Fall on wet floor in shop - what would you do?

[mamhaf]

I'm quite about this and would like some views.

Last week, I filled up at a Somerfield petrol station then went in to pay.

It was sheeting with rain, and as I stepped on the tiles inside the automatic door, I slipped on the floor and landed on my back, hurting my wrist, arm, shoulder and, worst of all, exacerbating an existing back problem which I'd had successful treatment for but which is now painful again (the other aches and pains cleared up after a few days).

There was a built-in doormat, but also a line of floor tiles just inside the door before the mat, and it was those that were wet and slippery.

At the time, I called for the manager, who mopped the floor but said "I've told them the mat should go all the way to the door"

I asked her to fill in an accident report form, but she said she didn't have access to the computer and wrote down my contact details, saying someone would be in touch.

No-one has - so although she took my information, I don't know that it has been recorded.

I phoned the local council the next day and asked them to go along and assess the premises - my fall was bad enough, but I'd hate someone else to go through the same.

I feel I should write directly to Somerfield too, or maybe even contact a personal injury lawyer.

What do you think?

(Sorry - that should have been 'happen')

Thanks for all your thoughts. I've just made a doctor's appointment - my back hasn't got any better, and somewhat depressingly, is hurting as much as it was before I had treatment.

I don't know how I sustained the original injury - it's a torn disc which could have happened from something as simple as twisting to reach something - although I am quite fit generally and normally play lots of sport.

I haven't written the letter to Somerfield yet but will do so - seeing the doctor is my priority at the moment.

But I may take legal advice - I think I have cover under our household insurance, will have a look.

I love georgiamama. Very sound advice.
whoever said OP couldn't sue or would have difficulty as back injury pre-existing this is not the case. I've not dabbled in PI for many years but when I did I remember the 'eggshell/thin skull rule' - take your victim as you find him. Does that rule still apply Gmama?

What I'm pondering here is what exactly all the 'anti action' posters on here would do if it was them/their DH/child that was injured. Write it off as one of those things??????

Mamhaf, hope your trip to the doctors goes well. Like I said before, you have to be so careful with back injuries. A lot of people tend to write them off as they can't see them!

If not covered under your household insurance then I would contact a NWNF solicitor (as opposed to some of the claims people you see advertised) Good advice given earlier ref the Law Society approved ones. Some do get bad publicity but I think that is often the claims people, many of whom I don't think are actually qualified lawyers.
Do the letter asap to cover yourself. Set out in the letter you were injured and are seeing your doctor but in the meantime they should acknowledge your complaint and refer it to their insurers. Good luck

what annoys me here is people say oh dont sue?

so whats happens then if mamhaf had to take 6 weeks out of work due to her back being bad and trust me i know as i have had a bad back and been out for 6 months.

so who pays her sick pay? us the tax payers or the stupid idiot company that should have had a sign up saying wet floor or the mat in the right place?

I think the fact that they didnt even bother to contact you with vouchers or something is unreal.

if your in pain because of it then its up to you i prob wouldnt sue but if it put me out of work or i had problems elsewhere then i would.

good luck hope ur back is ok!

mumoverseas - yes that rule still applies.

Without getting into the compensation culture debate, mamhaf, sounds to me like you have a claim and you can get compensation for an exacerbated back condition which may at least help pay for some private Osteo treatment if that helps. for the injuries you sustained.

Agree - don't contact any of the folk on the tv - have a look at the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers Website - they have a code of conduct to ensure you're not ripped off. Though if you go through your household insurance you will probably have to go with whatever lawyers are on tehir panel.

Hope you get better soon

It is also a culture that infantalises all of us.
We take no personal responsibility and when anythig bad happens we look for someone to make it right. Life shouldn't be like that. It makes us whiney which is pathetic and it makes everyone endlessly oppertunistic.

I don't know how bad the ops injuries are and i have no problem with her persuing the store.

