Car Park Barrier Failure

[polygonum]

Good evening,

On top of all the other questions/issues re NHS car parks, an actual
incident occurred the other day at one such car park. The solitary exit
barrier - usually controlled by putting in the paid-on-foot ticket -
failed in the down position. Many people were stuck, in their vehicles,
in the car park, unable to leave.

What legal issues apply here?

I imagine there comes a point at which people physically breaking the
barrier down could be argued as the actions of a reasonable person. But
I also imagine there are reasonable steps to be taken by the car park
operator(s)? Is there a precedent for how long people can be delayed
before it becomes unreasonable to impose further delay by even
attempting to check tickets (i.e. just let everyone out regardless)?

--
Rod

[John Briggs]

Last time this happened to me (station car park, late at night), I had
my socket set in my car, and we unbolted the arm of the barrier.
--
John Briggs

[Roland Perry]

In message <astmmi...@mid.individual.net>, at 19:35:02 on Sat, 13
Apr 2013, polygonum <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk> remarked:

>Is there a precedent for how long people can be delayed

3hrs seems to be a magic figure (often crops up when rescuing people off
failed trains and waiting to be seen in A&E). But I realise that seems
like a long time to those who are waiting.
--
Roland Perry

[GB]

I must have a shorter fuse than you. I'd have said 3 minutes, and hang
the consequences.

[Roland Perry]

In message <516a6c59$0$1102$5b6a...@news.zen.co.uk>, at 09:45:10 on
Sun, 14 Apr 2013, GB <NOTso...@microsoft.com> remarked:

>>> Is there a precedent for how long people can be delayed
>>
>> 3hrs seems to be a magic figure (often crops up when rescuing people off
>> failed trains and waiting to be seen in A&E). But I realise that seems
>> like a long time to those who are waiting.
>
>I must have a shorter fuse than you.

I'm not saying 3hrs is acceptable, however sometimes one has to put up
with it because there's not much you can do.

>I'd have said 3 minutes, and hang the consequences.

When I was trapped in a hospital [PFI treatment centre, actually] car
park a couple of years ago it was because the sole ticket machine was
refusing to take any money at all (not just certain money like the one
this week). And while this week's hospital car park didn't have
barriers, that one did.

It took me a good 15 minutes to find an admin person to issue me a
"free" ticket; the intercom in the car park failed to raise any
response. It was coming up to 6pm and I doubt the receptionist I found
was going to be on duty much longer.
--
Roland Perry

[steve robinson]

I have in the past forced a barrier up when the staff refused to open
it after a power failure or allow me to operate the system manually

[steve robinson]

The barriers can be manually released, unfortunatly most establishments
fail to advise customer facing staff how to do it.

[polygonum]

On 14/04/2013 08:35, Roland Perry wrote:

It certainly would! Had I been caught in the car park of this question
(rather than my sister), ten minutes would have seemed a long time!
Translated to myself, after two hours of stressful visiting, hungry and
with an hour and a half of driving through foul weather to get home,
though quite possibly driven by emotion rather than rationality or law.

--
Rod

[Roland Perry]

In message <xn0igt4q...@reader80.eternal-september.org>, at
10:45:10 on Sun, 14 Apr 2013, steve robinson
<st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> remarked:

>> Last time this happened to me (station car park, late at night), I
>> had my socket set in my car, and we unbolted the arm of the barrier.
>
>The barriers can be manually released, unfortunatly most establishments
>fail to advise customer facing staff how to do it.

What are these "customer facing staff" of which you speak? That was my
problem earlier this week - car park operator absent, hospital staff
saying "it's not our car park".
--
Roland Perry

[Stephen Wolstenholme]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 19:35:02 +0100, polygonum <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk>
wrote:

That's happened to me once on a car park in Manchester. It was
normally manned but had a machine as well. My ticket was crumpled up
and the machine did not like it! As there were cars behind me waiting
I got out to find help but there was no attendant. The chap in the car
behind told me to lift the barrier by hand and he offered to help me
do it. It had no form of locking so it was easy to lift up a little
bit and then walk down the length of barrier arm lifting it more and
more. As it happens I did not need any help to lift it. The
counterweight eventually took over and held it in the upright
position. No doubt I was breaking some law or other but I got a round
of applause!

Steve

--
EasyNN-plus. Neural Networks plus. http://www.easynn.com
SwingNN. Forecast with Neural Networks. http://www.swingnn.com
JustNN. Just Neural Networks. http://www.justnn.com

[polygonum]

So, had you not been released, could there be an issue of being detained
against your will? Or deprived of the use of your vehicle?

--
Rod

[Ste]

Last time this happened to me, I snapped the arm of the barrier.

[Roland Perry]

In message <asvc8m...@mid.individual.net>, at 10:50:02 on Sun, 14
Apr 2013, polygonum <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk> remarked:

>> When I was trapped in a hospital [PFI treatment centre, actually] car
>> park a couple of years ago it was because the sole ticket machine was
>> refusing to take any money at all (not just certain money like the one
>> this week). And while this week's hospital car park didn't have
>> barriers, that one did.
>>
>> It took me a good 15 minutes to find an admin person to issue me a
>> "free" ticket; the intercom in the car park failed to raise any
>> response. It was coming up to 6pm and I doubt the receptionist I found
>> was going to be on duty much longer.
>
>So, had you not been released, could there be an issue of being
>detained against your will? Or deprived of the use of your vehicle?

Yes, and there would have come a time (maybe after half an hour) when
I'd have given up trying to get someone to release me, and ordered a
taxi to take me home - sending the bill to the car park operator. In
that case I lived only five miles from the hospital, in an area crawling
with taxis. My current home/hospital situation is somewhat different.
--
Roland Perry

[David McNeish]

On Apr 14, 11:10 am, Stephen Wolstenholme <st...@npsl1.com> wrote:

> No doubt I was breaking some law or other

I would say you're certainly in the clear if you don't even cause
damage to the barrier. If you've actually paid for the parking then I
don't see what objection the car park operators can have. Not sure at
what point it might become "reasonable" to break the barrier but
they're normally designed not to cause costly damage if someone drives
into them.

