There is no getting away from health and safety warnings these days, emblazoned on everything from plastic cups to carrier bags, these notices help protect businesses from what is becoming an extremely litigious society.
Only last month, an 11 month old baby was badly burned and scarred for life after a hot drink was knocked over her at a famous fast food restaurant highlighting the need for good health and safety precautions as well as public liability insurance.
And with the so-called compensation culture engulfing UK courts of law, proprietors within the food and drink industry must ensure that their businesses are covered or face costly, potentially business closing, claims.
A Lloyd’s underwriter, who specialises in public liability, said: “We mould our policies to the needs of the customer. If the customer owns a small café in a suburban town then the dynamics of the claim would be very different to that of a fancy restaurant in London.
“A food and drink extension can be added to a public liability exposure which would not only cover the spilling of hot drinks in restaurants and coffee places but would also protect offices and any establishment with in-house catering.
“It is an easily obtainable policy which incorporates ‘slip and trip’ and any unfortunate events that may occur with regard to the food and drink industry.
“Within the market at the moment most businesses are buying combined packaged policies for property and liability. As they are buying more than one policy within the same product, they will receive a discount.
“Generally, companies are very sensible when it comes to taking out a public liability policy but they do need to be advised on the right limit. With social and medical inflation it is recommended that companies should not have less than £5m limit.”
A well-known product liability lawsuit in the US in 1992 is famously known as the ‘McDonald’s coffee case.’ Stella Liebeck, from New Mexico, sued McDonald’s after she spilled hot coffee that she ordered at one of the company’s drive-thrus. Causing her to suffer from third-degree burns, Liebeck decided to take action to sue the fast-food chain for failing to warn her of the extreme temperature of her drink. She later received $640,000 in compensation.