But people should be under no illusions that the determination to always sue - to always make a buck when something goes wrong impacts us neagtively.
The supermarket may get sued and have to pay a large amount of money. they pay that through uinsurance which costs a lot and with every successful claim will cost more. That charge does not get absorbed by the shareholders - that goes on proces, and reduced salary increases for staff.
It results in staff being told not to talk to customers if they hurt themselves, to call ambulances to check injuries and to refuseing to let customers use the staff loo in case they fall.

And you absoloutely can sue whether anyone is negligent or not. The excess on a public liabilty /personal injury case is going to be substantial. many companies will pay a case to get rid of it rather than pay the substantially increased cost of trying to defend it - lawyers fees are very often far greater to an Insured than the actual payment ever is. LOTS of crap claims get paid rather than risk the lawyers fees.

As usual the ONLY people who gain from this situation are solicitors

not sure I understand how you can sue when no one is negligent?
very sweeping statement to say that the ONLY people who gain are solicitors. what about the clients who they recover damages for that wouldn't have otherwise received any compensation?

Well said, Pagwatch.

OK mum - let me explain

suppose a woman slips in a shop walking near where there is one of those signs up saying 'slippery floor.
The shop is not negligent because they warned the customers and were ( lets assume) rushing staff to the area to mop up.
They have done nothing negligent.
Lets say the woman instructs her solicitor and claims £1000 .
The shop will reply through their legal team that they had taken all measures and woman chose to ignore/step over notice.
If solicitor then replies that woman did not see sign, that it was not there, or that it was poorly placed the shop would have to defend those allegations.
That will mean legal fess etc which may include womans fees. As solicitors charge £100 per hour++++ the £1000 quick settlemant may be much better bet for the store than potentially thousands in legal fees plus the hassle of witnesses etc etc.

Thats how.
I have seen it LOADS of times ( although actually for much bigger sums of money).
Settlement of spurious cases is often a matter of economics which is something the PI lawyers know

i'd use legal representation and buy monkeytrousers some special brew

I'm so glad to see so much sound anti-sueing advice on this thread. Well done, MNers, for making the world a better place!

OP, I'm so sorry to hear about your accident; you must have been pretty shocked and perhaps a bit embarassed to land on your ass in public like that. I'd have been fuming if it had happened to me. Thankfully you weren't seriously injured and hopefully the shop has now done something about it. What a great shame that you had to have a fall before they realised what a problem the doorway was.

You know how as parents we ask ourselves from time-to-time: 'What long-term effect are my actions going to have on my children? What sort of children am I creating?'. I believe they're the same questions we need to ask ourselves about the way we get involved in the world. If I barge this person out of my way to get on a train, what kind of world am I creating here? If I smile and graciously let them off first, am I making the world better (even if just for 2 seconds!)?

So many of us bemoan the state of British society, yet when it impinges directly on us we suddenly find that our principles are in conflict with our feelings. By attempting to sue Somerfield you might make yourself feel a little bit better but there's no question that your actions will negative ramifications that will cancel out any of your good feeling. Some of those ramifications have been listed above - increased rates/ insurance/ council tax, etc; paranoia from business leaders, which has a trickle-down effect creating stress and inefficiency throughout the organisation.

I'm building a grand picture here but the context is that it's a series of people sueing unnecessarily that creates a grand-scale butterfly effect which ultimately harms our societies. In your case you weren't badly injured. Why not live and let live?

sorry pagwatch but have to agree to differ.
In your nice little scenario, you have said that the shop is NOT negligent and they have done nothing negligent. They have covered themselves by displaying a sign.
If the said woman tries it on and threatens action and they decide to settle to avoid potential legal fees then they have chosen to settle and have not been successfully sued. I would have thought that in the scenario that you have painted, if they did not settle and the woman did issue proceedings, on the facts you have provided she would not have been successful.

I think part of the problem in this day an age is that people are scared of legal proceedings and therefore often do settle to avoid court/bad publicity when in reality the claimant is trying it on and may never have issued proceedings in the first place. It is because people settle rather than face proceedings that more and more people do try it on.
I completely disagree with some of the ridiculous cases you read about sometimes and agree that sadly the UK is becoming more like the USA but in genuine cases (which the OP's MAY be) sometimes a claim is justified.

