NParks trees pierced through car windscreen, no APOLOGY !

last SG · 2008-01-17T11:11:49+00:00

i recalled a similar incident last year. a tree branch fell on a car at potong pasir, ah seng blamed chiam see tong's town council of not doing their job ma...

hloc SG

Hi... morning.

Just read on the papers today.....

The lady car owner was unable to point out to the Npark people which tree that the branch fall from. Npark claim on '1st glance', all trees in the area are health....... Npark said that they check on trees along the major roads every 18 mth and minor roads every 24mths for health and condition.

Jamie Zawinski SG

phil30k SG

Dear Maurizio

I think I see the misunderstanding.

The condition of the tree as well as other factors are also important to the case as a whole but were not the factors being examined in this particular argument.

This was limited to whether the vehicle's speed being above the speed limit constituted contributory negligence. The court decided the case could not be lost on these grounds.

However, the case was won on other grounds.

HyperFocal SG

... here's a thought; if you were involved in an accident and your car somehow damaged a tree, would you not be ORDERED to pay for damaging the tree?

... since this is so, then what Act do people have to indemnify themselves from having to pay for damaging a tree in an accident - be it the fault is yours or not..?

hloc SG

Sorry.... I have not heard of anyone who damage a tree in an accident was made to pay for the damage.... unless you damage the tree knowingly....

HyperFocal SG

Originally posted by hloc:

[b]Sorry.... I have not heard of anyone who damage a tree in an accident was made to pay for the damage.... unless you damage the tree knowingly....[/b]

... oh, I have...

deathbait SG

never heard of compensation for accidentally hurting a tree.

Vandalism on the other hand....but that's another debate for another thread

hloc SG

Then show prove lah.......

deathbait SG

really?
that would be an interesting case.

Bearing in mind it has to be an accident, not a delibrate attempt to hurt a tree.

Fatum SG

I wonder if the hongkies or taiwanese or the japanese sues their goverment for property damage after a typhoon ? .... Confused

hey ! ... so who's going to join me in my hunger strike to demand a new hamster from the goverment ? .... Very Happy

newcomer SG

my coney died! i oso want hunger strike.

hloc SG

Sorry dude..... I think we are still waiting for your prove if any..... Neutral

HyperFocal SG

... let me put everything nicely together first...

Spartans SG

IMO, we shouldnt be blaming the Government over this unfortunate event.

It was an accident caused by bad weather and we have absolutely no control over weather.

Moreover, as far as I know, the agency in charge, NEA, do regularly check the health of the trees, especially those along the roadsides. We know they are doing their work. Maybe they should have be more prudent and cut away those 'more dangerous branches'.

NParks should give an apology and we can get on with our lives.

I'm actually quite perplexed that this incident can be blamed on Government. Neutral

edited for typo errors

maurizio13 SG

deathbait & hloc,

Are you trolling; or are you little girl with limited knowledge of how things actually work in the real world?

Your logic is quite unique and uncommon.

If an accident happens and the aggrieved party has suffered damages, he can't claim damages because it's an accident.

If Car A hits Car B, Car B hits a pedestrian, the pedestrian can't claim any damages suffered because it was not a deliberate attempt to hurt him?

Looks like all the 3rd party claims which all motorist have been claiming is a figment of their imagination.

We lost Gazelle in Speaker's Corner, now we have you to take over his place. Your logic is as profound and abstract as his.

Seriously, we miss Gazelle's antics in here, at least we have you to take over from him now.

Welcome to Speaker's Corner, I hope you can provide us with more of your entertaining views.

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

hloc,

Seems like hloc's scuba diving trips has taken a toll on his intelligence. Water pressure during scuba diving can prevent the growth of synapses in your neurons. Seriously, we have lots of morons here already, don't want to see another Singaporean turn into a vegetative state. Take care dude you are sounding more illogical these days.

As ambient pressure increases, hydrostatic compression of the central nervous system, combined with increasing levels of inspired PO2, PCO2, and N2 partial pressure, has deleterious effects on neuronal function, resulting in O2 toxicity, CO2 toxicity, N2 narcosis, and high-pressure nervous syndrome. The cellular mechanisms responsible for each disorder have been difficult to study by using classic in vitro electrophysiological methods, due to the physical barrier imposed by the sealed pressure chamber and mechanical disturbances during tissue compression. Improved chamber designs and methods have made such experiments feasible in mammalian neurons, especially at ambient pressures

anesthesia; carbon dioxide toxicity; free radicals; high-pressure nervous syndrome; membrane potential; nitrogen narcosis; oxidative stress; oxygen toxicity; polarographic oxygen electrode

Source: Journal of Applied Physiology

One quote to describe some of the participants in this forum.