[Roland Perry]

In message
<040e90ab-2e82-42a4...@a3g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>, at
17:15:01 on Sun, 14 Apr 2013, David McNeish <davi...@gmail.com>
remarked:

>> No doubt I was breaking some law or other
>
>I would say you're certainly in the clear if you don't even cause
>damage to the barrier. If you've actually paid for the parking then I
>don't see what objection the car park operators can have.

But one of the major failure modes is the payment machines breaking, so
you don't have a bit of card to let you out of the barrier.
--
Roland Perry

[Man at B&Q]

Really? They have been known to kill people when faulty.

MBQ

[the Omrud]

And remember what happened to Max Headroom.

--
David

[David McNeish]

I think that's more an issue with the more solid sort of swing barrier
padlocked in place to prevent out-of-hours access (or rather, when
they haven't been secured and swing into the path of a car). Typical
automatic barriers are pretty flimsy and designed to snap off rather
than cause damage to the motor unit etc.

[Clive George]

I know somebody who drove through one of the Dartford ones. He wasn't
trying to avoid the toll, just screwed up his automatic thinking that
day. Don't think there was any damage to the car, and for some reason
they just sent him the bill for the toll crossing rather than the
barrier. (he'd not stopped)

[Man at B&Q]

On Apr 15, 11:30 am, David McNeish <david...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 15, 9:40 am, "Man at B&Q" <manatba...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 14, 5:15 pm, David McNeish <david...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Not sure at
> > > what point it might become "reasonable" to break the barrier but
> > > they're normally designed not to cause costly damage if someone drives
> > > into them.
>
> > Really? They have been known to kill people when faulty.
>
> I think that's more an issue with the more solid sort of swing barrier
> padlocked in place to prevent out-of-hours access (or rather, when
> they haven't been secured and swing into the path of a car).

Not in the cases I am thinking of. Standard supermarket car park
barriers.

MBQ

[polygonum]

On 15/04/2013 09:40, Man at B&Q wrote:

They have been known to kill when not actually faulty:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1166393/Woman-79-killed-blow-car-park-barrier-left-hospital.html

It becomes increasingly difficult to decide what is the safe and proper
thing to do - such barriers can cause and have caused injury or death,
pedestrians are normally barred from being near them, but how else do
you attempt to open a failed barrier than getting out of the vehicle and
walking up to the barrier?

--
Rod

[Roland Perry]

In message
<7ce0617a-e1bc-445b...@b10g2000vbu.googlegroups.com>, at
14:20:02 on Mon, 15 Apr 2013, Man at B&Q <manat...@hotmail.com>
remarked:

>> > > Not sure at
>> > > what point it might become "reasonable" to break the barrier but
>> > > they're normally designed not to cause costly damage if someone drives
>> > > into them.
>>
>> > Really? They have been known to kill people when faulty.
>>
>> I think that's more an issue with the more solid sort of swing barrier
>> padlocked in place to prevent out-of-hours access (or rather, when
>> they haven't been secured and swing into the path of a car).
>
>Not in the cases I am thinking of. Standard supermarket car park
>barriers.

Which are quite rare. The only ones I recall are inside the M25.
--
Roland Perry

[The Todal]

On 13/4/13 19:35, polygonum wrote:
> Good evening,
>
> On top of all the other questions/issues re NHS car parks, an actual
> incident occurred the other day at one such car park. The solitary exit
> barrier - usually controlled by putting in the paid-on-foot ticket -
> failed in the down position. Many people were stuck, in their vehicles,
> in the car park, unable to leave.
>
> What legal issues apply here?

False imprisonment - unless someone can come up with a good legal reason
why the tort is incomplete. A barrier which fails in the down position
doesn't seem to me to be essentially different from an employee locking
up a building by mistake with people inside it.

>
> I imagine there comes a point at which people physically breaking the
> barrier down could be argued as the actions of a reasonable person. But
> I also imagine there are reasonable steps to be taken by the car park
> operator(s)? Is there a precedent for how long people can be delayed
> before it becomes unreasonable to impose further delay by even
> attempting to check tickets (i.e. just let everyone out regardless)?
>

I don't think there are any precedents. It seems reasonable to me that
if you are falsely imprisoned you must have the right to attempt to
escape even if that means forcing a door, breaking a window or damaging
a barrier.

I wouldn't wait more than half an hour, if I were imprisoned in that
way. Unless someone had promised that they were on their way and would
arrive shortly to let everyone out.

[the Omrud]

On 15/04/2013 16:55, The Todal wrote:
> On 13/4/13 19:35, polygonum wrote:
>> Good evening,
>>
>> On top of all the other questions/issues re NHS car parks, an actual
>> incident occurred the other day at one such car park. The solitary exit
>> barrier - usually controlled by putting in the paid-on-foot ticket -
>> failed in the down position. Many people were stuck, in their vehicles,
>> in the car park, unable to leave.
>>
>> What legal issues apply here?
>
> False imprisonment - unless someone can come up with a good legal reason
> why the tort is incomplete. A barrier which fails in the down position
> doesn't seem to me to be essentially different from an employee locking
> up a building by mistake with people inside it.

Surely it's only the car which has been imprisoned. The barrier is
preventing the driver from extracting his property from the car park,
but it's not stopping him from walking away.

--
David

[Nightjar]

On 15/04/2013 16:55, Jethro_uk wrote:
....
> When I worked in vehicle weighing, one system used barriers to align the
> vehicle on the weighbridge. I was amused on a site visit to notice that
> the barrier had been replaced with a section of guttering downpipe, and
> that they kept a couple of spares. Apparently lorry drivers couldn't be
> bothered to wait for the arm to lift, and just drive through them.

They need the stuff that flexible chevrons on some roundabouts are made
from - a bit like half-round guttering made from rubber. They just flex
out of the way when hit, then bounce back into place.

Colin Bignell

[The Todal]

Yes. That does seem a good point. Even though nobody would want to leave
their car in a queue, blocking those behind, it may be that it wouldn't
constitute false imprisonment.

Probably "wrongful interference with goods" or trespass to goods, which
would likewise entitle the victim to make reasonable attempts to recover
his goods and mitigate his loss.

