From another point of view...

[hollinsestate]

Hello, been a while since I've been on here!
Bit of a moan really, although I am well aware it probably won't apply to most on here.
We have a few derelict cottages etc around the farm, and a few old bits on the moors. They are in pretty bleek places and apart from myself and friends, have remained untouched for many years.
However, before I moved away to university a lot of work went on to try make them as secure as possible.
Last week an explorer fell through a cottage floor, and fractured his ankle. He has notified my parents he will be seeking legal action for compensation...!
Whilst we are pretty sure he won't be successful, due to the fences and the warning unsafe building signs, which prove we have taken appropriate precautions to warn people of the building, it is still a pretty frustrating thing to have to go through.
As a person who does a reasonable amount of tresspassing myself with regard to exploring, I can understand why a person might be in the building (which, incidently, my parents do not, to them it is extremely odd for a grown man to be wondering about in the ruins of a cottage...).
Personally, my injuries sustained from my adventures I would never try and cash in on, largely because I shouldn't have been there in the first place.
I would be interested to hear other people's opinions on this, and whether anyone on here has ever claimed for an exploring injury.
Thanks, R

 

[evilnoodle]

Like you, I wouldn't dream of trying to claim, as I shouldn't be there in the first place. But we live in a litigious society and an awful lot of people are after making money, so it amazes me, but doesn't surprise me when people do try to claim for something like this. The solicitors representing them also want to make money, so encourage people to try it on!

'Tis a funny old world!

 

[losttom]

Wouldnt dream of making a claim- you weigh up the dangers yourself and if you get injured its your own fault! Why should someone else compensate you for YOUR mistake just because they own the building you should not have been in??

There was plenty of warning signs.....

 

[recrudesce]

he's not got a leg to stand on.

*boom boom tish*

 

[Seahorse]

It is entirely the property owner's responsibility to take reasonable steps to ensure the safety of anyone who may access, lawfully or not, that property.

By securing the property and posting warning signs, you have taken what any sensible person would consider to be reasonable steps to ensure that safety.

I'd say you are bulletproof. Get a solicitor to send a threatogram pointing out that when he loses his case, he will be liable for both party's costs. (Although that may not apply if he is going through small claims. Chase for Fast Track in the unlikely event it gets to court.)

Feckin chancer. He's not a member of this forum, is he?

 

[krela]

I would suggest your moan is more aimed at our litigation society than it is explorers.

You could equally counter sue for him damaging the floor of the cottage...

 

[Goldie87]

I wouldn't do it myself, and think the person doing it is a bit of a nob. Having said that your parents also sound like right old gits as well so nevermind

 

[Munchh]

I can understand the sense of frustration you feel at having to deal with this and as an explorer yourself, it must be particularly irksome. I think I would probably tell him 'see you in court' and I would be mighty tempted to out the bugger too, legal implications aside of course. I'm constantly amazed by what the great god money will make some people do.

 

[King Al]

I would be very disappointed if it was anyone from here threatening something like that.

He sounds more a filthy chancer who wants you to give him a nice out of court settlement

 

[highcannons]

Whoever he/she is they are well out of order, best of luck to you!

 

[RichardH]

Seahorse's advice is wise.

The obligations owed to trespassers can be found in the Occupier's Liability Act 1984. The occupier must guard against a danger to trespassers if:

1. the danger is reasonably forseeable; and
2. the trespasser's presence is reasonably forseeable; and
3. it is reasonable that the occupier should guard against the danger.

It is reasonably forseeable that a derelict property is dangerous.
It is probably not reasonably forseeable for a trespasser to enter the property.
In any case, putting up notices which clearly advertise the danger and warn against entry almost certainly satisfies the requirement to guard against the danger.

The most recent case of note is Tomlinson v. Congleton (on appeal) (2003).

The ratio in Tomlinson v. Congleton is interesting. Hoffman and Nicholls LJJ said (well, one of them did and the other concurred), "It seems to me that Mr Tomlinson suffered his injury because he chose to indulge in an activity which had inherent dangers, not because the premises were in a dangerous state."

Based solely on the facts you have put forward, no sane solicitor would take the trespasser's case on. If he insists on bringing the matter to court, he's going to be humiliated and seriously out of pocket.

 

[Zotez]

I've jurt myself at a few derelict places before but have mixed opinions on claiming...

If I had injured myself and the owner of the building was a large corporation, access was easy etc then yes I would make a claim, simply because the large corporation wouldnt be hit largely and its my opinion that they make enough money out of us for us to grab as much as we can from them. As I said just my opinion I know i'll get shot down instantly.

However, I dont see how anyone could seek legal action against the people in question - illegally entering someones property then trying to take them to court over it is not only ludicrous but very very immoral - I dont understand how someone can have such disreguard for another human being.

 

[Incognito]

We have America to thank for this "where there is blame there is a claim" culture, all the no win no fee BS just emphasises this. At the end of the day he went into the building of his own accord, he ignored the fencing and signs and ended up getting injured, through no one elses fault but his own.

Hope you win your case but I am not a great believer in the British Court system i'm afraid. My aunt ended up having to pay a burgular 2K after he broke into her house through a skylight and fell not only breaking his ankle but also slicing himself on a walled knife rack which contained some seriously sharp knifes (her husband was a butcher). He got charged for the offence but he also sued for damages. TBH its a joke and the person who has the best lawyer wins at the end of the day not the person who is in the right.

 

[krela]

This thread like most others with a legal/political aspect has decended into pointless rhetoric and anecdotes.

Sorry hollinsestate but I hope you get a suitable resolution to your problem without having to spend too much money on legal fees.

Thread closed.