I will hencefortch boycott the Royal Mail.
Except when I need to post something. I'm kind of stuck there.
The Royal Mail has taken a less than grateful attitude towards a Bristol man who prevented a runaway post van "careering over a busy main road", as the Times puts it. Dad of two and artist Robert Moore, 63, spotted the Transit rolling backwards after the driver forgot to apply the handbrake, in an incident last September. He …
If you ask me he should get a medal.
I was in a similar situation albeit it was down to my own stupid fault by trying to push my car to the petrol station when it ran out of fuel. Unfortanately I couldn't catch up with the car to get in and I just managed to steer into a telegraph pole (yes it was the sort of thing that Mr Bean would do). Luckily in my case no one was hurt (although the car was a bit dented).
Paris because I do occasionally have blonde moments.
He actually wrote to them asking for 'a reward or compensation'? If he had really done it out of concern for others he wouldn't care about getting money. This is just a case of someone trying to get money for nothing. Sure he probably helped by stopping the van but it's his own fault that he got hurt and I don't see any grounds for him to demand money for it.
Wonder what sort of compensation Bruce Willis would ask of the Nakamoto Corporation after trashing their main office.
If you want to act the hero, accept the consequences of your actions. What about al those people who drown after jumping in the water trying to save someone else? Are their relatives entitled to some sort of compensation? Shouldn't think so. I applaud the man for trying to stop a moving van, and a letter of gratitude would have been nice, but compensation? come on!
Paris, because she, too, doesn't wear hockey-pants.
Typical NuLab sounding response from the RM. Just like the PCSOs who stood around watching some kids drowning!
Maybe RM felt that he should have phoned a copper who would have duly arrived within in 10 mins. Well if the van travelled slower than a snail, maybe!! But if the f*cking thing was about to hit someone you do what you can to prevent it.
Maybe RM will give the bloke a book of stamps!
Thumbs up for the bloke's bravery.
Did he write to them and royal mail work out who he has, in the past, used for legal advice, or did he get a solicitor to write to them demading money?
It seems like the second, and he deserves a responce like that. I don't doubt it was a nice act, but he got exactly what I would expect in that situation, the driver said sorry and thank you, and nothing more was said. He has probably got the driver fired now.
Not at all. I totally agree with Royal Mail.
It's his fault for leaving the handbrake off in the first place. If he hadn't jumped on to try and stop it rolling back, and the van had injured anyone, he'd have been prosecuted for driving without due care an attention (or similar).
All he got was a few grazes and bruises on his legs, nothing life-threatening or permanent. I get more than that most times I fall off my mountain-bike (which is also self-induced).
Good for Royal Mail not caving in to this crap (although the last para implies they have now :().
He should have run after it shouting "get out of the way" and waving his hands madly. Attempting to open the door of a transit van whilst its moving is only going to end badly, and it did. Okay unless there was a group of children having a picnic directly in its path or something then yes but there wasn't was there. Probably just a wall or hedge or tree. I stopped a car rolling backwards across the BP garage on the A3 once from hitting the big kerb that divides the lorry bit but I wasn't stupid enough to actually put myself in danger. I'd probably think twice now though, what if I was sued for damaging their paint with my finger prints?
1 - I really hate people sueing for compensation, its just wrong, work for a living and accept your own mistakes and accidents do happen you dont need to blame some one
2 - Royal mail could say thank you and at least send the guy some flowers. If the van had hit somebody or something then they (their insurers) would have to pay up
but this will be seen a LOT more in the future as companies seek to exclude themselves from any liability. Daft thing is it'd probably cost themless to give him a small reward than to pay the legal team for the letter, and they might even get som positive publicity from it, whereas this will only turn out badly for them.
It'll be interesting to see if the driver retains his job...
Sadly I have to agree. Yes it was very brave thing to do, in fact I probably would do the same thing, but actually asking for something afterwards, does seem a little big greedy.
Whenever I see these stories splashed across the gutter press, that little cynical demon lurking at the back of my mind always makes me think that there is more to this than meets the eye. We never get to the read all the facts only the writers opinions of the facts.
I aint sure about this one, I mean, on the one hand, he stopped one of their vans from possibly killing people, cause lets face it a van moving at 20mph only has to knock you under it and you're pretty much a goner (better if you go over the top, at least you're precious face and skull doesnt get squished).
