DOG'S OWNERS SUE SAFEWAY

The owners of a dachshund injured while jumping for Safeway leaflets posted through their letterbox are suing the superstore firm.

Retired company doctor Gordon Musselwhite, 62, and wife Susan, 61, claim there was no need for the literature to be delivered to their home as they have a postbox at the start of their 140ft drive.

They say their dog, Muffin, was partially paralysed after leaping for the leaflets and will be taking a six-minute video showing his condition to court.

Mr and Mrs Musselwhite, from, Yealmpton, Devon, are suing Safeway for £2,826.65 for vet's bills and legal fees.

Mr Musselwhite said: "The whole of Muffin's rump and back legs were withered away to nothing."

He added: "The video shows the problems he was having a month after his operation, after he had 25 staples taken out of his back."

Safeway said in a statement: "Mr Musselwhite alleges Safeway is responsible for injury caused to one of the family pets, named Muffin.

"We do not consider there to be any liability on the part of Safeway.

"The leaflet was actually delivered by the National Leaflet Co.

"But regardless, we feel what has happened to Muffin was merely an unfortunate incident for which no party can be held responsible"

Taken from SKY NEWS

Most dachsund owners will no doubt be given good advice my experienced breeders with regard to the advisability of them jumping etc.

After feeling hurt the first thing one feels after an accident to us, our our children, pets etc is embarassment and it is human nature to want to "blame" someone or something else.

This accident could have been avoided if the owners had made a suitable and sufficient risk assessment of their own circumstances and implemented one simple procedure.

Tape up their letterbox so that no mail COULD be pushed through!

Whilst it is true that they installed a mail box if they had taken the simple, cheap and quick solution of PREVENTION rather than try to CONTROL occurrences which they could not adequately supervise there would be no ingress of mail, dog would not jump up, dog would not have accident.

In fact they only have themselves to blame! (IMHO)

If you have a dog that jumps up to get the mail then surely its your own fault if it gets injured. If the postie had delivered mail would the dog have jumped up the same? I know that posties have to shove mail right into the letter box so that nothing is left outside, but I have seen mail stuck on the brushes on the inside. If the dog then hurt itself would you sue the Post Office?

I think these people only have themselves to blame.

Money grabbing?.... absolutly!

If they can't train their dog not to jump then they should have taken the temptation away from him by taping the letterbox shut :rolleyes: It's not the supermarkets fault at all - especially as they paid a company to deliver for them!

Some people will try anything for a few quid (should have had it insured anyway)

I agree that they seem money grabbing, however I think it's harsh to claim they only have themselves to blame.  Not all events have causes directly related to human involvement!  Sometimes naff things happen and instead of blaming people just accept it and deal with the consequances of unfortunate events.

MW

Why does every incident have to have somebody to blame - what happened to common sense.

Things happen resulting in sometimes unforseen circumstances - why can't people just live with it rather than trying to make money out of everything

"what happened to common sense"  
Not very common any more, I'm afraid, Christine!! ;)

This is just another example of the compensation culture we have

In partial defence of these people, I read an article and it seems that the basis on their claim is that they have a very long drive, but at the gate they actually have a letterbox and notices that people should not enter the garden but use this letterbox.  They thought this would (and apparentlly usually does) stop things being put through the door - I think they said what sort of amoron walks past half a dozen notices telling them not to do so?  I also hear the lady being interviewed on the radio - she sounded very reasonable, and genuinely concerned for her dog.  They had taken all these measures so he would have nothing to jump up at, so did not think it necessary to have the letterbox on the actual door removed, after all it would be so much extra walk and work for anyone to reach it.  I also got the impression that Safeway were passing the buck off on to the firm that they used for deliveries.  But I do agree - 20 years ago no one would have though about bringing a claim for such a thing!
bye
Gwen

It was on my local news tonight that the couple lost their claim for compensation. Chez.

