Should he pay or the store didn't secure the items endangering him and others?

[marylander1940]

Should he pay or the store didn't secure the items endangering him and others?

 

 

http://www.techspot.com/news/66678-watch-shopper-accidentally-destroy-four-brand-new-smart.html

[rvwnsd]

The store should have done a better job securing the TVs. Had the customer picked up a vase and dropped it I could see charging him. However, it seems like the display's contribution to the problem was far greater than the customer's.

[gallahadesquire]

Get our Legal Beagle! STORE'S FAULT! Those sets TELL you that they are prone to fall in their instructions.

[bigvalboy]

Faked...

[+ azdr0710]

the comments section at the link in the first post here has some good stuff.....

 

comments section: best thing about the internet, by the way!

[marylander1940]

Get our Legal Beagle! STORE'S FAULT! Those sets TELL you that they are prone to fall in their instructions.

 

Is like the sign: "Don't lean on the glass"

[+ purplekow]

Come on people, he should take some responsibility. He did not accidentally knock over the TV, he purposely went to lift it and then knocked everything else over. I would sooner excuse the dropping of the vase, which is something one will reasonably expect to hold. When you go to pick up a TV, you should be wise enough to know it will take some strength and with a big screen TV, some balance to hold it. The store should absorb the cost, because they have the deep pockets, but the man is responsible for his irresponsibility.

[Guest]

Wow. It's only $1.22 to the pound now. Those stupid xenophobic English. I have a feeling that the next addition to the EU will be the Republic of Scotland.

[mike carey]

Wow. It's only $1.22 to the pound now.

I read during the week that at airports in the UK the (admittedly, usually unfavourable) rate for the pound was below the euro. Ouch!

[+ purplekow]

Well at least they got the 350 million pounds a week into health care. Oh wait....that was a lie just to trick gullible people into voting against their interest. Well at least that could never happen here in the US of A.

[LADoug1]

I was in Trader Joe's and ground the wrong kind of coffee. I asked if they could use it intending to pay for it first. But the sales associate said they would just take it back without my paying. My mistake but their incredible customer service.

[Meo]

The store should have done a better job securing the TVs. Had the customer picked up a vase and dropped it I could see charging him. However, it seems like the display's contribution to the problem was far greater than the customer's.

I tend to lean toward this simply because I just did some TV shopping recently and I was astonished at how badly $1000+ big screens were displayed, simply scattered about with crowds and crowds in the store. One clerk had un-boxed a big screen, leading to a giant pile of cardboard and styrofoam right next to unsecured TV on the floor, and I tripped over it and nearly created my own domino effect. The clerk apologized but there was no sense that the store should have thousands of dollars of merchandise scattered across the floor.

[rvwnsd]

I tend to lean toward this simply because I just did some TV shopping recently and I was astonished at how badly $1000+ big screens were displayed, simply scattered about with crowds and crowds in the store. One clerk had un-boxed a big screen, leading to a giant pile of cardboard and styrofoam right next to unsecured TV on the floor, and I tripped over it and nearly created my own domino effect. The clerk apologized but there was no sense that the store should have thousands of dollars of merchandise scattered across the floor.

Good grief! Contrast that to my local Best Buy, where I moved a TV and the alarm sounded.

[Nvr2Thick]

Seems unlikely that a store would display large screen TVs at waist level, three feet apart.

[Guest]

Seems unlikely that a store would display large screen TVs at waist level, three feet apart.

Strange that they're right at the entrance, too. Seems staged.

[escortrod]

Yeah, if this is real it's totally the store's fault. Looks staged though.

[+ purplekow]

I agree that it is staged. Given that, if this were true who would be responsible? It seems this is the McDonald's coffee case done with TVs. We expect society and authorities to protect us from our own ignorance. A two year is pulled away from a hot stove. An eight year old is reminded that the stove is hot before he has the chance to burn himself. However, at some point, we make it a personal burden to avoid a hot stove. If the person purposely trying to lift a TV is a competent adult and not an eight year old, he should not need to be pulled away or reminded that if you drop a heavy thing it can do damage and be damaged.

[mmk123]

I work in retail inventory management and I can guarantee you that there is no way that this store would make this client pay for the damage. He could very easily find an attorney to simply countersue for customer endangerment if the store did try to make this client pay. We have had clients damage items where I work truly by accident and we merely damage it out and send it back to the vendor. It is all part of retail.

