Thomas Cook abomination

scorza · 17 May 2015 at 18:47

MichaelAwkward said:
Convenient timing for parent group Tui to kill the Thomas Cook brand... I imagine some heads may roll at the same time.

TUI owns Thomson, not Thomas Cook.

Agree with the OP, this stinks - it's like Thomas Cook pulled out all the stops chasing compensation for the damage done to their image, but wasn't quite as keen in chasing compensation for their customers, who'd lost both their kids

thepharcyde · 17 May 2015 at 18:48

Being a parent, I cannot even begin to imagine the pain that they are going through. Very very sad.

MichaelAwkward · 17 May 2015 at 18:48

scorza said:
TUI owns Thomson, not Thomas Cook.

Indeed you're right. Shows how meaningless these holiday brands are.

Amnesia · 17 May 2015 at 18:48

OldCoals said:
Look at how they have behaved over the incident.

If they apologise it means they feel responsible some what. They did right to sue the hotel, look at the hate they are getting for something that wasn't their fault.

Hotwired · 17 May 2015 at 18:57

It's perverse to compare a loss of earnings claim to a wrongful death compensation sum.

Equally twisted to ram in any kind of laymans opinion on the value of death in cash and at the same time say the value matters or that it doesn't.

Thankfully the average layman doesn't have a say in the matter.

Destination · 17 May 2015 at 19:03

OldCoals said:
It wasn't an accident though.

Exactly, their only statement refers to an unfortunate accident.
What the hell sort of accidents do Thomas Cook preside over?
Did someone accidentally the whole carbon monoxide?

When you mess up, you say you are sorry, that's the start. Even if you are only sorry for ever collaborating with a hotel with a poor safety record. Or sorry for placing people in a hotel that was unsafe without your knowledge.

You don't claim that you didn't nothing wrong, and cite a Greek court letting off two holiday reps as evidence of such!
They did something wrong, they placed a family who paid them money for a holiday, in a room which ultimately killed their children.
Are they wholly responsible? Certainly not.
Should they apologise for their part in what happened? Yes.
Should their CEO hide behind a wall of silence? No.
Should they refer to it as an accident? No!

benjii · 17 May 2015 at 19:07

I don't mean to play devil's advocate, but what is a life worth? What amount of compensation will grieving parents be happy with? I'm not having a go at anyone, I'm genuinely asking.

Sudden · 17 May 2015 at 19:07

Apologising may be considered to be admitting liability for the incident, so i'd wager that's why they chose not to say anything.

Xordium · 17 May 2015 at 19:08

You can't say its an accident when three people have been found guilty of manslaughter. I'm with a few other people in here on this. It is an insult and I certainly wouldn't want anything to do with Thomas Cook after the shameful way they have behaved.

Woden · 17 May 2015 at 19:10

Thomas Cook didn't even need to do all that much. Pay the compensation, and apologise privately.

Then apologise publicly with an explanation of what's been done to stop it ever happening again. That's the important part.

Danthus · 17 May 2015 at 19:11

benjii said:
I don't mean to play devil's advocate, but what is a life worth? What amount of compensation will grieving parents be happy with? I'm not having a go at anyone, I'm genuinely asking.

Lets ignore actual numbers.

Is it right that Thomas cook have received more than the family who lost their children?

Sudden · 17 May 2015 at 19:14

OldCoals said:
Lets ignore actual numbers.

Is it right that Thomas cook have received more than the family who lost their children?

But the reasons behind that are different, no? You can't look at compensation with a 'Hey, they got more than me' attitude. It depends on loss suffered.

Emotionally, the family's loss is far worse, naturally, but does that automatically mean that the other party shouldn't be compensated for the loss they suffered? (ignoring the fact that it seems like they didn't receive the amounts actually awarded).

Do victims in criminal trials (like this one, where people have been sentenced to prison), normally get compensation for loss suffered?

Destination · 17 May 2015 at 19:22

benjii said:
I don't mean to play devil's advocate, but what is a life worth? What amount of compensation will grieving parents be happy with? I'm not having a go at anyone, I'm genuinely asking.