When my two have had ops we have taped up the letterbox and put a note on door saying please post everything at Number .... next door. My two get excited when post is put through the letterbox and have to open a letter every day - an envelope we give them :) :)

Gina

Not wanting to start a strop here.
If they had a letter box at the end of the drive why in the hell did the deliverers put it through the door.
If it had been my dogs, Mastiff, Bullmastiff and two JRT's would they have walked up the drive. I think not.

I have been in the position of the said 'deliverers', I was over the moon not to have to walk up a long drive.

You put a 'box' up for a purpose. Not to have people walking all over your property.

If the said 'box' was easily visible then I personally think the vet fee's should be paid. Now whether that should be by the 'Safeway' firm or the distribution firm it's not for me to say.

Maybe the 'deliverers' were not trained personel. Then where would the claim lay??
D4wn

Just my opinion. I do like my privacy.

Maybe the person who delivered the leaflets could not read?!  There are a huge number of people in the UK who sadly are illiterate and have never learned to read or write.

When we put a box on the gate we blocked off the letterbox on the door. Not that my dogs would hurt their backs but I was concerned for peoples fingers as they all competed to be first to the prize of an important letter. Said important letter was always destroyed in the insuring tug of war.

On a much more distressing subject the people whose children's body parts were removed.  They want at least £5,000 each as that is what the Alderhay children's parents were given rather than the £1,000 that has been informally mentioned to them.  I imagine most of them did not even know about this till the media got hold of it and now they are demanding compensation.

What would £1,000 buy - 1/3 of a hip replacement?  If the NHS is going to have to pay out all this money I wonder where it is going to come from and who is going to suffer because of it.  I can understand payments being made when something has gone wrong and the person is still living and needs constant nursing or phyical adaptations to the home but not for everyone because of "distress caused".  If everyone received money every time we were distressed about something we would all be millionaires and the lawyers multi-billionaires

(BTW If my daughter had died in hospital instead of quietly at home her notes medical stated we would give our permission for organ donations.)

Have to agree with you; these people would not be suffering stress if it weren't for the media stirring the whole thing up.  Not the correct thing to do without permission may be, but had been done for years and if the bereaved require money to make them feel better perhaps they should turn to those who are the real cause of their distress, the media.

In our family we mourn and remember the sprit of a person not their body parts, believing that the body is just the mechanism and container that allows the personality that is the loved one to exist.

I completely disagree.

Those parents are entitled to compensation. They lost children whose body parts where removed and stored...without their permission. Its nothing less than theft. I'd be going after the NHS for far more than £5000 if that had happened to my child - the stress at finding out you had buried half your child must be intolerable.

As for where the money is coming from....the NHS receives plenty of money, its just badly managed. If they stopped making such catastrophic mistakes (removing the wrong kidney and killing the man, for example) then I would have more sympathy. But for now they are stuck in a vicious circle. As for the hip replacement - I wouldn't know - my grandad, aged 88 had to pay £8K to go private to get his done.

C :)

Confused Chloe, how would money help, surley if you lost a child no amount of money would make that any better, how would taking money from other peoples children or your Grandfather help?

If you think that way then there would be no point int he victims of Lockerbie, for example, pursuing compensation! The stress was caused by theft of a childs organs, without parental consent - money won't replace the child, but if its the only way to receive some kind of payment for the stress and heartache concerned then its worth every penny. Its not taking it from my Grandfather or anyone else, he, and I have paid enough into the NHS throughout our lives to cover any illnesses so far (thats the first time he has ever been in hospital and he had to go private )

You think an apology and a promise not to do it again is sufficient? They DO do it again though don't they.

I totally agree with that statement - and it must be infuriating to have gone to such lengths to avoid the problem, and someone goes and ignores it. However, I think that you have to be prepared for all eventualities with dogs, and not assume everyone else is going to think the same, and someone walking round delivering hundreds of leaflets just might not have seen the box!

I would assume that the dog was insured... if not, I can perhaps understand why they would pursue the company, if so, then thats where the money grabbing bit could come in. JMO mind :)