[Ian Jackson]

In article <at2m11...@mid.individual.net>,

The Todal <deadm...@beeb.net> wrote:
>False imprisonment - unless someone can come up with a good legal reason
>why the tort is incomplete. A barrier which fails in the down position
>doesn't seem to me to be essentially different from an employee locking
>up a building by mistake with people inside it.

Does false imprisonment apply if what is being held is merely a
conveyance rather than someone's person ?

--
Ian Jackson personal email: <ijac...@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
These opinions are my own. http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ijackson/
PGP2 key 1024R/0x23f5addb, fingerprint 5906F687 BD03ACAD 0D8E602E FCF37657

[Nightjar]

The problem with frangible street furniture is that it is vulnerable to
vandalism, so not everybody chooses the frangible option.

Colin Bignell

[polygonum]

On 15/04/2013 15:35, Jethro_uk wrote:

> Assuming you have the ability to walk.
>
Absolutely.

--
Rod

[the Omrud]

On 15/04/2013 17:35, Jethro_uk wrote:

> Sure that depends on the driver ? It's a possibility that exit from the
> car park is impossible for someone who can't walk - but can drive.

This is getting to the edge of my knowledge, but I still don't see that
as false imprisonment. The driver is not being prevented from leaving
by whatever means he is capable of. False imprisonment implies the
complete blocking of somebody from leaving.

--
David

[Dr Zoidberg]

"the Omrud" <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0dWat.323$Hx7...@fx11.fr7...

Using that argument, you would be able to say it's not false imprisonment if
you happen to be physically capable of fighting your way free of kidnappers.

--
Alex

[Mark Goodge]

On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 18:20:02 +0100, Dr Zoidberg put finger to keyboard and
typed:

>
>"the Omrud" <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:0dWat.323$Hx7...@fx11.fr7...
>>

>> This is getting to the edge of my knowledge, but I still don't see that as
>> false imprisonment. The driver is not being prevented from leaving by
>> whatever means he is capable of. False imprisonment implies the complete
>> blocking of somebody from leaving.
>>
>Using that argument, you would be able to say it's not false imprisonment if
>you happen to be physically capable of fighting your way free of kidnappers.

Actually, it isn't.

Or, to be more precise, if you are only being restrained by a person,
however strong, then it isn't imprisonment. One of the key aspects of false
imprisonment is that you are in a prison - that is, a physical space from
which you are unable to exit.

Of course, just because you're not physically imprisoned doesn't mean it
isn't a crime. There are all sorts of other possible offences, including
wrongful arrest, assault and kidnapping, which could apply.

Mark
--
Please take a short survey on salary perceptions: http://meyu.eu/am
My blog: http://mark.goodge.co.uk

[Ian Jackson]

In message <cqeom8p7u0c83jmlh...@news.markshouse.net>,
Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> writes

You could argue that being stuck in a broken-down train - or even in car
in a 20 mile queue on a blocked motorway - might also be unlawful
imprisonment. However, even with their best efforts, it may not
realistically be humanly possible for anyone to 'release' you quickly,
so I guess that argument would fail. On the other hand, it is obviously
foreseeable that a carpark barrier mechanism might fail, so the
operators should at least have a contingency plan available to release
those trapped with the minimum of delay and inconvenience.
--
Ian

[polygonum]

Again, assuming the person is able to get out and walk. If the person
were disabled, maybe it truly would be false imprisonment. But maybe it
would also be false imprisonment if the environment you are in when you
get out of your car is dangerous enough to require "No pedestrian
access" signs on H&S grounds?

--
Rod

[Mark Goodge]

On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 19:25:01 +0100, Ian Jackson put finger to keyboard and

False imprisonment requires intent; it isn't a strict liability offence. So
yes, there is certainly a defence of being reasonably unable to effect a
release.

> On the other hand, it is obviously
>foreseeable that a carpark barrier mechanism might fail, so the
>operators should at least have a contingency plan available to release
>those trapped with the minimum of delay and inconvenience.

I agree, but I think that a reasonable financial consideration would come
into it. The cost of having someone on site 24x7 is likely to be
significant, and would consequently increase the costs of providing the
service and may even make it unviable. Simply having someone on call, even
several miles away, would probably be considered reasonable in most cases.

[Roland Perry]

In message <at2on6...@mid.individual.net>, at 17:40:02 on Mon, 15
Apr 2013, polygonum <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk> remarked:

>maybe it would also be false imprisonment if the environment you are in
>when you get out of your car is dangerous enough to require "No
>pedestrian access" signs on H&S grounds?

Seems unlikely in a hospital car park, where patients who have arrived
by car are expected to walk/hobble/etc to their appointments.
--
Roland Perry

[polygonum]

I meant in the typical way things are at many multi-storey car parks.
Quite often the exit area - where the barrier is - will be so
restricted. And that, of course, is likely where you will be stuck if a
barrier fails. This is as likely at a hospital as anywhere else. And is,
arrangement-wise, exactly how things are at one of the hospitals I have
recently been visiting. Hobbling or rolling from the parking bays is, I
agree, unlikely to be restricted.

--
Rod

[tim......]

"David McNeish" <davi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:040e90ab-2e82-42a4...@a3g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...

On Apr 14, 11:10 am, Stephen Wolstenholme <st...@npsl1.com> wrote:

> No doubt I was breaking some law or other

I would say you're certainly in the clear if you don't even cause
damage to the barrier. If you've actually paid for the parking then I
don't see what objection the car park operators can have. Not sure at
what point it might become "reasonable" to break the barrier but
they're normally designed not to cause costly damage if someone drives
into them.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Or if they come down on the guy behind trying to "shoulder surf", as a
pillock in front of me at the Thames crossing once tried

tim

[Adam Funk]

It seems quite possible to me that a patient might be able to hobble
with his/her driver's help from the parking space to the hospital, but
not practically farther than that.

[Roland Perry]

In message <pvs04ax...@news.ducksburg.com>, at 22:50:30 on Tue, 16
Apr 2013, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> remarked:

>>>maybe it would also be false imprisonment if the environment you are in
>>>when you get out of your car is dangerous enough to require "No
>>>pedestrian access" signs on H&S grounds?
>>
>> Seems unlikely in a hospital car park, where patients who have arrived
>> by car are expected to walk/hobble/etc to their appointments.
>
>It seems quite possible to me that a patient might be able to hobble
>with his/her driver's help from the parking space to the hospital, but
>not practically farther than that.