But on the other, did he have to ask?
I think they should have offered him a reward for what he did, but I also think that he shouldn't have asked for it, because by asking, don't he paint himself as a ambulance chaser? It's kinda easy to see their point of view on this, I mean, nobody asked him too and maybe they were going to give him something, then got this letter asking for compensation.
It's like arriving at a birthday party only to be asked for your present for the birthday boy, when you were about to give it, now doesnt it feel like your purpose at the party isnt to celebrate the birthday, but just to provide presents? If you had given the present from your own hands, it feels better, cause you "gave" it, not "handed it over" because it was asked for.
Although nowadays a company can't admit fault in any way cause then they open themselves to liability from people who are less than honest, so what is a company to do? say thanks, give a gift, perhaps pay for some treatment (thanks for NOT getting us a lawsuit for manslaughter and putting that idiot driver in jail) THEN open themselves up for "HA HA!!! I'm in your bank accounts, cleaning your moneys!!" Cause by giving the gift, you acknowledge the fact that something happened and you feel responsible, some people would just jump all over them, what if the gift wasnt enough for the guy, ok, hire a lawyer to get a better gift.
So of course the company won't do anything because they, like others, are afraid of people suiing them, which is completely understandable. But at the same time, the guy does deserve something for possibly saving lives
Catch-22 I think, what you reckon?
"However, when Moore subsequently wrote to Royal Mail to see if he was "entitled to a reward or compensation", the company replied to his solicitors"
Where exactly did they find out who his Solicitors were? Oh wait, let me guess... He wouldn't perchance have enlisted a solicitor to write this letter for him? If a company receives a letter from someone's legal representatives requesting payment from them what do you expect them to do? If they admit guilt they are basically setting themselves up to write a blank cheque for treatment. The guy wasn't looking for a thank you letter, he wanted cash and the Royal Mail didn't want to give it to him.
This guy prevented 1 or more people getting run over or an accident with other vehicles without regard for his own safety. In my book that makes him a "hero".
Misery guts Oliver Mayes would rather not get involved and let these kids, old people and other motorists be subjected to fate and the incompetence of a royal mail employee.
Actually, it's much worse than that: He did not *write* to them, he sued! From the response letter, at least, it seems that Royal Mail was contacted by Mr. Moore's lawyers, and at the end they advise that the claim--pressumably a lawsuit--be withdrawn.
Also, it would have helped if his "adventurous" antics would have, you know, worked. As it stands, he didn't manage to stop the vehicle. It was later on that it was finally halted with the help of others, proving that his stunt was dangerous and not only unnecessary, but useless; which is why none of the other participants were injured.
I'm with Oliver. He chose to take the risk by attempting to stop the vehicle. ASKING for something because he tried sounds like money grabbing to me. I don't knock the guy for what he did as it is very possible he has saved lives, but to ask for money for doing so is a bit much!
I remember back in the olden days, a better time when the first words to come out of a have-a-go hero's were not "Now where's my money?" and I'm a mere 25 years on this earth.
What happened to the days of a cheesy photo call with the area manager gushing about how thankful they were in front of the local free rag and that being enough?
Stupid thing is, if he took it to court, he'd probably win. Britain's personal injury legal system is becoming more and more like the USA's every single week. Coming soon to a street near you: Royal Mail vans with "Warning chasing this vehicle down a hill towards a busy road may result in injury" emblazoned on the side.
Assuming he managed to hop into the van and apply the handbrake without getting smashed up in the process - Im pretty sure he wouldn't have bothered asking for compensation.
However when faced with one of the many retarded people Royal Mail employs and in addition to his own injuries when trying to fix someone elses mistakes I think anyone would have asked for compensation - I certainly would have!
There is a difference between a good deed (generally not involving you being battered and bruised from it) and one done out of necessity due to retarded employees.
I say fair play to the guy - I hope he gets a decent payout!
@Steve - I agree - I also wouldn't put it past this countries PC culture to do it!
@Lol Whibley - Its in bootnotes for a reason - stop whining!
You sir, are a bell-end. A bell-end I say.
Could it possibly be that he saw a runaway van and the dangers it posed, and instead of just standing there thinking "Well, it's going away from me so I'll be OK, shame for those kids / elderly persons / small kittens etc. though" he actually tried to make a difference.