Good grief.

So if I had said "initiated proceedings" or "attempted to sue" that would make you happy.

The scenario. She alleges negligence. They are not negligent. Yet she receieves payment and case would be listed on the defendants insurance record as negligence - case settled.
They may make it an ex gratia payemnt of course but tis a payment none the less and would acrue to any aggregated deductible and would negatively affect their insurance rating for future premiums.

You are making a highly pedantic deifferential between her being successful following the shop being proved negligent and her being successful because the shop pay her and effectively accept liability

with respect, don't think I'm the one being pedantic

No . Of course . Its me
How silly of me.

I think some posters are being a little unfair on the OP; she's not being whiney or pathetic. And she hasn't said she's definitely going to sue. If her back is seriously injured by the accident, it's not unreasonable of her, IMO, to consider further action.

Now, I am as horrified as all of you by the 'culture of litigation' which increases costs, both financial and social, for all of us. Clearly, unreasonable claims are a social problem.

BUT - we do have a right to be safe in, say, our workplaces, and we certainly have a right to hold companies to account if they endanger us, or if their procedures put us at unreasonable risk.

The right to pursue a claim to compensate for loss of earnings or for injuries is important; and arguably part of a wider social shift which precisely doesn't say, "Well, tough. S**t happens. Deal with it". The same social shift has built the welfare state in this country; again, in the past, people down on their luck work-wise or afflicted with a disability were told to just lump it. Thankfully, we live in a marginally more socially just world, and the unemployed, or disabled, etc. do receive some help.

Again, however, I repeat, stupid claims disadvantage us all.

Well said Penthesileia

Thanks Penthesileia - I actually feel I'm being quite stoic about it - I was in a lot of pain yesterday although it's quite a bit better today - to the point that I would have been justified in taking time off work yesterday.

On a pain scale of 1 to 10 - 10 being childbirth - I reckon it was about a 5 or 6 yesterday, but about 2 today.

Luckily my job is quite sedentary, so I've been downing painkillers and carrying on.

I'm going to ask the GP for advice on treatment and in the meantime I do intend to consult a solicitor to send off a letter to Somerfield as a marker to make sure they've first of all recorded the accident and secondly know I've been injured.

I too hate the compensation culture so wouldn't jump to take action for the sake of it, but I am really hacked off about my back when I thought it had cleared up.
As regards sueing, I'm going to see how my back is - if I need more treatment then I might consider it as the treatment itself is very unpleasant and I do think the accident was preventable if the doormat had extended to the door.

sorry, if you hate the compensation culture why are you using a solicitor to send the letter? you are literate so why not just send it youself? shouldnt you also be contacting the original cause of your backpain?

The reason I've decided to use a solicitor to get advice is to make sure that if I do pursue compensation - to pay for treatment - that I've laid things out in such a way that that would be possible. I may well write the letter myself, but I want to talk it over with someone experienced in such cases before I do so.

My earlier back treatment was private, but we no longer have the medical insurance and I'm not sure how long it would take to access the same treatment, if needed, on the NHS. For instance, the first step when I had the original injury, was to have an MRI scan which diagnosed the torn disc.

I would imagine I'd need another scan to see if I'm still suffering from the original injury or if it's something different.

Also, I really got the impression that the shop wasn't taking it seriously - not just on my behalf, but on behalf of other customers - and a formal letter, I hope, would concentrate their minds somewhat.

slightly baffed here. Why would the OP be 'contacting the original cause of backpain'.

Regardless of whatever injury she had previously, if it has now become worse due to the new accident, then this is her potential cause of action against the petrol station if they are liable. 'take your victim as you find him'

Mamhaf, hope you are not being put off by some really crap advice on here from people who clearly have no idea what they are talking about. I agree it sounds like the garage/shop were not taking it seriously and I think you are doing the right thing to write (either yourself or via a Solicitor) so that if nothing else, you can ensure that they deal with the poorly placed Matt and make sure it doesn't happen to someone else.