Contracts, Where do i stand? I recently hired a hall from the local council for a childs birthday party.? - sparkler birthday candles
I signed a contract under the rules. No candles, no smoke machines. The room was equipped with smoke detectors and several told me that when she left, I should his appeal for the fire service pay of 400 pounds was lost. Cover instead of a candle, a torch B'Day cake, and guess what ... The alarm was raised. Fortunately, the DJ has worked for the fire department and has called on his colleagues, immediately make the claim. You have the phone number of the guardian who had the key to activate the alarm and called for. He stated that he will fire and threw the phone call and was unable to key the alarm please. Before arriving, he called a security company, they sent someone out for a walk, they turned left and turned the Alarm wide, the other to send the bill to the security firm, I have to pay? It says nothing about the contract upon payment of a security check and not say to use torches.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Sparkler Birthday Candles Contracts, Where Do I Stand? I Recently Hired A Hall From The Local Council For A Childs Birthday Party.?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Answer.The wording suggested by English law of contract is what counts. I am surprised that the text does not say "no candles, torches, matches, flames, or lights or something similar is at least a description, then you will be charged is responsible for fire calls. The starting point of dispute is assumed that the parties a market for the document that contains all the key points and terms or a piece of paper created, are generally not considered part of the contract if the written contract refers to them. If the prohibition "not that candles are not to speak of a birthday cake, when there is no ordinary courts, that the rash is a form of sailing, other wiseIt is a fair argument that "no sail has been designed to cope with the danger of fire general candles in candlesticks, etc. latterns not as a form of decorative lighting, which is a long-term use and cupcake candles immediately blown by the desire to what we want.
In any case, we have what is said, has no contract with the security company and has never existed and can not be created retroactively, therefore not directly with them at all. You can simply ignore them or say what you think is right. Do not give in to threats that they could. There are many well-established case law to the point you have no contract, claims or liabilities intermediatries support to the consultation.
The next point is not called the fire brigadeed, and therefore do not have to pay costs. The council can not substitute for a security company for the fire department.
So together, in order, what we have said, it may be stupid, but in the law, I see that the liability is proven that you are responsible.
yeah I agree with what I have something like this and contact my attorney recentley that their words are ignored something only if the wage bonus U SA much for them if there is something that they can could do for U thret court, but actually used to do what they do not have a valid argument, it was for me, then withdrawn as soon as I told you what he said Solictor
Good luck
their hard and will enter into the technical details. To be fair, it was said that if the fire alarm system was that it paid 400 pounds for. We assume it was less than the security? and thus get away really. when the fire was man hadnt, there were more.
The caregiver is responsible for the construction and needs to be done to see more about Incase there is a problem elsewhere, why should they pay the bill when they were warned that it?
tried to oppose him with the keeper - perhaps you can each pay half, or at least had a little money as a compromise?
You can get away with it!,
as the exact wording of the contract.
You do not have a contract with the security company. You can not demand payment from you and the Council should pay. However, the Council can confirm that the costs incurred as a result of negligence, and reimbursement from you. His defense was that he had not noticed that an increase in thinking caused the fire alarm system - but given the warnings on the candles, I find the court in favor of the Council. I suggest you pay.
Post a Comment