SMRT sue for 3.4M,Nitcharee say she din faint, she's pushed

[Mecontle]

whoever pushed her will suffer in agony after life , such cruelty

[Latio2005A]

  On 6/20/2011 at 12:01 PM, Mecontle said:

whoever pushed her will suffer in agony after life , such cruelty

you believe what the thai man said? I just have this gut feel that he is out to sqeeze money.

[Happily1986]

  On 6/20/2011 at 10:30 AM, Elfenstar said:

There are limits to the number of people allowed into enclosed areas like clubs etc. These limits are there to prevent overcrowding. IMHO at the very least SMRT should have such limits to reduce the chances of accidents happening.

 

Good post. Really food for thought. I have noted the countless times Mustafa was fined and admonished for allowing over a certain no. of patrons into its premises. This was all done under the pretext of ensuring that evacuation of all patrons will be practically possible. I really wonder what SCDF has got to say about SMRT.

[Happily1986]

  On 6/20/2011 at 11:42 AM, 5936 said:

MRT is a natiional rail networks built by govt. Not SMRT.

 

SMRT is only the operator.

 

If they want to bet on this issue, they picked the wrong defendant.

 

 

 

So much for the flow of sympathy from public. Maybe the $500K made them see Sg as money tree.

 

As i have mentioned some posts back, the practical determinant is really whether the Public Liability Insurance underwriter will pay up. If it doesn't then SMRT will have to pay out of its own pockets. No business ever do that. All are eventually paid by their underwriters and subsequently their R/I.

[Modykoh]

  On 6/20/2011 at 2:36 AM, Mcf777 said:

whether dead/alive, suicider will choose a place where no camera is in sight.

they can claim all sorts of reasons.

 

Duplicated reply...

Edited June 20, 2011 by Modykoh

[Modykoh]

  On 6/20/2011 at 2:26 AM, Mcf777 said:

If SMRT pay the amount, this will open the floodgate for all the Suicider to jump into our track causing unnecessary delay.

SMRT should just put up a big signboard in all their stations.

We will not be responsible for any injuries/damage once you enter our premises.

 

SMRT should not even give them a single cent!

 

There is no disclaimer of negligence for tort even you put up big big sign board...

the contention will be to demonstrate what actions are taken to prevent the accident....more over not the first case...

[Babyt]

what if a foreign trash eat fishball noodle kenna choked and died? will the hawker kenna sue for making his fishball so smooth and big that it choke a person? can he be sue cos he never inform about the danger of eating fishball?

[LoverofCar]

CB...$400k donation still want more $... Human greed is unlimited

[Good-Carbuyer]

  On 6/20/2011 at 2:10 AM, Relacklabrudder said:

Tragedy at the MRT Singapore

Posted on June 16, 2011

By now, you should have heard of some updates of the 14 year-old Thai student named Nitcharee Peneakchanasak who lost both of her legs in the MRT, Ang Mo Kio station, two months back. I

[Lanevomax]

  On 6/20/2011 at 3:52 AM, Rockaphonics said:

My heart goes out to this poor girl. It is definitely unfortunate for her to go through all these at such a young age.

However, this i feel is an accident. Up to heaven to decide. Can understand why she wanna claim damages its only normal, but is it really SMRT's fault?

 

do u think SMRT should design the yellow line 100m away so there no reason when pple will fall down?

 

when had you see pple accidently fall down for the past 20 years.... all because of sucide and etc.

 

 

[Mcf777]

If im not wrong, the girl father works in the insruance company.

that's why got this idea of suing SMRT.

 

=====================================

Jun 21, 2011

IN THE ST NEWSPAPER TODAY

SMRT: $15,000 given to family as goodwill aid

Compensation not yet addressed as inquiry is still on; dad says girl did not fall but was pushed

By Elizabeth Soh

 

Nitcharee Peneakchanasak is seen here with her father Kittanesh Peneakchanasak, an insurance agent, at Tan Tock Seng Hospital. -- PHOTO: NP

 

RAIL operator SMRT on Monday broke its silence on how it has helped the Thai teenager who lost both her legs after landing on an MRT track and being hit by a train.

 

The father of 15-year-old Nitcharee Peneakchanasak, Mr Kittanesh Peneakchanasak, 56, is suing SMRT for negligence on her behalf.

 

SMRT had earlier declined to comment on media reports that quoted Mr Peneakchanasak as expressing disappointment over the $5,000 he said the rail operator had offered as compensation. Relating what had happened so far, SMRT said that following the incident on April 3, it immediately began looking at how it could help Nitcharee and her family.