Legally a death isn't worth much, especially that of a child who has no dependants.
Amounts in the UK tend not to be punitive. So the company isn't charged extra to punish them and make them not want to do it again. Certainly not in compensation amounts.
In this case, if say a child had survived or a parent survived with massive brain damage needing 24 hour care etc and no chance of improvement then the amount to be paid would be significantly greater.

I am not complaining amount the amount of compensation.
I am not complaining about Thomas Cook suing the Greeks.
It is their apparent lack of care in this case, lack of evidenced regret, and lack of transparency. they claim to have fully overhauled processes which at the time were in place to stop this happening, yet they call it an accident, and also suggest no fault of theirs as a judge cleared their employees.
It reads terribly.
From a corporate law point of view they are operating as efficiently as possibly, as such I'd never want to rely on them to have my back.
I will never use this company while such processes exist. Customer is a commodity, and an accident involves gassing children to death.

There are ways of stating regret that don't involve refusing to answer questions at a trial or inquest. It stinks of legalise and lack of care for dead children.

Pestilence · 17 May 2015 at 19:41

Tefal said:
well unless the couple were planning on selling their children as slave labour they probably cant claim loss of earnings from their deaths.

Honestly, I'd chase for the compensation of the lifetime earnings of an expected 'life'.

If those children had grown up, held an average-paying wage job until retirement age. I'd want that income. That's what a life is worth.

StriderX · 17 May 2015 at 19:45

Pestilence said:
Honestly, I'd chase for the compensation of the lifetime earnings of an expected 'life'.

If those children had grown up, held an average-paying wage job until retirement age. I'd want that income. That's what a life is worth.

A life is worth more than chosen enslavement, surely.

Regardless, there is no serious worth to a life, one cannot replace them, but all the parents want is a direct face-face apology and the cold nastiness that is corporate law, they can't.

doofer · 17 May 2015 at 20:35

Corporate Profits>People.

Anyone who doesn't think there's anything wrong in a Corporation getting £3.5MILLION for LOSS OF PROFITS over the deaths of two innocent children it had a duty of care to protect needs to go and have a long hard look at themselves in a mirror.

Ironically, all the clowns condoning this would be the first on here screaming for Compensation if someone pooed through their letterboxes. :rolleyes:

Tragic. Truly tragic.

MrMoonX · 17 May 2015 at 20:41

doofer said:
Corporate Profits>People.

Anyone who doesn't think there's anything wrong in a Corporation getting £3.5MILLION for LOSS OF PROFITS over the deaths of two innocent children it had a duty of care to protect needs to go and have a long hard look at themselves in a mirror.

Ironically, all the clowns condoning this would be the first on here screaming for Compensation if someone pooed through their letterboxes.

Tragic. Truly tragic.

+1

In short massive holiday company gets £3.5m, parents of dead children who paid massive holiday company for dangerous hotel get £350k utterly shocking!

StriderX · 17 May 2015 at 20:50

Objectively, the massive holiday company (Thomas Cook) employs near 22k people, protecting their liability is just surely?

(Objectively, ofcourse)

dannyjo22 · 17 May 2015 at 20:52

Hotwired said:
What's your problem?

Three people, including the manager of the Louis Corcyra Beach Hotel and two members of staff, were found guilty of manslaughter by negligence and sentenced to seven years in jail..

When they covered this story on 5live on friday they said that hadn't spent a day in prison. The laughable greek justice system.

TC had a duty of care to that family. I understand why they got much more compensation even if I don't think it's right. What they should have done is donated a massive portion or all of it to a Childrens charity.

Iirc when that guy hit the wall coming off a water slide in Thomas Cook hotel they said the slide wouldn't meet UK standards of health and safety. They said even if you are abroad a hotel pimped out by a UK travel agent has to meet UK H&S standards and it's the agents responsibility to make sure it does.

Anyway such a sad tale, one I'm not sure I could get through.

Hotwired · 17 May 2015 at 21:05

Either the money matters and you are cold enough to put a value on a dead child.

Or the money makes no difference since the victim is dead resulting in any money going to the already self supporting parents and you understand there is no happy ending.

You can't have it both ways.

How two companies settle the separate issue of fault and income loss between them is totally financial and it's a disgusting media smear to link the two. Which is particularly disgusting because it is for the profit of the media to do so.