Once the van was safe and the adrenaline wore off he realised that he was injured. Because of Royal Mail's negligence (no runaway van no need to try to stop it). I for one would expect him to get compensation if not a big fucking medal and the personal attention of a pair of page three models.
If you hadn't noticed this particular article happens to be posted under Odds & Sods>Bootnotes. That is generally a pretty good indication that the article in question may not have an IT Angle. If the article did have anything at all to do with IT it would probably be posted under Hardware/Software/Security/etc...
Your powers of observation = Fail.
Bloke averts disaster, demonstrating presence of mind and physical courage. What's not to like ? He deserves appreciation, and a reward is the simplest way of showing that. If he did the same for my car, I would sure give him a present.
@Charles Calthrop: I dare say the bloke was driven to write by the silence of the Royal Mail. And he wasn't thinking about getting a reward when he acted.
I thinks its fair to say that a moving car presents a potentially lethal threat. The employee in this case is negligent and thus the royal mail is also negligent .
While the man in question has no real claim for compensation it is fact that he helped bring (to his detriment) a very serious situation under control unless that is of course you find it acceptable that vehicles should be allowed to roll around driverless in public places?
It is my opinion that at the very least the Royal Mail should admit negligence on their part, commend this man for his bravery and for saving their collective asses from a potential law suit and make some form of goodwill gesture.
Long live email
I'm not dismissing what he did, he stopped the van and that's a good thing. But I just think It's really arrogant of him to then demand payment for something he did off his own back.
There's no evidence that there was anyone else around at the time so as far as we can tell from the facts we have, there was no immediate danger to anyone other than the possibility of property damage. (Which would be paid off by the RMs insurance)
He's clearly entitled to a thank-you from the Royal Mail and at most a commemorative stamp of him, but I don't see any reason to give him anything else.
RETARD <<it's his fault for leaving the handbrake off in the first place. If he hadn't jumped on to try and stop it rolling back, and the van had injured anyone, he'd have been prosecuted for driving without due care an attention (or similar).>>
Read "The driver came down - he was a young guy - and said, 'Did I forget to put the hand brake on?'." Guess he wasn't the driver, then...
<<in reality, the van was rolling toward a parked car and nowhere near any pedestrians.>>
RETARD .Pedestrians move unpredictably. Parked cars (PO van excepted) generally don't.
RETARD BLoad <<'Mr Moore has been summarily dismissed and we are reviewing our recruitment procedures to ensure we don't employ any more lemmings.'">> He wasn't employed by PO.
Or maybe they're using a different version of English.
between a have-a-go hero and an idiot, is the outcome and police prosecution.
Why wasnt he charged with being in charge of a vehicle without permission? no insurance etc, trespassing (he wasnt a RM emlployee, no right to enter the van)
come on Royal Mail, just telling him he shouldn't have wont stop others from saving kids being killed by runaway vans.
No wonder no one wants to get involved nowadays, if this is the thanks they get for saving lives, but then the courts only value killing at 18 months probation and a holiday abroad at taxpayers expense
The Post Office should pay for his medical care and sanction the negligent driver. Fair, responsible and a near miss on a potential landmine of cost. More, they should have *offered* to do so at the time the incident was reported.
Of course, that assumes the driver filed an incident report. If the responses in this comment section are typical for the rest of the country, it would suggest he probably omitted to do that on the grounds that the only person hurt was injured because he wouldn't mind his own business.
Where do you lot think the bloody money would come from to settle the lawsuits that would arise had the van entered a busy cross street with no-one at the controls?
Azathoth on a bike!
If the guy had been sitting in a car and the runaway van had hit him. then he would doubtless be due for some compensation. If he had suffered any losses due to time off work, torn clothing, etc. then that would all be included in an insurance claim.
As he was a pedestrian, evidently without personal injury insurance, he has no alternative but to sue for uninsured losses.
Regardless of this guy's case, the P.O. have a duty of care and should be held accountable for their negligence by the HSE or similar. I fail to see how they can deny their liability. Actually, that's not true. I can see. It's their policy to deny liability until they are led by the nose to it.
Now, there's a lovely image!
What the hell is wrong with everyone here??
