School to bear kid's medical costs

[Lite Beer]

School to bear kid's medical costs
The Nation on Sunday

BANGKOK: -- Assumptionsuksa School would pay for medical expenses of a three-year-old kindergartener, who was seriously injured after falling off and being run over by the school's van on Thursday in Bangkok's Khlong San district.

Case investigator Pol Lt-Colonel Avudh Udonrat said police had interviewed most witnesses and is waiting for the doctor's report about the girl's condition and the treatment, while the van driver, Wutthipong Suwansirisilpa, 46, was released on bail.

Avudh said Assumption-suksa School had testified on Friday that it was a private van hired by parents to give the students a lift and the school only accommodated it by providing a parking lot and supervised it as per the Education Ministry's regulation.

The girl, as of press time, was in a critical condition and would remain under close medical surveillance for 3-4 days.

-- The Nation 2013-07-07

[Scott]

In most places the school would be paying much, much more than just the medical expenses.

[Sunisalom]

And as I said yesterday, this is no time to be blaming the van driver. The school is ultimately responsible, whether or not the parents hired the van. The school gave it parking rights, and therefore must accept responsibility.

Sunisa.

[Thai at Heart]

Shouldn't the car insurance cover this?

Please don't tell me he was uninsured?

[noitom]

Another Thai piddling tragedy settlement.

[DocN]

That is the absolute least they could do!

[rishi]

And as I said yesterday, this is no time to be blaming the van driver. The school is ultimately responsible, whether or not the parents hired the van. The school gave it parking rights, and therefore must accept responsibility.

Sunisa.

So - the school is reponsible for the parents hiring a van with a driver without sufficient brains to secure the doors in his van full of 3-year old kids because at one point on the route it was parked on the school's premises? - A poorly thought out judgement, IMHO.

What will be the natural cause of action for the school in the future to avoid a repeat? - They can't control how the parents arrange for bringin their kids back and forth, nor what kind of persons or vehicles are involved. What they can control is who is permitted to park on the premises. - So, the obvious solution for this and other schools is to ban vans or other private vehicles to park on their premises, so that the kids will have to walk to wherever the closest parking lot may be as to be onloaded in the midst of traffic.

Have you ever seen the traffical chaos outside schools when the kids arrive or depart? - Great environment to have a group of 3-year kids moving around in, right?

[Kilgore Trout]

And as I said yesterday, this is no time to be blaming the van driver. The school is ultimately responsible, whether or not the parents hired the van. The school gave it parking rights, and therefore must accept responsibility.

Sunisa.

So - the school is reponsible for the parents hiring a van with a driver without sufficient brains to secure the doors in his van full of 3-year old kids because at one point on the route it was parked on the school's premises? - A poorly thought out judgement, IMHO.

What will be the natural cause of action for the school in the future to avoid a repeat? - They can't control how the parents arrange for bringin their kids back and forth, nor what kind of persons or vehicles are involved. What they can control is who is permitted to park on the premises. - So, the obvious solution for this and other schools is to ban vans or other private vehicles to park on their premises, so that the kids will have to walk to wherever the closest parking lot may be as to be onloaded in the midst of traffic.

Have you ever seen the traffical chaos outside schools when the kids arrive or depart? - Great environment to have a group of 3-year kids moving around in, right?

If a commercial vehicle picked up the kids on school property then the school is ultimately responsible.

If the vehicle had picked them up after the kids exited school property, then the school would bear no responsibility.

[bangkokheat]

making the school responsible just because they allowed the van to be parked on the school grounds is ridiculous, the parents hired the van and i am assuming the driver, so what would you guys say if the school allowed private cars to pick up the kids from the school parking area and they had an accident on way home? nanny state views IMO

I would hazard a guess the school is paying for medicals on compassionate grounds rather than legal, what a horrible thing to happen to such a young child

[jpduggan]

A ''kid'' is a baby goat and I don't think there were any goats on this bus.There were however children on board and particularly a 3 year old child who is in a critical condition. If writing a column in English then it would be a good idea to know English.

[harrry]

Schools only allow selected vans to pick up their children. By restricting the choice it is reasonable to consider the van is acting on their behalf. Basicly I think even if they are not liable they should be for ensuring that all drivers have full cover.

Edited July 7, 2013 by harrry

[johnlandy]

Shouldn't the car insurance cover this?

Please don't tell me he was uninsured?