The only distance they need to hobble is from inside the car park to
just outside the car park, to get into the waiting taxi.
--
Roland Perry

[Robin Bignall]

On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 17:55:02 +0100, the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Which would apply to people who can't walk. AFAIK it's a criminal
offence to clamp or otherwise immobilise a vehicle with a valid blue
badge correctly displayed, or to tow it more than is necessary to move
it from causing an obstruction. Similarly to park so close to it front
and rear that it is immobilised.

I don't know how that would apply in the case of a stuck barrier, but I
would be in trouble in those circumstances. My electric wheelchair, the
lightest on the market, is now at the limit of the strength of my wife
and me to put it into the boot, and unless we know that we're going to
somewhere -- typically a hospital -- where the disabled parking is a
long way from where we have to get to, we don't normally carry it in the
car.
--
Robin Bignall
Herts, England

[Ste]

On Apr 18, 12:45 am, Robin Bignall <docro...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 17:55:02 +0100, the Omrud <usenet.om...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> [...]

>
> My electric wheelchair, the
> lightest on the market, is now at the limit of the strength of my wife
> and me to put it into the boot,

Couldn't help noticing that you avoided the often incorrect use of the
stock phrase "my wife and I" in the accusative, but it is still not
quite correct. You would not say "it is at the limit of the strength
of me to put it into the boot". It should be "is now at the limit of
my and my wife's strength to put in the boot".

[polygonum]

I post to agree with Robin about the effective false imprisonment, or
could it detention against will?

I also wonder if the exit barrier in a multi-storey car park has to be
linked to fire alarms. If you have a number of vehicles waiting to get
out, that represents possibly the most sensible emergency/fire exit for
those already in their vehicles with engines running.

On the grammatical issue I remain to be convinced.

There is a change in emphasis by putting "my and my wife's" which Robin
probably did not intend and would not wish. "my wife's and my strength"
would appear a better fit. Somehow, I want to force another word into
the sentence - "combined strength"? - but that too changes emphasis.

--
Rod

[Norman Wells]

Ste wrote:
> On Apr 18, 12:45 am, Robin Bignall <docro...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 17:55:02 +0100, the Omrud
>> <usenet.om...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> My electric wheelchair, the
>> lightest on the market, is now at the limit of the strength of my
>> wife and me to put it into the boot,
>
> Couldn't help noticing that you avoided the often incorrect use of the
> stock phrase "my wife and I" in the accusative, but it is still not
> quite correct. You would not say "it is at the limit of the strength
> of me to put it into the boot".

For the life of me I can't see why you say that.

> It should be "is now at the limit of
> my and my wife's strength to put in the boot".

Actually, both are perfectly correct.

[Adam Funk]

I agree.

[Simon Finnigan]

How are they paying the taxi,they've just put their last money into the car
parking payment machine.

[Roland Perry]

In message
<1729537134387979010.84200...@news.individual.net>
, at 16:00:03 on Thu, 18 Apr 2013, Simon Finnigan
<simonf...@hotmail.com> remarked:

>> The only distance they need to hobble is from inside the car park to just
>> outside the car park, to get into the waiting taxi.
>
>How are they paying the taxi,they've just put their last money into the car
>parking payment machine.

On one hand taxis might take credit cards and notes (and/or stop at an
ATM on the way), and on the other hand the taxi might take the coins
which the carpark machine was refusing to accept.
--
Roland Perry

[Ste]

Perhaps, "my wife and I find that it is now at the limit of our
strength to put it into the boot"?

[Ste]

The former does not sound correct to me. You wouldn't say, for
example, "your behaviour is at the limit of the tolerance of me".

[GB]

On 18/04/2013 00:45, Robin Bignall wrote:

>
> I don't know how that would apply in the case of a stuck barrier, but I
> would be in trouble in those circumstances. My electric wheelchair, the
> lightest on the market, is now at the limit of the strength of my wife
> and me to put it into the boot,

Leaving aside the grammar, I had to pick up a non-electric wheelchair
the other day, and it was really rather heavy and cumbersome. This was
definitely not a lightweight one, though. IIRC it took two of us to get
it into the car boot without damaging either the car or the chair.

For electric ones, it would make sense if they came apart, so for
example the battery and the motor can be loaded separately from the
rest. Are they made like that?

[John Briggs]

You wouldn't say it, but that does not make it incorrect.
--
John Briggs

[Robin Bignall]

That's probably better, you nitpickers, but did anyone NOT understand
what I was trying to say?
Seriously, though, it's become a bit of a problem. The tricycle,
stripped of the battery and seat and with handlebars lowered, just fits
into the rear of the boot. Because of hydraulic struts to the sides of
the boot lid, the battery and seat have to be lifted over the trike to
be placed to its front. Those are the difficult bits because they're at
arms' length, and heavy (for us).
We usually now hire a taxi, and the driver simply picks the whole trike
up as easy as pie and puts it into the back of his 7-seater. Oh to be
young and strong (and not need the trike) again!

[Robin Bignall]

Oh yes. You can remove the battery and seat assembly from mine, and the
handlebars fold down. You end up with three separate pieces, designed
to fit into the average boot.
Chassis / motor assembly -- very heavy (for us)
Battery -- quite heavy because it has to be lifted over the chassis
Handlebars -- not so heavy but quite awkward as bits stick out.

[GB]

On 19/04/2013 17:00, Robin Bignall wrote:

> We usually now hire a taxi, and the driver simply picks the whole trike
> up as easy as pie and puts it into the back of his 7-seater. Oh to be
> young and strong (and not need the trike) again!
>

My wife runs a stroke support group, and they had a little discussion
about winning the lottery and what they would buy with the proceeds.
One of the members simply said "good health".

[GB]

After I posted that, I had a look on the Internet, and there is quite a
neat 3 wheeler that I found which is overall quite light, 35 lbs.
However, they spoil that because the heaviest single part of it comes to
21 lbs.

http://www.travelscoot.com/specifications.htm

[Ste]

If you wouldn't say it, then that is *exactly* what makes it incorrect.

