tube replacement

[sam2019]

The woman was awarded medical bills, and 3 million as punitive damages.
oh, the burns, a 72 year old woman's genitals.

OK, this is getting abit too far off topic. so my very brief opinon is: McDonalds should stop serving coffee to people who fail to understand that water boils at 100C.
old lady or otherwise. this is institutionalized madness catering to the idiocracy.

 

[Wintrup]

YEs, that's true. but dont let the facts bother you.

-Corporate policy was to serve the coffee at a 180-190 F, (82-87 C) ((go ahead and look up what temps are needed to cause 3rd degree burns))
-McDonald's had almost 1000 reports of injurie due to the temp, and had paid settlements in some of the cases.
-Woman wanted only her medical bills covered.
-McDonald's offered $800.

So why did she win?
-McDonald's admitted they knew about the risk
-McDonald's said the risk was worth the money they made selling coffee
-McDonald's knew the coffee was too hot to drink at the temp served
-McDonald's never warned customers of the excessive temp
---all that was testified to by McDonald's in open court

The woman was awarded medical bills, and 3 million as punitive damages.

oh, the burns, a 72 year old woman's genitals.

Oh my gawd.
As a baby mum would blow on hot drinks or food until they'd cooled enough before giving them to me. As child I recall being told numerous times, 'careful, it's very hot, let it cool down a bit before you drink it'. Despite being told, I've scolded my mouth a few times and had a few burnt hands and legs too when I've been clumsy, so tend to be careful with hot liquid. That's the thing with tea and coffee, they taste best made with boiling water. The question is if I spill it who's at fault here, I'm clear it's always me, regardless of who made the coffee or tea. Every adult knows, or ought to know, that boiling water is hazardous, so handle it with care until it cools a tad.

.

Of course McDonald's are aware of the risk, because they're aware of litigation, otherwise they'd assume everything I wrote in the previous paragraph of those who purchase the product. I guess they had lots of complaints about their coffee being luke warm. What you're asking is for them to mitigate against clumsiness by only selling tepid coffee and treating the general public like infants. And that's exactly what we have, an infantilized public who are forever playing victim and running to authorities to make it better. Adults take responsibility for their own actions.

>oh, the burns, a 72 year old woman's genitals.
What has that got to do with anything, other than at that age she ought to know better. 3 million dollars for being clumsy, the world has gone mad.

 

[puttbutt]

YEs, that's true. but dont let the facts bother you.

-Corporate policy was to serve the coffee at a 180-190 F, (82-87 C) ((go ahead and look up what temps are needed to cause 3rd degree burns))
-McDonald's had almost 1000 reports of injurie due to the temp, and had paid settlements in some of the cases.
-Woman wanted only her medical bills covered.
-McDonald's offered $800.

So why did she win?
-McDonald's admitted they knew about the risk
-McDonald's said the risk was worth the money they made selling coffee
-McDonald's knew the coffee was too hot to drink at the temp served
-McDonald's never warned customers of the excessive temp
---all that was testified to by McDonald's in open court

The woman was awarded medical bills, and 3 million as punitive damages.

oh, the burns, a 72 year old woman's genitals.

I heard that she was cradling the coffee in her lap while she was driving. if that was the case, she should have been held partially responsible for not having common sense.

 

[Scott Free]

190ºF is not “tepid,” it is “just below boiling.” It’s also something like 30-40º hotter than the American restaurant association’s standards for “hot” coffee. (The reason for the high temperature, by the way, was that McD’s was using a cheap variety of beans that required near-boiling water to extract any flavor.)

I am no fan of frivolous lawsuits, but the McD’s coffee judgment strikes me as a perfect example of the system working as it should, to penalize corporations for doing things that are really stupid and harmful. No wonder it’s become the poster-child for irresponsible corporate propagandists* who would like to see the whole tort system “reformed” out of existence.

*not referring to anybody on this board

 

[cwadej]

I heard that she was cradling the coffee in her lap while she was driving. if that was the case, she should have been held partially responsible for not having common sense.

She was a passenger, the vehicle was stopped, not in gear. She removed the lid to add creamer.