So you're suggesting that the school has no responsibility? With this thinking it is no wonder that there have been in the last 5-6 weeks 3 fatalities where 3-4 year olds

have died and now this, all because of the brain dead stupidity of some moron driving or being in charge of school transportation.

Are you by chance 'in keeping with you pseudo' a Thai?

Whether you are or not it should come of no surprise to learn that a major % of Thai drivers and, or their vehicles are uninsured. Insurance is not like gasoline 'without which the vehicle will not run'

insurance is only good in the event of an accident, and then they hope like he!! that the other driver is at fault and he has insurance.

[thhMan]

The problem is the complete lack of intelligence by driver, school officials and Government regulations.

When Thailand accepts its in the 21st century and adopts policies to cope with motor vehicles, education, road rules and just common sense, until then, Thailand is balancing on a very thin line that leans towards more avoidable accidents.

[bangkokheat]

A ''kid'' is a baby goat and I don't think there were any goats on this bus.There were however children on board and particularly a 3 year old child who is in a critical condition. If writing a column in English then it would be a good idea to know English.

thank you for your intelligent response to my illiteracy, Im sure the word "kid" isnt acceptable english to the hiso of the world, such as yourself but let me assure you for your own education that the word "kid" "rugrat" "child" "infant" amongst others are widely understood words, lawyers use these words, mothers use these words, and im certain that you have even let the word "kid" slip out, get a life instead of trying to play english police

[CIHUAHUA]

What a horrifying experience for a child, especially one so young. It is everyones responsibility to watch out for children. Later in her life she will remember it and it would be good if she also remembered that others cared enough to help make her whole again. Bless the children.

[johnlandy]

A ''kid'' is a baby goat and I don't think there were any goats on this bus.There were however children on board and particularly a 3 year old child who is in a critical condition. If writing a column in English then it would be a good idea to know English.

On the subject of the use of the word 'kid' you would seem to know very little about Thailand where 90%++ of parents (plus teachers) refer to CHILDREN as kids.

I have to agree with you that we who do have English as our native language should use the correct term as we have known it since the days we stopped shytting yellow but

if you read many of the posts on TV you will immediately see that many posters have never been educated in the subject of English as we know it (or anyone else knows it for that matter)

I think the important thing is to make oneself understood rather than do a "correct spelling and linguistics/grammar check" on every post.

Edited July 7, 2013 by johnlandy

[bangkokheat]

A ''kid'' is a baby goat and I don't think there were any goats on this bus.There were however children on board and particularly a 3 year old child who is in a critical condition. If writing a column in English then it would be a good idea to know English.

On the subject of the use of the word 'kid' you would seem to know very little about Thailand where 90%++ of parents (plus teachers) refer to CHILDREN as kids.

I have to agree with you that we who do have English as our native language should use the correct term as we have known it since the days we stopped shytting yellow but

if you read many of the posts on TV you will immediately see that many posters have never been educated in the subject of English as we know it (or anyone else knows it for that matter)

I think the important thing is to make oneself understood rather than do a "correct spelling and linguistics/grammar check" on every post.

i think you have opened up a can of worms old mate suggesting many TV posters have never been educated in english, bit of an arrogant statement i think. As you said, its "important to be understood" rather than attacking someone on their language skills

[tragickingdom]

And what about the cost to care for her the rest of her probably now miserable life?

[FangFerang]

making the school responsible just because they allowed the van to be parked on the school grounds is ridiculous, the parents hired the van and i am assuming the driver, so what would you guys say if the school allowed private cars to pick up the kids from the school parking area and they had an accident on way home? nanny state views IMO

I would hazard a guess the school is paying for medicals on compassionate grounds rather than legal, what a horrible thing to happen to such a young child

I asked a Thai lawyer, and he confirmed the opinion above on both points. the school is paying the expenses on compassion grounds. The driver was a contractor and bears the full legal responsibility. Parking somewhere does not invoke liability. If a parent ran over three students after dropping their own child off, the school is not liable -- even if the parent parked and walked their child to the classroom.

When I have a plumbing problem I talk to a plumber. When I am curious about the legality of an issue, I ask a lawyer. Duh.

[GeorgeO]

And as I said yesterday, this is no time to be blaming the van driver. The school is ultimately responsible, whether or not the parents hired the van. The school gave it parking rights, and therefore must accept responsibility.

Sunisa.

I don't really see vicarious liability taking any firm hold in this country for many years to come...!