[Simon Finnigan]

What credit card? What bank notes? I always have a few quid in change in my
car, I don't always have cards or significant quantities of cash on me.

We are also considering the issue of a barrier failing to lift and let a
driver out of the car park, hence the mention of H&S signs forbidding
pedestrian access to the area.

[Neil Williams]

Simon Finnigan <simonf...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> What credit card? What bank notes? I always have a few quid in change in my
> car, I don't always have cards or significant quantities of cash on me.

I always carry my wallet when leaving the house other than if I'm just
going for a quick jog, and even then I might in case I pop into the shop on
the way back. Never understand why anyone wouldn't - you never quite know
what might happen. It sits on the kitchen table, half a second to grab on
the way out. It would normally contain between 10 and 50 quid in cash, and
a good selection of plastic.

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK. Put first name before the at to reply.

[Roland Perry]

In message
<1591362148388097067.75932...@news.individual.net>
, at 11:55:01 on Sat, 20 Apr 2013, Simon Finnigan

<simonf...@hotmail.com> remarked:
>>>> The only distance they need to hobble is from inside the car park to just
>>>> outside the car park, to get into the waiting taxi.
>>>
>>> How are they paying the taxi,they've just put their last money into the car
>>> parking payment machine.
>>
>> On one hand taxis might take credit cards and notes (and/or stop at an
>> ATM on the way), and on the other hand the taxi might take the coins
>> which the carpark machine was refusing to accept.
>
>What credit card? What bank notes? I always have a few quid in change in my
>car, I don't always have cards or significant quantities of cash on me.

I always find it prudent to take some financial resources with me on
trips to the hospital. You never know how long you are going to be
there, or whether the car might break down, get a puncture, or be
involved in an accident.

In general I'll always have enough to "get me home", as appropriate to
the distance travelled (so definitely some cards if it's a 20 mile
drive, but maybe only a few pounds if it's walking distance).

>We are also considering the issue of a barrier failing to lift and let a
>driver out of the car park, hence the mention of H&S signs forbidding
>pedestrian access to the area.

Indeed, but what the signs usually mean is "don't walk past/under the
barrier" rather than "you are forbidden to get out of your car".
--
Roland Perry

[Simon Finnigan]

Neil Williams <wensl...@pacersplace.org.uk> wrote:
> Simon Finnigan <simonf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> What credit card? What bank notes? I always have a few quid in change in my
>> car, I don't always have cards or significant quantities of cash on me.
>
> I always carry my wallet when leaving the house other than if I'm just
> going for a quick jog, and even then I might in case I pop into the shop on
> the way back. Never understand why anyone wouldn't - you never quite know
> what might happen. It sits on the kitchen table, half a second to grab on
> the way out. It would normally contain between 10 and 50 quid in cash, and
> a good selection of plastic.
>
> Neil

I know a few people who don't have (and can't get) credit cards. And since
they are living right on the breadline, the thought of having £10-£50 spare
to leave lying in a wallet would be a dream come true for them. Not
everyone has spare money, I know there have been times in my life when I've
had a week or two to go until,payday, no money and no access to any credit
to cover the gap, and I've just had to not buy anything until payday.

[Simon Finnigan]

Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <1591362148388097067.75932...@news.individual.net>
> , at 11:55:01 on Sat, 20 Apr 2013, Simon Finnigan <simonf...@hotmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> The only distance they need to hobble is from inside the car park to just
>>>>> outside the car park, to get into the waiting taxi.
>>>>
>>>> How are they paying the taxi,they've just put their last money into the car
>>>> parking payment machine.
>>>
>>> On one hand taxis might take credit cards and notes (and/or stop at an
>>> ATM on the way), and on the other hand the taxi might take the coins
>>> which the carpark machine was refusing to accept.
>>
>> What credit card? What bank notes? I always have a few quid in change in my
>> car, I don't always have cards or significant quantities of cash on me.
>
> I always find it prudent to take some financial resources with me on
> trips to the hospital. You never know how long you are going to be there,
> or whether the car might break down, get a puncture, or be involved in an accident.
>
> In general I'll always have enough to "get me home", as appropriate to
> the distance travelled (so definitely some cards if it's a 20 mile drive,
> but maybe only a few pounds if it's walking distance).

Not everyone has spare funds. People living on the edge of financial
stability might to have any access to credit, and need every penny they
have to pay bills and for food, leaving nothing spare.

>> We are also considering the issue of a barrier failing to lift and let a
>> driver out of the car park, hence the mention of H&S signs forbidding
>> pedestrian access to the area.
>
> Indeed, but what the signs usually mean is "don't walk past/under the
> barrier" rather than "you are forbidden to get out of your car".

Even so, the fact that we're discussing a hospital greatly increases the
chance that people there will be unable to get out the car and move to
another place, due to injury, illness or disability.

[polygonum]

In some cases the signs are there because other traffic (e.g. entering
the car park) also represent a danger. Further, once you are actually at
the machine, within hand reach, it is often difficult or impossible to

get out of your car.

--

Rod

[Neil Williams]

Simon Finnigan <simonf...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I know a few people who don't have (and can't get) credit cards. And since
> they are living right on the breadline, the thought of having £10-£50 spare
> to leave lying in a wallet would be a dream come true for them. Not
> everyone has spare money, I know there have been times in my life when I've
> had a week or two to go until,payday, no money and no access to any credit
> to cover the gap, and I've just had to not buy anything until payday.

True. But if you do have cash and cards, it is to me prudent to carry them
whenever you go out, as it requires no effort to do so and it might solve a
problem you encounter like this one.

[Roland Perry]

In message
<1131369120388222226.45506...@news.individual.net>
, at 08:35:02 on Sun, 21 Apr 2013, Simon Finnigan
<simonf...@hotmail.com> remarked:

>>> We are also considering the issue of a barrier failing to lift and let a
>>> driver out of the car park, hence the mention of H&S signs forbidding
>>> pedestrian access to the area.
>>
>> Indeed, but what the signs usually mean is "don't walk past/under the
>> barrier" rather than "you are forbidden to get out of your car".
>
>Even so, the fact that we're discussing a hospital greatly increases the
>chance that people there will be unable to get out the car and move to
>another place, due to injury, illness or disability.

