to sue hotel chain

[tosuehotelchain]

We were at a well known hotel this afternoon for Sunday lunch, after lunch we were walking through the reception area where DC (13months old) fell and split open their head on the corner of the table (adult shin height) we had to ask the receptionist for medical assistance, all the while DC screaming and blood pouring everywhere.

We had to take DC to A&E where he needed a GA, however because of past expeirence with this, it was then decided that our baby would go through the treatment and the horrid trauma with no pain relief, he needed 1 inner stitch and 2 outer stitches, and next week he will have to endure it all again.

I phoned the hotel to let them know the result, and asked for safety guards on the tables to stop further accidents like this in future, they said the would get back to me, due to the "design" of the lounge

Everybody has said to sue, as its the only way they know, that this hotel will take action.

I know this from expeirence sadly also with the chain.

However I feel uneasy about it.

Calling yourself "TOSUEHOTELCHAIN" is a bit of a giveaway regarding your plans I feel.

All that blood must have been a scary experience for the staff of the hotel chain. I wonder if any staff will sue?

I do think the litigation culture, has in general, completely lowered the quality of life for children. It has led to increased insurance premiums for premises or anyone wishing to host a public event so consequently less activities are laid on for children or they are prohibitively expensive.

It is a shame for your baby but actually a 13 month old should be closely watched and that would be brought up in court. Are you prepared to have your parenting skills picked apart in a court room?

A while ago we were in a shopping centre, there was an area that was fenced off because they were doing work there. As we walked pasted DD knocked one of the boards which fell and hit her on the head.

She sustained a cut which needed gluing back together at A+E and she was very upset.

I was concearned about the safety of these boards but at the end of a day it was an accident. I didn't want it happen to anyone else so I contacted the Health and Safety Executive who investigated and made the company errect the fence panels in a much safer way.

We didn't need to sue to make sure the same thing didn't happen to anyone else.

Lional Hutz obviosly has too much time on his hands

Even if he can find the minutest loophole that lays hotel responsible

While I agree with the majority of posters, ie this was an accident, and accidents happen, and the poor OP is probably very upset about her little boy she might have a point.
I was a witness in a legal case where someone slipped and broke their ankle on tiles near a swimming pool.
They sued the hotel and won, because the onus was on the hotel to show they had taken reasonable steps to ensure guest safety.
The guest was wearing silly shoes.
I would have said it was the guests fault, but the judge found in favour of the claimant.

If the hotel has had other accidents where people have cut legs on the table, then they might have a case.....

My kid grazed his knee on the pavement last week. I'm suing the council for a million quid!

You're fucking nuts.

Oh, and I'm not saying she should sue. Just that she might actually get somewhere.
I think like Memoo, she should contact the HSE

It's people who sue for accidents like this that have made health and safety measures go mad. It's all claims culture nonsense and it needs to STOP.

OP I hope you're OK

I well remember the aftermath of ds3's accident and how shaken I was, and angry (luckily he wasn't with us when it happened so I didn't have to feel guilt (not that you do, I blame myself for anything and everything that happens in the world), he was at school).

I well remember some of the courses of action i mentioned but would never have followed!

I hope you have a peaceful night and the shock has worn off by tomorrow.

Sorry, Shiney

I hope this poor little boy is having a good night's sleep. I started off thinking how mad this was but I do feel sorry now for OP, who's had a rubbish day and everyone (including me, I am afraid) has piled in and made her feel worse.

She still shouldn't sue, though.

"We had to take DC to A&E where he needed a GA, however because of past expeirence with this, it was then decided that our baby would go through the treatment and the horrid trauma with no pain relief, he needed 1 inner stitch and 2 outer stitches, and next week he will have to endure it all again."

A GA would only be used if the Drs didn't think the child would hold still and a local would definitely be used if GA wasn't possible, the child would not be expected to have NO pain relief.

OP you shouldn't sue, you should make sure your DC has a local anastethetic next week.

Why would they do it again next week?

Surely they'll be removing the sutures and the 'inner' stich will be absorbable, no?

