celebrity Big Brother), then why not ask an able-bodied neighbour to help - or even pay a local teenager a tenner, that's what I did? And if you don't know any of your neighbours well enough to ask - well, maybe it's time you did.

Sorry, this sounds like an attack on jan, which it isn't meant to be at all - your actions make it clear that you're a very kind, thoughtful and public-spirited person. But our recent unfamiliarity with the formerly commonplace hazards of cold weather mean that many people seem to have lost their ability to use common-sense to deal with it.

Edited January 15, 2010 by osmposm

[Jan_Bromley]

Actually, within my job, my code of conduct states that I am not only liable for the actions I take. I am also liable for the actions that I did not take. (buggered either way really). I think this argument is being used more and more in law, which makes things pretty hard. Gone are the days of helping people, due to all this crappy pc rubbish. This postie could not only sue me personally but professionally as well. but, we have a duty of care to the public even when not on duty!

Jan

[osmposm]

....I've a feeling something of an Urban Legend is springing up around this issue, and it's promulgated mostly by the lazy attitude of councils who use it as a convenient get-out.

I completely agree, TT. Apart from the legal minimum for my vehicle, I have no insurance of any kind, even buildings. Since I paid off my mortgage many years ago I have elected to take on all the risk myself. I protect myself and my property by being careful and pro-active in maintenance in as risk-free a manner as possible for myself and others, and since I work largely from home and am usually here, I am able to keep on top of things. I have had to shell out occasionally - a water tank burst a couple of years ago and did much damage - but the cost to me (so far!) is far less than the thousands saved in premiums.

I am thoroughly depressed that anyone with jan's mind and heart should seriously think it sensible not to clear a path of snow for fear of the legal consequences - particularly as I believe it is a wholly erroneous fear.

[Timmytour]

But the sensible - and obvious - way to prevent it happening on people's own patch is to clear, and keep clearing the snow/ice/slush from their path. It's not so hard, and quite apart from any legal questions seems the kind and responsible thing to do. Temps in the south have not been severe, and after clearing at night or first thing in the morning, a scattering of salt (and gritty sand or cat litter) should keep it safe for a while.

i'm sure I read somewhere that Cat litter is not something that should be used as a chemical it contains can actually serve to make things even icier. Not sure how true that is..

[osmposm]

i'm sure I read somewhere that Cat litter is not something that should be used as a chemical it contains can actually serve to make things even icier. Not sure how true that is..

Oh dear - sorry! Stick to sharp sand (not the soft, orangey builder's type which just forms a sort of sludge) or horticultural grit.

EDIT: you're right, see here http://www.pendletoday.co.uk/strange-but-true/Cat-litter-gritting-warning-as.5971728.jp

However, I think it could still work on already cleared surfaces as a temporary grip-aid to counter a thin frosty layer - but clear it when it starts to absorb misture and soften. There's also a (more expensive) type that doesn't soften and stays hard and granular - it's the cheaper (Fuller's Earth) type, that forms big clumps in the litter tray, that would be problematic.

Edited January 15, 2010 by osmposm

[Snow Queen one]

If this was a company looking at it from a health and safety point of view then if the paths were cleared and then allowed to ice up the company who cleared the paths would be found to have created a risk and by not doing everything so far as is reasonably practiable they would be responsible for any injuries caused by their actions.

I stress this is looking at it from a companies side not the private premises side.

This counrty is going mad and just like USA in the no win no fee stakes.

I am not judging anybody here i think Jan did what anybody would do for a fellow human being she helped them and they should be grateful for it people who care like her are few and faw betweent we seem to live in a not my problem attitude in todays way of life.

Incidently insurance companies are the worse offenders of all any time you have an accident they always pass your details on to a no win no fee solicitor who then contacts you to see if you have a claim. There by pushing up the cost of insurance for all of us.

[osmposm]

If this was a company looking at it from a health and safety point of view then if the paths were cleared and then allowed to ice up the company who cleared the paths would be found to have created a risk and by not doing everything so far as is reasonably practiable they would be responsible for any injuries caused by their actions.....I am not judging anybody here i think Jan did what anybody would do for a fellow human being she helped them and they should be grateful for it people who care like her are few and faw betweent we seem to live in a not my problem attitude in todays way of life...

I'm sorry, but this is madness. If you take that to its logical end, then we would be ill-advised to try and help someone after they have fallen, lest we are sued for doing it in a slightly (in someone's opinion) less-than-perfect manner. Jan had the courage (and the heart) to help him after he had fallen, so surely we should all have the courage (and the heart) to try and prevent the fall in the first place? Or is Jan implying that she only helped him because of her professional obligation to do so, and that those of us without her expertise and 'code of conduct' duty should keep our distance and just call an ambulance? Probably best not even to reassure the injured party that an ambulance is on its way, as if it were delayed there might be psychological damage from the falsely-raised hope.

There have been a number of studies showing that - like crime in general - people's perception of how much this nonsense goes on is far, far greater than its actual occurrence. And where these things actually - and rarely - reach court, British judges continue to show a refreshing tendency to throw them out. The problem lies, as you say, with the insurance companies - and the tendency to settle immediately out of court 'without prejudice' as it is cheaper than even beginning to fight the case.

Sorry, but my path will stay cleared, and I will continue to help people who fall down, despite my lamentable lack of advanced first-aid skills. Sue me if you like - I'll see you in court!