[bangkokheat]

as a parent you are responsible for your children, as a teacher, as a carer, babysitter, driver etc you have accepted responsibility while the children are in your care, the driver neglected the safety of the kids and should be held accountable, not the school, if there is anyone else to blame it would be the parents lack of educating their kids on safety, everyday you see very young children balancing on the side of sidecars and crossing roads etc on their own, probably not much different than when we were growing up

[cheeryble]

In most places the school would be paying much, much more than just the medical expenses.

Those are the places I don't want to live.....and where in any case ultimately everyone bears the cost of the payouts.

[klauskunkel]

And as I said yesterday, this is no time to be blaming the van driver. The school is ultimately responsible, whether or not the parents hired the van. The school gave it parking rights, and therefore must accept responsibility.

Sunisa.

So - the school is reponsible for the parents hiring a van with a driver without sufficient brains to secure the doors in his van full of 3-year old kids because at one point on the route it was parked on the school's premises? - A poorly thought out judgement, IMHO.

What will be the natural cause of action for the school in the future to avoid a repeat? - They can't control how the parents arrange for bringin their kids back and forth, nor what kind of persons or vehicles are involved. What they can control is who is permitted to park on the premises. - So, the obvious solution for this and other schools is to ban vans or other private vehicles to park on their premises, so that the kids will have to walk to wherever the closest parking lot may be as to be onloaded in the midst of traffic.

Have you ever seen the traffical chaos outside schools when the kids arrive or depart? - Great environment to have a group of 3-year kids moving around in, right?

Ahem, the school provided parking for and supervision of the van as per the Ed Ministry's regulation...What those regulations entail...I don't know, but "supervision" in my mind implies responsibility to some degree.

[EyesWideOpen]

A ''kid'' is a baby goat and I don't think there were any goats on this bus.There were however children on board and particularly a 3 year old child who is in a critical condition. If writing a column in English then it would be a good idea to know English.

Cast the mote from thine own eye first.... Here , let me help you out with a corrected version .

"A ''kid'' is a baby goat, and I don't think there were any goats on this bus.There were, however, children on board, and in particular a 3 year old child who is in critical condition. If writing a column in English, then it would be a good idea to know English."

A child has been hurt, and your response is a bizarre and grammatically incorrect diatribe on an alternate definition of the word kid ? Wow, there really are some strange people on TV... :-)

Edited July 7, 2013 by EyesWideOpen

[evadgib]

The only person entrusted to drive my children is me!

[Thai at Heart]

Shouldn't the car insurance cover this?

Please don't tell me he was uninsured?

So you're suggesting that the school has no responsibility? With this thinking it is no wonder that there have been in the last 5-6 weeks 3 fatalities where 3-4 year olds

have died and now this, all because of the brain dead stupidity of some moron driving or being in charge of school transportation.

Are you by chance 'in keeping with you pseudo' a Thai?

Whether you are or not it should come of no surprise to learn that a major % of Thai drivers and, or their vehicles are uninsured. Insurance is not like gasoline 'without which the vehicle will not run'

insurance is only good in the event of an accident, and then they hope like he!! that the other driver is at fault and he has insurance.

Not Thai at all, just surmising that the insurance of the van should cover this. Why does anyone have to get involved in paying if the van is insured.

In which case, even worse, it appears the van isn't insured which is the worst of all circumstances.

I've done joint school runs with friends kids. One kid refused to belt up. Had to tell them, no belt no travel.

Edited July 7, 2013 by Thai at Heart

[Scott]

Off-topic posts have been deleted. Here's a recap of what you have missed:

Everything is good in the West and bad in Thailand

and vice versa.

All posters have bad English except one,
etc.

Stay on topic or find another thread to post in.

[Scott]

The insurance on the van is an intriguing topic. If the van had been involved in a collision, surely the insurance--even 3rd class--would pay the hospital costs, up to a certain level. I don't know how it works in this type of case, though.

It would be pretty sneaky of the school to offer to pay for something that is already being paid for.

[Thai at Heart]

The insurance on the van is an intriguing topic. If the van had been involved in a collision, surely the insurance--even 3rd class--would pay the hospital costs, up to a certain level. I don't know how it works in this type of case, though.

It would be pretty sneaky of the school to offer to pay for something that is already being paid for.

It should be covered I would think.

[sausageandmash]

A ''kid'' is a baby goat and I don't think there were any goats on this bus.There were however children on board and particularly a 3 year old child who is in a critical condition. If writing a column in English then it would be a good idea to know English.

Popular, aren't you.