 

[sam2019]

(The reason for the high temperature, by the way, was that McD’s was using a cheap variety of beans that required near-boiling water to extract any flavor.)

not a single coffee machine in the world boils below 100C. It is physics mate, not politics. how long they boil is also of no consequence.
it is called "cooking coffee" for a reason, not luke warming coffee.

I am no fan of frivolous lawsuits, but the McD’s coffee judgment strikes me as a perfect example of the system working as it should, to penalize corporations for doing things that are really stupid and harmful.

I could come up with a lot of examples for that, from nuclear waste to the "defence" budget of the US, but this coffe issue is not one of them LOL

No wonder it’s become the poster-child for irresponsible corporate propagandists* who would like to see the whole tort system “reformed” out of existence.

well, no amount of leftist green politics far removed from common sense and any incling of applied intelligence will change the laws of physcis, sorry to disappoint.
of course I also take this disclaimer*

*not referring to anybody on this board

 

[Wintrup]

This thread should probably be snipped and this interesting and lively off topic discussion moved to the Campfire. Just a thought.

 

[Robert]

Riding motorcycles is inherently more dangerous than driving cars. Anybody in his or her right mind should realise this. So is riding track days or even racing. So is solo hiking in sparsely populated areas. So is driving without safety belts on or riding without a helmet. So is parachute jumping.
I sometimes did and / or do all of the above. Not with the intent of getting hurt or taking unnecessary risks. On the contrary, it takes more consciousness to do these things and enjoy them safely. There is no substitute for thinking.
Not everybody thinks. So some get hurt. Modern culture has taught people to look for some one else to blame and modern society facilitates that by legislation and unscrupulous lawyers. Modern society takes away peoples responsibility. To take responsibility for one's own action is also a matter of growing up.
I dare to say that I'm old enough (and was brought up to be so at an early age) to be responsible for my own actions and accept that responsibility.
Maybe I make wrong decisions sometimes, but then these are my decisions: and so are the consequences.
I will not tell other people what to do, other than urge them to think. If I ride my tires till the canvas shows, that my problem. I Will not do that if I can help it, but sometimes you have no choice.
I have driven lots of kilometers with patched tubes while a mate of mine would not dream of riding any sort of distance with any sort of tire repair other than complete replacement.
Just go for whatever makes you feel comfortable. Use common sense. If in doubt use public transport.

 

[Justice Bikes]

"Just go for whatever makes you feel comfortable. Use common sense. If in doubt use public transport."

 

[sam2019]

If in doubt use public transport."

that may not be the safest advice LOL, at least not where I live, especially after dark.
can I sue you if I get robbed on the tube? or the board admin, or the board owner? or all three of you?
particularily for psychological damages to my unborn children as they will have to live with a traumatized dad?
where does the madness end?

 

[BurnieM]

By closing this thread ?

 

[cwadej]

it ends when you have a puncture 300 km from anything and have to walk because you do not carry a patch kit, but a penguin eats you a few meters later. your last thought is of course "why is there a penguin here?"

 

[BurnieM]

What happened to the tiger ?

 

[sam2019]

What happened to the tiger ?

it got sued out of existence

 

[cwadej]

What happened to the tiger ?

didnt feel right, so the penguin ran it off and now you're stuck with a penguin.

 

[puttbutt]

She was a passenger, the vehicle was stopped, not in gear. She removed the lid to add creamer.

that's why I drink my coffee black!

 

[puttbutt]

it ends when you have a puncture 300 km from anything and have to walk because you do not carry a patch kit, but a penguin eats you a few meters later. your last thought is of course "why is there a penguin here?"

I thought penguins eat fish?

 

[Roy Gavin]

In any case it would only have been necessary to prove that McDonalds should have known about the risk, not that they actually did know.
That is the "duty of care" which these claims are based on, and they are hard to avoid as they do not involve any direct contractual link between the parties, merely
the duty which everyone has to take care at all times!
In any case McDonalds did admit some responsibility and offered some compensation.
The $M3- was not compensation - it was punitive damages, a punishment, imposed by a court which was in possession of all the facts, for repeatedly and knowingly putting someone at risk.
If your opinion is different from the courts, fine, everyone has a different view of the world , sometimes based of facts others may not know.
But courts are compelled to follow the law - justice, equity , fairness or my or your or version of common sense simply does not come in to it!

 

[sam2019]

definitely campfire by now