Actually libra ds3 didn;t get any pain relief but some prat assumed that not showing pain (autism) meant not feeling it. I have recoiled in horror many times since (DH didnt get the distinction either and had taken him in)

DS3 didn;t even need to be geld, he grinned throughout. Poor kid.

WRt to absorbable stitches we were warned that rarely tehy don't dissolve so need a check and remove after a week so muct be that?

Tiger you have a point. I too thought that about OP because of the time scale and because her post is very accusing.

I do wonder if this had been posted the day, week after not clearly having just walked through the door if the responses would have been so harsh?

No one has noticed that this, apparently, a first child.

General Anaesthesia is bloody serious, because these days there's far more understanding of anaesthesia risk, and it's virtually inconceivable in this scenario without trying other options first. Options short of general anaesthesia covers a multitude of sins, both local anaesthetics and various sedatives. And the NHS also has ketamine in reserve for children, which is this side of a GA but the other side of the child remembering anything about it (it's less commonly used on adults outside the military, but my local hospital is partially military, so I can tell you what I remember of an orthopaedic procedure using ketamine a few years ago: nothing).

Yeah but the kid didn't have a GA tokyo. Just nearly....

If your DC was hurt, it is upsetting. However if your DC damaged the hotel furniture as a direct result of your husband letting him fall, they may sue you.

Does your child ever go out to play? I hope all your furniture has soft corners and that no friend of your DC falls and hurts themselves in your house, could be potential lawsuit...

there is no legal basis for liability against the hotel so far as I can see. Your child fell - how is that their fault? Children fall over sometimes. It wouldn't be reasonably practicable to expect anyone operating a public building to pad every single surface in case a child fell against it would it? Why would you think you are entitled to money from them because your child fell over? It was an accident - these things happen. The problem is that in the modern litigation culture everyone thinks that if they hurt themselves they myst be entitled to compensation - in fact this is just not the case.

"Yu have to see the tables to know what I mean, adults have cut their legs on them, as they are metal. and not what I would consider safe tbh."

So you and DH decided to take your DS there for lunch?

I'd phone the police!

Its just criminal that hotels have furniture in the lobby that a toddler could fall onto, they might as well have set a man trap.

darc You're right. I wouldn't feel safe going into a hotel that had tables that had corners on!. It's not right y'know!

Ive asked MN to delete this post, not because of the advice, but because of some of the childish posts.

If you read my post correctly, you will see that I never considered suing the hotel, but it was advised that was given to me by the members of staff, who are sick of dealing with injuries from the tables, (hence the reason I knew of the other injuries today). The staff also said, the only way they would listen to myself was because if I threatened to sue, as a member of staff has done, because of a kitchen floor that went unreported for 2 years, until a member of staff fell and needed steel pins in her injury).

We were in A&E for a total of 1 hour, was not busy and he was seen and was stitched by the IFAX(?) Dr, immediately (do I really need to post a pic of his forehead and his cream antiseptic to prove this ) He can have GA, but unfortunately the last 3 times he has had it, he has had a bad reaction where he needed oxygen and meds to control his breathing). No he was not given any pain relief, as it would have caused further stress.

We were given the two options, go down the GA route, or do it blind, where it took about a min, with dh holding him down and 2 nurses steadying his head for the Dr to do the procedure, we went for the latter, as the GA poses many risks, for him and his breathing.

No I dont blame my dh, he had him in safe reach, unfortunately not from objects of unforeseeable circumstances however! (or shall I join the imperfect parent brigade, to all your perfect parenting brigade?.

Ive already phoned the hotel, and the manager was more concerned about the design, than the safety aspect.

My thinking behind the suing was to kick their butt into action, as from what it seems only threatening behavior is what stems them to do something, and not verbally as it seems/appears.

Im not in this for the money, couldn't care less, however I am concerned about this happening to more children/people getting injured, theirs no malice or self entitled attitude, however my intention is to get something done to prevent this happening repeatedly.

I really do think, some of you're comments were completely uncalled for, and just plain vindictive .

You will see, even from my own OP, that Ive already said it was a accident, however I dont want other children getting repeatedly hurt, due to these "designer" tables

but do you accept that you don't actually have a case to sue for? meaning that threatening to sue would have no effect on the hotel rethinking their safety measures because they would find the threat laughable?