[Snow Queen one]

I'm sorry, but this is madness. If you take that to its logical end, then we would be ill-advised to try and help someone after they have fallen, lest we are sued for doing it in a slightly (in someone's opinion) less-than-perfect manner. Jan had the courage (and the heart) to help him after he had fallen, so surely we should all have the courage (and the heart) to try and prevent the fall in the first place? Or is Jan implying that she only helped him because of her professional obligation to do so, and that those of us without her expertise and 'code of conduct' duty should keep our distance and just call an ambulance? Probably best not even to reassure the injured party that an ambulance is on its way, as if it were delayed there might be psychological damage from the falsely-raised hope.

There have been a number of studies showing that - like crime in general - people's perception of how much this nonsense goes on is far, far greater than its actual occurrence. And where these things actually - and rarely - reach court, British judges continue to show a refreshing tendency to throw them out. The problem lies, as you say, with the insurance companies - and the tendency to settle immediately out of court 'without prejudice' as it is cheaper than even beginning to fight the case.

Sorry, but my path will stay cleared, and I will continue to help people who fall down, despite my lamentable lack of advanced first-aid skills. Sue me if you like - I'll see you in court!

I know this is madness and i do not make the law i am just stating a fact from a Health and Safety point of view. I hope the comments are not directed at me I am a fully qualified Health and Safety consultant who has been running her own comapny for 16 years and i am still here and have never been sued by the way.

I am one of the first to say this country is going to pot and i did indeed say something to that fact in my previous post but it is a fact If you create a hazard due to your actions and somebody gets hurt you are going to be held responsible for it. Because if you had not acted in the first place then the situation would not have arrisen.

We have lost the art of good will and we are scared to help for the exact reasons i have stated.

Look at that man who shot that burglar on his own land. He was put in jail for it the law is not fair and the law needs to be changed to reflect modern life but with out test cases it will remain as it is. This is why test cases are so important and also why incidently people can now sue for damages because there was a test case and the person won and the law was changed but that is for another debate.

You are older than me and you come from an era when people looked after others you were prob one of those people i had looking over me and i knew if i did something wrong my mum would be told and i would get told off. The old way of ensuring children respected other people and that the comunity pulled together. That time has gone sadly and now we have to make do with what is left. Some of us like jan try to keep the old ways alive but i fear we are facing a losing battle.

Edited January 15, 2010 by Snow Queen one

[osmposm]

....it is a fact If you create a hazard due to your actions and somebody gets hurt you are going to be held responsible for it.

It is a fact that you might theoretically be held responsible for it, not that you will. As a Health and Safety consultant, you personally are professionally required to act as if the worse-case scenario were always going to happen: the fact is that it very, very rarely does. As you say, you have never been sued - is that because you always play it by the book, or - in part, at least - because it doesn't happen much? I ignore the more ridiculous end of health & safety completely, and I've never been sued either. How many people on this forum have actually been sued or threatened with suing for taking a sensible and responsible action, I'd love to hear from them? I have a friend staying here at the moment who was indeed sued for damage caused by trees in his garden - but he acted idiotically in ignoring the threat for for years even after he's been warned of a potential problem.

My young neighbour cut his hand badly a week ago, I helped slow the bleeding, blocked up the smashed window with a board, and drove him to hospital in the snow. Hmm, a bit risky - might have caused problems if there was still glass in the wound (there wasn't as it turned out); might have cut myself working on the window; might have had an accident driving him there or back; either of us might have slipped on the (uncleared!!) snow in the hospital car park. If I'd minimised potential risk I'd have stayed clear and called an ambulance. Well, bless him, he brought me round a seriously nice bottle of wine this morning. Oh, and by the way, do you know how he did it? He slipped on the snowy steps down to his front door, and stuck his hand through the glass as he tried to save himself. I bet he's really glad he didn't expose himself to the risk of legal action by trying to clear it himself.

If the world has changed, it is only because we let it. You, and I, and everybody else can stop the changes you abhor now if we want to - at least in our domestic lives.

Edited January 15, 2010 by osmposm

[JamesCoop]

and the weather.............?

[osmposm]

and the weather.............?

Yes, sorry - though since it's grey and unexceptional not much to say about it really. And the discussion did start and continue with specific reference to recent weather conditions, so not (IMHO) wholly off-topic.

Perhaps you'd like to add to your 12 posts, James, and raise a more specifically weather-related matter for us all to discuss....?

[Southender]

Well, well. The 12z GFS gives us coldies something to smile about.

Will it verify though? Must be one of the colder members...

Odds must be against it. But we shall see whether ECM plays ball...

Edited January 15, 2010 by LeighShrimper

[Jan_Bromley]

Yes, the GFS has done a complete about turn from the 6z. Very strange really. GFS was the first model to spot the trend for this cold spell we have just had, so who knows?......

Jan

[MAF]

just to clear things up for Jan and anyone else interested. i posted this a while back > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8443745.stm

basically you have to be proved to have been careless in clearing your pathway

........But, Paul Kitson, a partner with leading personal injury solicitors Russell Jones & Walker, explains that a claimant would have to show you had acted either maliciously or carelessly, and that such a case would often be tricky in practice.

"It would be quite difficult to prove and quite difficult to proceed with a claim."

hope that settles any doubts <_<

[Jan_Bromley]

Thanks for the info guys. Fingers crossed that I don't get sued.

Jan

[Snow Obsession]

Hmmm - just got a Met Office advisory for heavy snow on Wednesday...