Hospital barriers are (in my experience) much more likely to be in the
open, with lots of room around them. Only the very largest have
multi-storey car parks with classic exit lanes.

[And the hospital I have most experience QMC in Nottingham, which is one
of the biggest in the country, has no multi-storey because it died of
concrete cancer abut four years ago. Here's what it looks like now:
http://goo.gl/maps/JyajA

This is the one nearby that I got stuck at, it has the "no peds" sign
but is pretty much out the open: http://goo.gl/maps/cl5Vu ]
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <athjb4...@mid.individual.net>, at 08:40:02 on Sun, 21
Apr 2013, polygonum <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk> remarked:

>>> We are also considering the issue of a barrier failing to lift and let a
>>> driver out of the car park, hence the mention of H&S signs forbidding
>>> pedestrian access to the area.
>>
>> Indeed, but what the signs usually mean is "don't walk past/under the
>> barrier" rather than "you are forbidden to get out of your car".
>
>In some cases the signs are there because other traffic (e.g. entering
>the car park) also represent a danger. Further, once you are actually
>at the machine, within hand reach, it is often difficult or impossible
>to get out of your car.

See the pictures I just posted, and don't forget that one of the
commonest failure modes is the payment machine failing to accept the
money (or less likely swallowing the ticket) in which case the car is
still parked.
--
Roland Perry

[Simon Finnigan]

Neil Williams <wensl...@pacersplace.org.uk> wrote:
> Simon Finnigan <simonf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I know a few people who don't have (and can't get) credit cards. And since
>> they are living right on the breadline, the thought of having £10-£50 spare
>> to leave lying in a wallet would be a dream come true for them. Not
>> everyone has spare money, I know there have been times in my life when I've
>> had a week or two to go until,payday, no money and no access to any credit
>> to cover the gap, and I've just had to not buy anything until payday.
>
> True. But if you do have cash and cards, it is to me prudent to carry them
> whenever you go out, as it requires no effort to do so and it might solve a
> problem you encounter like this one.

But that doesn't help people who don't have these facilities available does
it?

[Simon Finnigan]

Of the hospitals I've been to recently, the car parks are either multi
story, or the ground condition and traffic around the barriers is not
suitable for people not steady on their feet.

[Neil Williams]

Simon Finnigan <simonf...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> But that doesn't help people who don't have these facilities available does
> it?

No, and it doesn't mean the problem should not be solved properly; it
should, of course, and to me the solution is having staff on site
contactable via an intercom who can resolve the situation (Luton Airport
works this way, and they have never failed to resolve the situation
whenever I've had ticket issues there). But the world is not a perfect
place, so those who have a solution and don't use it when they very easily
could are making life needlessly hard for themselves, IMO.

Similar point - I'm en route to Brum Airport to meet my mum and my 3 year
old nephew to take him on his first flight. They got caught out by a
cancelled train, but fortunately with a bit of a rush made the one before
(and had a bit of slack there anyway). But had they got stuck, I said to
them to take a taxi and I would pay for it rather than just giving up and
moaning about it. OK, I can afford that, many people might not be able to
and would have lost the holiday, and it doesn't make cancelled trains OK.
But if you do have the means, you're causing unnecessary hassle for
yourself if you don't use it.

[Roland Perry]

In message
<1669878185388222125.74627...@news.individual.net>
, at 08:35:02 on Sun, 21 Apr 2013, Simon Finnigan
<simonf...@hotmail.com> remarked:

>I know a few people who don't have (and can't get) credit cards. And since
>they are living right on the breadline, the thought of having £10-£50 spare
>to leave lying in a wallet would be a dream come true for them.

Would these people be able to afford the car, which has become
hypothetically stuck in the hospital car park?
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message
<131989620388260188.380182...@news.individual.net>,
at 00:00:05 on Mon, 22 Apr 2013, Simon Finnigan
<simonf...@hotmail.com> remarked:

>> This is the one nearby that I got stuck at, it has the "no peds" sign but
>> is pretty much out the open: http://goo.gl/maps/cl5Vu ]
>
>Of the hospitals I've been to recently, the car parks are either multi
>story, or the ground condition and traffic around the barriers is not
>suitable for people not steady on their feet.

I've had reason to visit four hospitals (and two of the big new
treatment centres) in the last few weeks, and only one was like that.

Having said that - the visit to Nottingham (pictured above) was by train
and bus, not car.
--
Roland Perry

[Simon Finnigan]

Motability? Or perhaps, like my brother, someone else covers the cost of
the car for them. My brother can't afford a car, but I find it easier and
more convenient to fund a vehicle, insurance and tax so all he pays for it
diesel. Or maybe they can afford the car within their limited budget, but
given the ongoing pay freezes and inflation increasing prices they've
reached a point where their limited income is entirely taken up paying for
essentials.

Not everyone has a significant disposable income.

[Simon Finnigan]

If there's a faulty car park barrier blocking me in a car park, I have the
means - a toolkit in my boot. Remove the arm, leave the bits safely by the
machine and drive away.

But that doesn't change the fact that there are large parts of the
population that are unable to carry spare cash and credit cards, or get out
the car and try to find someone to help.

[Simon Finnigan]

The hospitals I've been to have been in two different areas, two hospitals
in each.

[Roland Perry]

In message
<536723834388348257.426622...@news.individual.net>,
at 11:20:07 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013, Simon Finnigan
<simonf...@hotmail.com> remarked:

>If there's a faulty car park barrier blocking me in a car park, I have the
>means - a toolkit in my boot. Remove the arm, leave the bits safely by the
>machine and drive away.

Could still be construed as criminal damage.

>But that doesn't change the fact that there are large parts of the
>population that are unable to carry spare cash and credit cards, or get out
>the car and try to find someone to help.

