On 23/11/2012 21:55, John Williamson wrote:
Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 23/11/2012 19:42, John Williamson wrote:
Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 23/11/2012 15:35, John Williamson wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:22:06 on Fri, 23
Nov
2012, Graeme Wall remarked:
I believe bus replacement services have designated "bus stops",

No, they just stop on a country road somewhere near the station.

They stop at the point designated by the Train operating Company. This
is the only point approved by the insurance company.

Is the insurance thing really true, or is it like the common idea that
you should never clear snow off a path or give someone first aid? ISTR
that the often quoted idea that if a someone who hasn't bought a
ticket is killed then the transport company and/or its insurers can
have no liability is not actually true.

I've been told by many managers over the years that it is true.

That's not quite the answer to the question

Clearing snow can leave you responsible for the consequences if you do
it and don't leave a safe surface.

Even the Daily Mail has admitted that this is a myth:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...on-winter.html

An article from 2010 spouting about the *proposed* introduction of a
"Snow Code"

Because the authorities realised the urban myth was taking firm root, so
they decided to make clear what the real position is. There was no need
to introduce anything new.

Further digging reveals a copy of the Snow Code which says, in part
"There’s no law stopping you from clearing snow and ice on the pavement
outside your home or from public spaces. It’s unlikely you’ll be sued or
held legally responsible for any injuries on the path if you have
cleared it carefully. Follow the snow code when clearing snow and ice
safely."

"Unlikely to be sued" does *not* mean that if someone slips on a bit
you've cleared, you're not going to get sued.

Just as there is no guarantee that you won't get attacked by a unicorn.

First aid is a legal minefield and a
number of people have been successfully sued, especially if they have
professional training. An example would be a nurse or doctor, or even a
vet doing the best they could at the time, but still leaving the patient
with a problem that could have been cured if they had called an
ambulance instead of going it alone.

How many people have been successfully sued for doing the best they
could at the time, rather than for something like negligence?

In this country, not many.

Quite.

In the USA, it has been reported that doctors
have either refused to help or have not admitted to any knowledge for
fear of being sued.

And in Cambodia they had doctors killed for being doctors - it's of
about equal relevance in this country. I've read that in some countries
people can in theory get in trouble for _not_ helping someone in need of
help (presumably this is subject to various limitations, and a quick
Google suggests that phoning for professional help is probably
sufficient these days).

Is there any exemption if something unusual happens - the bus station
burns down, the bus conks out, a mad axe-murderer gets on-board?

The owner's public liability insurance is liable, it depends on what the
breakdown is and whether the passengers are delivered to their
destination, and the last is a matter for the police.

So if you stay on and die, your family get a refund on your ticket (or
whatever), but if you escape while not at a scheduled stop you are on
your own?

Pretty much, yes. It's your choice. Then again, how often do axe
murderers get onto a bus and start hacking people at random?

I think I'll take my chances with getting off at the wrong stop if one
ever does.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK