Jump to content

Auntie sues Keppel Land for fall


Ahtong
 Share

Recommended Posts

pc_600x450.jpg

 

Madam Tan Ah Lai, 59, claims she slipped as she was walking down a staircase, which was unlit and had sand on it.

 

The self-employed businesswoman sustained multiple bruises to her face and left leg. She also damaged her teeth and suffered depression.

 

According to a report in the Straits Times, developer Keppel Land, however, denies negligence, saying she was at least partly to blame because she could have chosen to use a sloping walkway with handrails.

 

This is believed to be the first case of its kind to reach the courts, and the outcome could have implications on the way developers are expected to look after people who visit their show flats.

 

The accident happened when Madam Tan and her family members visited the show flat at the Lakefront Residences condominium project next to Lakeside MRT station on Nov 10 last year reported the Straits Times.

 

She claimed the only access and exit from the show flat was via a common staircase. She said that this was not lit and there was sand on the steps.

 

She filed court documents claiming she stepped on the sand as she came down the stairs, causing her to fall on her face.

 

Her injuries made her look unsightly and curbed her daily activities, such as exercising, and affected her self-confidence. She attached medical reports and bills to support her claims.

 

Her lawyer, Mr Madan Assomull, alleged in court papers that the developers had failed to protect her from injury, pointing out the staircase should have had handrails or guides.

 

Keppel countered that Madam Tan had the choice of using an alternative sloping walkway with handrails if she had deemed it too dangerous to use the stairs.

 

Its lawyer K. Anparasan said the area was properly lit. He claimed Madam Tan failed to exercise proper care when she used the steps. There was also no need to place any warning boards as the staircase did not constitute an 'unusual danger'.

 

 

↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites

Auntie better dun go n visit KepLand's Reflections. Skali she see tower bend here, bend there, she pengsan n sue KepLand again. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Next time disclaimers will be everywhere.

It can easily be disprove......as many other users use the same staircase but did not fall.

 

Perhaps need to sign death indemnity form to view show flats in future.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Madam Tan Ah Lai, 59, claims she slipped as she was walking down a staircase, which was unlit and had sand on it.

 

The self-employed businesswoman sustained multiple bruises to her face and left leg. She also damaged her teeth and suffered depression.

 

According to a report in the Straits Times, developer Keppel Land, however, denies negligence, saying she was at least partly to blame because she could have chosen to use a sloping walkway with handrails.

 

This is believed to be the first case of its kind to reach the courts, and the outcome could have implications on the way developers are expected to look after people who visit their show flats.

 

The accident happened when Madam Tan and her family members visited the show flat at the Lakefront Residences condominium project next to Lakeside MRT station on Nov 10 last year reported the Straits Times.

 

She claimed the only access and exit from the show flat was via a common staircase. She said that this was not lit and there was sand on the steps.

 

She filed court documents claiming she stepped on the sand as she came down the stairs, causing her to fall on her face.

 

Her injuries made her look unsightly and curbed her daily activities, such as exercising, and affected her self-confidence. She attached medical reports and bills to support her claims.

 

Her lawyer, Mr Madan Assomull, alleged in court papers that the developers had failed to protect her from injury, pointing out the staircase should have had handrails or guides.

 

Keppel countered that Madam Tan had the choice of using an alternative sloping walkway with handrails if she had deemed it too dangerous to use the stairs.

 

Its lawyer K. Anparasan said the area was properly lit. He claimed Madam Tan failed to exercise proper care when she used the steps. There was also no need to place any warning boards as the staircase did not constitute an 'unusual danger'.

No mention if the sloping walkway was available/constructed after her fall

No mention if the sloping walkway was user-friendly (could be a maize/merry-go-round to use it).

No mention if the staircase was lit after her fall.

No mention how many steps the staircase got (if more than 5, hand rails should be povided).

No mention how the staircase was constructed (risers and treads dimensions).

I believe each got their own view and dedicated interest, we know too little to comprehend more precisely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Next time disclaimers will be everywhere.

It can easily be disprove......as many other users use the same staircase but did not fall.

 

Perhaps need to sign death indemnity form to view show flats in future.

 

U can't disclaim responsibility for death. U dun need many ppl to fall in order for de other party to be responsible. One is enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Next time just put a disclaimer at the door or the flyers lor -

 

"By entering the showroom premises, you agree to indemnify Keppel Land of any injury, partial or permanent loss of use of your limbs, paralysis, and/or death in the event of an accident within the premises."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Due to own negligent and careless when walking and then fall, still want to sue other people?! What theory is this? [:/]

Edited by 13177
Link to post
Share on other sites

No mention if the sloping walkway was available/constructed after her fall

No mention if the sloping walkway was user-friendly (could be a maize/merry-go-round to use it).

No mention if the staircase was lit after her fall.

No mention how many steps the staircase got (if more than 5, hand rails should be povided).

No mention how the staircase was constructed (risers and treads dimensions).

I believe each got their own view and dedicated interest, we know too little to comprehend more precisely.

For far too long sgp consumers/men-in-the-street have been 'taken for a ride' by some builders/designers/developers which provide access etc which is unsafe. It doesnt matter if other users of the access have not stripped and injured themselves as long as the victim can prove that the surface is slippery / uneven and has caused his/her fall while using it in a normal and expected manner ie walking and not running etc. This can serve as a wake-up call to the culprits who earn design fee / profits from sales of new condo etc but chose to provide sub-standard access in terms of safety.

 

Those who choose a tidak-apa attitude, whether they are the users or designers/developers, god bless them not to become the victims themselves one day. It doesnt cost that much to provide anti-slip or proper handrails for these access ways.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Due to own negligent and careless when walking and then fall, still want to sue other people?! What theory is this? [:/]

but do you and I really know the injuries were caused by her own negligence or the flaws in the access way? do we?

↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...