And how many of these people are found, the next morning, dead behind
the wheel?
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message
<1811856269388348360.50602...@news.individual.net>
, at 11:20:06 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013, Simon Finnigan

<simonf...@hotmail.com> remarked:
>>> I know a few people who don't have (and can't get) credit cards. And since
>>> they are living right on the breadline, the thought of having £10-£50 spare
>>> to leave lying in a wallet would be a dream come true for them.
>>
>> Would these people be able to afford the car, which has become
>> hypothetically stuck in the hospital car park?
>
>Motability? Or perhaps, like my brother, someone else covers the cost of
>the car for them.

Which should include the consequential costs of getting them out of a
jam like being trapped in a car park.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message
<733510469388348491.784980...@news.individual.net>,
at 11:20:07 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013, Simon Finnigan
<simonf...@hotmail.com> remarked:

>> I've had reason to visit four hospitals (and two of the big new treatment
>> centres) in the last few weeks, and only one was like that.
>>
>> Having said that - the visit to Nottingham (pictured above) was by train and bus, not car.
>
>The hospitals I've been to have been in two different areas, two hospitals
>in each.

Same here. Were they both in congested urban areas?
--
Roland Perry

[Neil Williams]

Simon Finnigan <simonf...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> If there's a faulty car park barrier blocking me in a car park, I have the
> means - a toolkit in my boot. Remove the arm, leave the bits safely by the
> machine and drive away.

A different solution :)

> But that doesn't change the fact that there are large parts of the
> population that are unable to carry spare cash and credit cards, or get out
> the car and try to find someone to help.

Which is why I mentioned the intercom on the barrier.

[Simon Finnigan]

So because I'm generous enough to provide a car for my brother, I'm
suddenly expected to fund taxis for him when he gets trapped in a car park
through no fault of his own? Lets ignore the fact that I may not have
enough spare income to allow for this, lets just concentrate on the first
massive flaw in the plan - getting money to him. I get a phone call - hi
Simon, I'm in the hospital 75 miles away from you and the car park barrier
has failed, so can you please send me money. How do you propose I get cash
to him quickly at that kind of distance? I may be able to transfer money to
his bank account assuming the bank website is working and fast payments are
working between our two banks (which often isn't the case, I regularly have
to wait a few hours for the system to sort itself out), but that requires
me to have access to a safe Internet connection, not be in work and him to
have access to a cash machine.

[Simon Finnigan]

Neil Williams <wensl...@pacersplace.org.uk> wrote:
> Simon Finnigan <simonf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If there's a faulty car park barrier blocking me in a car park, I have the
>> means - a toolkit in my boot. Remove the arm, leave the bits safely by the
>> machine and drive away.
>
> A different solution :)
>
>> But that doesn't change the fact that there are large parts of the
>> population that are unable to carry spare cash and credit cards, or get out
>> the car and try to find someone to help.
>
> Which is why I mentioned the intercom on the barrier.
>
> Neil

I once visited a friend in hospital, and the intercom that was ringing as I
went in was still ringing as I left, well over an hour later. I also have
had to wait ten minutes for someone to answer an intercom at my work car
park to get into the car park. Anyone who depends on those intercoms for
help is begging for trouble :-)

[Simon Finnigan]

Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message
> <536723834388348257.426622...@news.individual.net>, at 11:20:07 on
> Tue, 23 Apr 2013, Simon Finnigan <simonf...@hotmail.com> remarked:
>> If there's a faulty car park barrier blocking me in a car park, I have the
>> means - a toolkit in my boot. Remove the arm, leave the bits safely by the
>> machine and drive away.
>
> Could still be construed as criminal damage.

I'd be prepared to take that risk, given the unrealistic options suggested
elsewhere.

>> But that doesn't change the fact that there are large parts of the
>> population that are unable to carry spare cash and credit cards, or get out
>> the car and try to find someone to help.
>
> And how many of these people are found, the next morning, dead behind the wheel?

So what do you expect them to do? They don't have spare money to get home,
and are unable to go looking for help, so what do they do?

[Simon Finnigan]

Two hospitals were, two hospitals not. And that's one in each area.

[Roland Perry]

In message
<1467039609388656718.43979...@news.individual.net>
, at 17:10:02 on Fri, 26 Apr 2013, Simon Finnigan
<simonf...@hotmail.com> remarked:

>>> But that doesn't change the fact that there are large parts of the
>>> population that are unable to carry spare cash and credit cards, or get out
>>> the car and try to find someone to help.
>>
>> And how many of these people are found, the next morning, dead behind the wheel?
>
>So what do you expect them to do? They don't have spare money to get home,
>and are unable to go looking for help, so what do they do?

"Too many straw men" error.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message
<730451682388656828.293320...@news.individual.net>,
at 17:10:02 on Fri, 26 Apr 2013, Simon Finnigan
<simonf...@hotmail.com> remarked:

>>>> Would these people be able to afford the car, which has become
>>>> hypothetically stuck in the hospital car park?
>>>
>>> Motability? Or perhaps, like my brother, someone else covers the cost of
>>> the car for them.
>>
>> Which should include the consequential costs of getting them out of a
>> jam like being trapped in a car park.
>
>So because I'm generous enough to provide a car for my brother, I'm
>suddenly expected to fund taxis for him when he gets trapped in a car park
>through no fault of his own?

You are heartless enough to leave him abandoned there? In *your* car??
--
Roland Perry

[Stuart A. Bronstein]

Simon Finnigan <simonf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message

>>Simon Finnigan <simonf...@hotmail.com> remarked:

>>> But that doesn't change the fact that there are large parts of
>>> the population that are unable to carry spare cash and credit
>>> cards, or get out the car and try to find someone to help.
>>
>> And how many of these people are found, the next morning, dead
>> behind the wheel?
>
> So what do you expect them to do? They don't have spare money to
> get home, and are unable to go looking for help, so what do they
> do?

Get Charlie off the MTA!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VMSGrY-IlU

--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

[Simon Finnigan]

So I take it that you fund everything your family do, since you're so
generous? Or would you accept that ignoring the significant technical
difficulties I mentioned elsewhere to do with sending money in such a
situation, there has to be a limit to the support one family member can
offer another?

[Simon Finnigan]

So you're honestly claiming that there are no people out there unable to
carry significant quantities of cash, that hold no credit/debit cards with
funds available and that have mobility problems?