[escortrod]

I agree that it is staged. Given that, if this were true who would be responsible? It seems this is the McDonald's coffee case done with TVs. We expect society and authorities to protect us from our own ignorance. A two year is pulled away from a hot stove. An eight year old is reminded that the stove is hot before he has the chance to burn himself. However, at some point, we make it a personal burden to avoid a hot stove. If the person purposely trying to lift a TV is a competent adult and not an eight year old, he should not need to be pulled away or reminded that if you drop a heavy thing it can do damage and be damaged.

Having read the McDonald's coffee case it was entirely right (IMO) that the claimant won. She was elderly and sustained second degree burns to a large portion of her upper legs. It's also worth pointing out that McDonald's appealed, and had that appeal gone to court the massive punitive settlement handed down by the jury would likely have been substantially reduced, so the claimant settled out of court. In the end there's no way she got millions.

[+ purplekow]

Having read the McDonald's coffee case it was entirely right (IMO) that the claimant won. She was elderly and sustained second degree burns to a large portion of her upper legs. It's also worth pointing out that McDonald's appealed, and had that appeal gone to court the massive punitive settlement handed down by the jury would likely have been substantially reduced, so the claimant settled out of court. In the end there's no way she got millions.

I never said she got millions, though it is a popular misconception that she did.

 

However, she did take a hot coffee and place it between her legs while she was driving and as a result suffered burns. Coffee is hot.

In this case, McDonald's coffee was hotter than expected, but when you buy hot coffee you should expect it to be hot and should take proper precautions to protect yourself. If she had poured it over her head, would that have been McDonald's responsibility? Where is the line. Should there have been a warning, bathing in hot coffee could lead to serious injury?

 

People, even elderly people, should be aware enough of the world around them not to place hot coffee between the legs, especially while driving. If she were in need of instructions not to do so, perhaps she was seriously unaware of how the world works and she should not have been driving.

 

In the case raised by the OP, assuming that it is true, the store was remiss in not tethering down the TVs. There is a responsibility to protect the public. But the man in the film, knowingly walked over to lift what was likely to be a cumbersome and heavy TV. He should bear the cost of the damage that his action caused. The store of course, should refuse payment in a good faith effort to maintain the customer. They also probably have insurance to coverage the damage.

[escortrod]

I never said she got millions, though that is a popular misconception. However, she did take a hot coffee and place it between her legs while she was driving and suffered burns. Coffee is hot. In this case, McDonald's coffee was hotter than expected but when you buy hot coffee you should expect it to be hot and should take proper precautions. If she had poured it over her head, would that have been McDonald's responsibility. Should there have been a warning, bathing in hot coffee could lead to serious injury. People, even elderly people, should be aware enough of the world around them not to place hot coffee between the legs, especially while driving. If she were in need of instructions not to do so, perhaps she was seriously unaware of how the world works and she should not have been driving.

I wouldn't expect to get second degree burns from a McDonald's coffee. The harm was entirely foreseeable (lots of people will put a cup given to them at a drive thru between their legs) and McDonald's didn't do enough to mitigate it. The negligence is pretty clear.

 

I had a take-out coffee cup fall apart in my hand when I was driving on a motorway. The seam of the cup wasn't properly sealed and so absorbed coffee and failed. Happily the coffee chain in question served their product at a temperature that wasn't liable to cause scalding and so I was able to continue driving to the next service station without coming to any serious harm. I'm glad my coffee wasn't from McDonald's.

[Jbdesc]

Can we look at the root cause of the problem here? McDonald's coffee... Come on.. That's just hot dirty water.

[escortrod]

Can we look at the root cause of the problem here? McDonald's coffee... Come on.. That's just hot dirty water.

Even if stupidity or a lack of personal responsibility is the 'root problem' that can't be eradicated, whereas there's practically no cost involved for McDonald's to have a hot liquid warning on their cups and/or serve their beverages at safer temperatures.

[+ azdr0710]

 

http://pleated-jeans.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/warning-label-iron.jpg

 

http://pleated-jeans.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/warning-label-peanuts.jpg

 

http://www.elmo.ch/private/Stories-from-a-great-country/sue-me-if-you-can/vending-sticker-01.jpg

[Jbdesc]

Ahhh good ol warning labels. I don't think the issue was specifically if it was labeled as such, but more the fact that they had been warned numerous times about serving, ahem, 'coffee', at a temperature that was hotter than it should be based upon guidelines.

 

The guy I'm the video should have known better, but so should the store. They're both in the wrong but I don't believe the gentlemen who knocked them over should be held responsible for paying the damages.

 

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-nZT-FTTeqrs/VcWPw8Qy_sI/AAAAAAAATDs/sFI4b4TkHSE/s1600/ChokingHazard.png