Suing a charity.

JTF wrote:It appears that the charity is doing the wrong thing here, imho. (It should not have handled it this way, obviously, or there would be no bad publicity over it.)

The wiring is a serious situation that could have killed somebody and should not be characterized as a small, innocuous incident. The way the kid is being treated can result in some punitive damages here, imo.

Bad behaviour should never be rewarded, and that is what would happen if this was swept under the carpet.

JTF wrote:I just got a different feeling when I read the story. To me it was...frick off dude...we've got insurance.

Just the mention of having insurance smacks of bad judgement and very bad negotiations skills.

Imo, they should dump the jerk that talked to the dad and make a settlement. They should then sue their electrical ontractor.

Freeman wrote:True, 120 volts has the potential to kill. My point is that such dangers exist all over the place, but is it negligence worthy of a lawsuit?

Deank wrote:

Freeman wrote:True, 120 volts has the potential to kill. My point is that such dangers exist all over the place, but is it negligence worthy of a lawsuit?

I cant count on my hands the number of times I have been electrocuted by 120 volt.. all I can say is thank god for breakers.