[Roland Perry]

In message
<613619634388775064.003410...@news.individual.net>,
at 18:10:02 on Sat, 27 Apr 2013, Simon Finnigan

<simonf...@hotmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> But that doesn't change the fact that there are large parts of the
>>>>> population that are unable to carry spare cash and credit cards, or get out
>>>>> the car and try to find someone to help.
>>>>
>>>> And how many of these people are found, the next morning, dead behind the wheel?
>>>
>>> So what do you expect them to do? They don't have spare money to get home,
>>> and are unable to go looking for help, so what do they do?
>>
>> "Too many straw men" error.
>
>So you're honestly claiming that there are no people out there unable to
>carry significant quantities of cash, that hold no credit/debit cards with
>funds available and that have mobility problems?

Slight goalpost shift at the end there (from mobility problems to
"unable to get out of the car" and "unable to call for assistance (from
a friend)".

And what were they expecting to use to pay the car park fee?
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message
<1457265973388775123.13187...@news.individual.net>
, at 18:10:02 on Sat, 27 Apr 2013, Simon Finnigan
<simonf...@hotmail.com> remarked:

>>> So because I'm generous enough to provide a car for my brother, I'm
>>> suddenly expected to fund taxis for him when he gets trapped in a car park
>>> through no fault of his own?
>>
>> You are heartless enough to leave him abandoned there? In *your* car??
>
>So I take it that you fund everything your family do, since you're so
>generous?

Quite a bit yes, but not to the extent of funding a car. But if I did
then it would include "emergency incidentals" such as this.

--
Roland Perry

[Simon Finnigan]

So what do you fund? A computer - hope you're prepared to cover the cost of
financial loss caused by an insecure system allowing bank details to be
leaked. Providing food - presumably you also leave them cash to get a taxi
to hospital in the event of them choking or being made ill be the food?

[Simon Finnigan]

The cash that the machine has refused to accept. It's been suggested they
leave the car and get a taxi home, hence the discussion about having spare
cash.

[Roland Perry]

In message
<846192245388865537.313122...@news.individual.net>,
at 19:30:03 on Sun, 28 Apr 2013, Simon Finnigan
<simonf...@hotmail.com> remarked:

>>> So I take it that you fund everything your family do, since you're so
>>> generous?
>>
>> Quite a bit yes, but not to the extent of funding a car. But if I did
>> then it would include "emergency incidentals" such as this.
>

>Providing food - presumably you also leave them cash to get a taxi
>to hospital in the event of them choking or being made ill be the food?

Yes, or I give them a lift myself.
--
Roland Perry

[Simon Finnigan]

So when you provide food to someone, you also leave them say £20 in cash to
get a taxi to and from the nearest A&E, or stay with them for 48-72 hours
until you can be reasonably sure there will be no ill effects? How does
your employer feel about you doing this and not being able to go to work,
jus in case you have to ferry someone to a hospital?

[Roland Perry]

In message
<1743395970389464786.86735...@news.individual.net>
, at 17:45:02 on Sun, 5 May 2013, Simon Finnigan

<simonf...@hotmail.com> remarked:

>>>>> So I take it that you fund everything your family do, since you're so
>>>>> generous?
>>>>
>>>> Quite a bit yes, but not to the extent of funding a car. But if I did
>>>> then it would include "emergency incidentals" such as this.
>>>
>>> Providing food - presumably you also leave them cash to get a taxi
>>> to hospital in the event of them choking or being made ill be the food?
>>
>> Yes, or I give them a lift myself.
>
>So when you provide food to someone,

The question was about family, but I have houseguests the same would
apply.

>you also leave them say £20 in cash to
>get a taxi to and from the nearest A&E, or stay with them for 48-72 hours
>until you can be reasonably sure there will be no ill effects?

I don't "leave them" things, but if an incident arose at home I would
deal with kit.

>How does your employer feel about you doing this and not being able to
>go to work, jus in case you have to ferry someone to a hospital?

I work from home.
--
Roland Perry

[Simon Finnigan]

So what happens if you have to go out, if you don't leave people the money
to get to and from a hospital? Working from home, what happens if you have
an urgent deadline and are unable to meet it because of the quite surreal
level of responsibility you're prepared to accept for someone else?

Or would you accept that offering some charity doesn't mean accepting
responsibility for anything that can ever happen to someone else?

[Roland Perry]

In message
<956240817389560465.876209...@news.individual.net>,
at 20:20:03 on Mon, 6 May 2013, Simon Finnigan

<simonf...@hotmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> So I take it that you fund everything your family do, since you're so
>>>>>>> generous?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Quite a bit yes, but not to the extent of funding a car. But if I did
>>>>>> then it would include "emergency incidentals" such as this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Providing food - presumably you also leave them cash to get a taxi
>>>>> to hospital in the event of them choking or being made ill be the food?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, or I give them a lift myself.
>>>
>>> So when you provide food to someone,
>>
>> The question was about family, but I have houseguests the same would
>> apply.
>>
>>> you also leave them say £20 in cash to
>>> get a taxi to and from the nearest A&E, or stay with them for 48-72 hours
>>> until you can be reasonably sure there will be no ill effects?
>>
>> I don't "leave them" things, but if an incident arose at home I would
>> deal with kit.
>>
>>> How does your employer feel about you doing this and not being able to
>>> go to work, jus in case you have to ferry someone to a hospital?
>>
>> I work from home.
>
>So what happens if you have to go out, if you don't leave people the money
>to get to and from a hospital? Working from home, what happens if you have
>an urgent deadline and are unable to meet it because of the quite surreal
>level of responsibility you're prepared to accept for someone else?

The surreal level of responsibility would be giving priority to a work
deadline over taking a family member to hospital. I suppose if I was
intending to be on the way to the airport I'd give them the money for a
taxi.
--
Roland Perry

[Simon Finnigan]

I noticed you didn't answer my question about ensuring the care of people
who have eaten or drank something you provided - if you had a house guest
that then left to go home, presumably you'd also go with them in the
eventuality that they fell ill and were unable to get themselves to
hospital?

Does anyone else consider what Roland is proposing as reasonable?