A fool can ask more questions in an hour than a wiseman can answer in seven years.

Laughing

This forum has gone to the dogs!!!

maurizio13 SG

Destruction, damage, etc., of notices, boundary marks, etc.

10. (1) No person shall wilfully or negligently destroy, damage or deface any object of zoological, botanical, geological, ethnological, scientific or aesthetic interest within any national park or nature reserve.

(2) No person shall

(a) destroy, damage, deface, alter or remove any notice or other sign erected by or on behalf of the Board within any national park or nature reserve; or

(b) knowingly destroy, damage, deface, alter or remove any boundary mark within any national park or nature reserve.

(3) Any person who contravenes subsection (1) or (2) shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $20,000.

(4) Subsections (1) and (2) shall not apply to

(a) the Commissioner, an authorised officer or a park ranger acting in the performance of his duty under this Act;

(b) any other officer or employee of the Board acting in the performance of his duty under this Act or any other written law; and

(c) any police officer or workman assisting a person referred to in paragraph (a) or (b) to carry out his duty.

[National Parks 1997 Ed., s. 25]

maurizio13 SG

STOMPer Gilbert said a large tree branch fell and damaged his car, but when he went to his insurance company, it said that he is accountable for 50% of the blame.

"If we were 50% to blame for the falling tree branch, does that mean the other 50% of the blame goes to the tree?" the STOMPer asked.

According to the STOMPer, he was in the Portsdown Road area at about 3pm last Thursday (Dec 6) when he heard a crunching noise outside, and found out later that a large tree branch had fallen on the bonnet of his car.

He said that when he asked his insurance company how he should get the car repaired, they told him to go to an independent damage assessment centre (IDAC), for the extent of the damage to be certified.

The STOMPer said the insurance company told him that he was considered 50% to blame and that he would lose his no-claim discount, without explaining how the policy actually works.

"Does anyone have any idea how this works, how to appeal, and who to inform about what seems a very unfair policy?" the STOMPer asked in his email to STOMP.

The STOMPer, however, directed STOMP to the consumer portal "MoneySENSE", to clarify the issue of the no-claim discount.

STOMP checked the website and it states:

"You (insurance policyholder) are entitled to a No-Claim Discount (NCD) if no claim has been made against your policy, either by yourself or by a third party for a period of 12 months between each successive renewal of the policy (such practice may vary across different insurance companies).

"The NCD reduces the premium you have to pay for the following year."

However, the policy also states that the NCD of the policyholder may be affected if he or she is found to be partly responsible for an accident.

Update:

STOMPer Gilbert contacted STOMP again on Dec 23 with updates. This is his account:

"Thanks to Stompers for advice. We fixed car and contacted National Parks. We'll post the outcome, if any.

"Parking along roads within Wessex Estate is legal. Unless they can walk a kilometer or more, every visitor or tenant must park along the road.

"Webster dictionary defines "Act of God" as "a natural and unavoidable catastrophe that interrupts the expected course of events," and a falling branch (especially if it falls on us) is thus more tragedy than catastrophe.

"In most countries, insurance would pay without argument, and policyholders would not lose the discount for the first claim of this type. However, does not seem to be true for Singapore."

Source: http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/singaporeseen/viewContent.jsp?id=10602

HyperFocal SG

Originally posted by maurizio13:

[b]Destruction, damage, etc., of notices, boundary marks, etc.

10. (1) No person shall wilfully or negligently destroy, damage or deface any object of zoological, botanical, geological, ethnological, scientific or aesthetic interest within any national park or nature reserve.

(2) No person shall

(a) destroy, damage, deface, alter or remove any notice or other sign erected by or on behalf of the Board within any national park or nature reserve; or

(b) knowingly destroy, damage, deface, alter or remove any boundary mark within any national park or nature reserve.

(3) Any person who contravenes subsection (1) or (2) shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $20,000.

(4) Subsections (1) and (2) shall not apply to

(a) the Commissioner, an authorised officer or a park ranger acting in the performance of his duty under this Act;

(b) any other officer or employee of the Board acting in the performance of his duty under this Act or any other written law; and

(c) any police officer or workman assisting a person referred to in paragraph (a) or (b) to carry out his duty.

[National Parks 1997 Ed., s. 25]
[/b]

... woah you sure are fast...

... I'm still waiting for someone to email me his accident report & outcome of accident involving damaged tree...

deathbait SG

I'm a little confused by your aggression in this question.

Are you implying it's common knowledge that drivers who crash their cars into trees end up paying for damaging a tree?

HyperFocal SG

... so technically, are you implying you do not possess this 'common knowledge'?

« Previous Page Next Page »