 

'We were mindful of the special circumstances surrounding the case: A young girl who was alone in Singapore was seriously hurt, and needed her family by her side as she sought to overcome the trauma and recuperate.'

 

To facilitate her family travelling to Singapore to be with her, SMRT said it offered 'an initial financial support' of $10,000 to cover the expenses incurred during their journey and stay here. 'Our help was meant to be a goodwill gesture, not compensation,' it said. It added that this was clearly indicated to the father in their meeting and he 'accepted our offers of help'.

 

Following an appeal by him through the Thai Embassy for further help, SMRT provided a further assistance of $5,000 at the end of last month, it said.

Edited June 21, 2011 by Mcf777

[Badder]

  On 6/20/2011 at 2:10 AM, Relacklabrudder said:

Besides the sadness of this incident, the great news is that Nitcharee is now almost fully-recovered from the injuries

what? her legs grew back on did they? how does one 'fully recover' from losing ones legs?

 

[Badder]

  On 6/20/2011 at 2:26 AM, Mcf777 said:

If SMRT pay the amount, this will open the floodgate for all the Suicider to jump into our track causing unnecessary delay.

SMRT should just put up a big signboard in all their stations.

We will not be responsible for any injuries/damage once you enter our premises.

 

SMRT should not even give them a single cent!

 

your not too bright are you

 

 

"open the floodgate"?

 

 

yes singapore is full of people waiting to kill themselves for financial gain. :blink:

 

 

 

[Badder]

  On 6/20/2011 at 2:27 AM, Roadhogger said:

SMRT should published all the facts..fight the case if they are not wrong.

 

 

 

 

thats what the court case is for,

 

 

 

 

both parties have an even and fair chance to prove their cases

 

a well informed judge will decide who is right.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Tom_kkh]

  On 6/20/2011 at 3:20 AM, Davidtch said:

I still think SMRT is negligent. By drawing the yellow line or making announcment regularly, does not mean that they have taken enough precaution to ensure that this accident does not happens. During all time (including peak hours), there is not a single SMRT staff on the open platform to manage the crowd especially the crowded stations. When there is some1 drop on the track, there is no 1 to push the stop button.

 

 

 

No one on earth will be able to come out with a fool proof system to stop idiots and fools from hurting themselves.......

 

am not saying that the girl is any of the above, but if u wan a fool proof safety system, there is no such thing on earth...

Edited June 21, 2011 by Tom_kkh

[Badder]

  On 6/21/2011 at 1:48 AM, Mcf777 said:

If im not wrong, the girl father works in the insruance company.

that's why got this idea of suing SMRT.

 

 

so in your world only people who work in insurance companies know about law suits?

 

 

get a life.

 

 

his daughter lost her legs.

 

 

this man has the RIGHT to take it to court if he feels someone is to blame for that

 

 

SMRT has the right to defend themselves

 

 

A JUDGE will decide who is right.

 

 

let the courts do their due diligence and the truth will come out.

 

NOTHING ELSE TO SAY

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Badder]

  On 6/21/2011 at 2:13 AM, Tom_kkh said:

No one on earth will be able to come out with a fool proof system to stop idiots and fools from hurting themselves.......

 

 

Thats true, and is an often quoted reason why safety standards shouldnt be improved. But its actually flawed logic.

 

 

Ill try to explain why.

 

 

Nothing can be 100% foolproof - very true. But safety is not an ALL OR NOTHING thing, We gain from every incremental improvement.

 

 

Take something thats 80% foolproof. No point trying to make it even 1% safer? because it can never be 100%??

 

 

obviously not true. If we can make something thats say 70% foolproof and make it 80% then less people will get hurt/killed. Not all will be saved but less will be killed/injured

 

The fact that we can never be 100% foolproof doesnt negate the reduction in death/injury by every increase we can make to its level of foolproof-ness

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Badder]

  On 6/20/2011 at 11:27 AM, Ender said:

Both ways, whether giddy or pushed, we also don't see how is it SMRT fault. Unless it's overcrowding, where SMRT still allows people to enter when it's overcrowded.

 

 

you answered you own question in part.

 

 

 

SMRT will have to show that

 

a) they couldnt have predicted she could be pushed by crowds

b) they did everything reasonable in their power to prevent it

 

 

 

 

It could be as simple as them having to install barriers to stop crowds pushing forward, or have gates that open automatically like some if the undergrounds have.

 

 

In japan in known busy stations where platforms are often very crowded they now station guards whose main job it to not allow anyone to stand infront of a red line. Before this method was introduced hundreds died from just getting pushed forward by crowds behind.

 

I am sure a judge will consider if SMRT should have introduced such a system (if they havent already)