If your kid/wife/puppy had been killed by a runaway PO van while people just stood round and watched would you:
a) Be quite happy and relieved that nobody else had sustained minor injuries saving said kid/wife/puppy
b) Be pissed off that everyone just stood around and did nothing in case they got hurt or sued for being involved?
If he had used lawyers, then that kind of response is expected, but if he had just written to them, the least they could do is send him a get well card!
Bah. ODFO you miserable lot. Hope nobody tries to help you when you're drowning
To say he "arrogant" and "demanded" is rather disingenuous as well as not being based on any provided facts.
As to there being no-one around to injure, again we don't know this for sure but mainly I think if you saw something like this happen, and were inclined to do something about it then you wouldn't waste time checking the trajectory and possible hazards before trying to stop the van.
But put it like this, say you saw a runaway pram with a baby in it coming towards you at speed. You would, I assume, try to save the baby and stop the pram. Assume, for me if you can, that in doing so you break your arm.
If it turns out that the runaway pram ranaway through "just one of those things" you would shrug (painfully I reckon) and get on with life.
However if it turned out that the pram ranaway because it was, say, nudged by a car through the driver's negligence, you would probably try to gain compensation off said driver for the consequences of said negligence.
If their insurance company then told you to fuck off because you could have just let the baby die and so ensured no injuries to yourself then you would likely be less than chuffed with the response.
Unfortunately there is a company that thinks so bloody little of the prople reading El reg, that it sees fit to put it's BLOODY SHOCKWAVE ADVERT on top of part of the text and doesn't bother to give it a CLOSE option.
Who else but bloody Microsoft in it's server room ad?
On the other hand, El Reg could have been a sight more aware whast they were carrying.
If you read the local rag version that was published yesterday and not just The Register version you'll notice this intriguing statement from Mr Moore;
"It wasn't going very fast but there was a parked car it would have hit."
So, judging by his own remarks from his own words, no-one was ever in any danger. No matter how unpredictably pedestrians move.
Long ago, a then roommate hopped out of his car without setting the handbrake. He got just enough steps away that he couldn't quite catch up as it rolled gently toward his girlfriend's car. Another roommie who saw the incident (say 10 mph, bent metal only) commended its comedic qualities but alas I didn't get to see it; there were no cell phones to whip out & record with.
The moral of the story: if a vehicle is rolling toward a parked car, with no prospect of injury to persons, don't skin yourself jumping in, get a video and post it to You Tube so the rest of us can enjoy it.
Hate to say it but am on the side of RM here.
It should have been others that contacted them demanding he be rewarded not him going to his solicitor and instructing him/her to write to Royal Mail asking for compensation (and I would probably be one of them)
I have a lot of time for older people but not the ones whose only motivation for doing anything is compensation.
If anyone high up in RM is reading this, don't pay this self centred old git.
he doesnt deserve compensation for this. remember the TV adverts. "Had an accident NOT YOUR FAULT?"
was quite obviosuly his fault for jumping in
but he should have been given something. an letter thanking him at least.
but as he asked for it. i kinda retract that statement. i dont think he should have asked.
Get a real browser you wonk, because the advertisers here and elsewhere definitely aren't going to listen to your whinging about how their adverts make the site unusable and irritating to visit. They don't give a shit, because they somehow think they have a fundamental right to control MY screen, MY sound, and MY viewing. Screw that attitude.
I use firefox+Noscript+Adblock. Browsing experience is pretty good, and the only adverts I see are those that show respect for me and my viewing.
People seem to think he is demanding compensation for stopping the van, but the Reg article indicates he had a broken rib, and presumably other injuries. So he stopped a run away van and was injured whilst doing it. The runaway van was the responsibility of the PO. Surely that would be worth compensation?
...and he had not tried to stop the van, any ensuing injury to humans, dogs, or property would have clearly been his fault! His only option for the good of his kids (It is for the CHILDREN!) would be to throw himself in front of the rear of the careening van hoping for a clean kill so that his sprats have a nice financial cushion for their partying.
I think people actually trying to help should be commended and rewarded.
they should look at the average cost of a lawsuit of that van slamming into a car killing 1 or more occupants or seriously harming them, then give him a small cut of it.
Oh hang they couldnt give a shit because they're insurance would pay.
Personally if i was the driver i would take him out for a decent lunch / dinner for saving my job !!
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019