The Todal posted
>
> wrote in message
>news:tld6241c1or2of3j73m430qvc6lug724k0@4ax.com...
>> Think of this the next time you are thinking of having a bouncy castle
>> in your garden or some other event . You'll need to have age, height
>> and weight restrictions . Personally I'd just not bother .
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/kent/7389775.stm
>
>No, nor would I. In theory a bouncy castle is the ideal thing for a
>children's party and, in the imagination of a naive parent, the risks of
>injury (or at any rate, of severe injury) are so remote that they aren't
>worth thinking about.
>
>Yet those who are in the bouncy castle business know that people regularly
>sustain severe injury if for instance the castle is under or over inflated,
>or if there is an inappropriate mix of ages, or if some people are too
>uninhibited in their play.
That is true of many types of childrens' play, though.
People are always saying these days how "the compensation culture" is a
myth and how all the caution about health and safety is misplaced and
exaggerated. Personally I think this judgement gives the lie to those
claims. This sort of thing could easily have happened to me, and if my
household insurance refused to pay (and I'll bet they'd think of some
excuse) then I and my family would be ruined.
People like me will think *very* carefully in future before hosting any
play activities for children. I consider this judgement very damaging.
--
Les Invalides |