Captain's Log, April 30, 2014 from the Rebel Heart Blog

[anotherT34C]

re:McDonalds case, google it and read for yourself. See (images too) the 3rd degree burns and skin grafts required, because the coffee was held between 180-190 degrees F (3rd degree burns between 2 and 5 seconds at that temp). Read how she tried to settle for just the medical bills, but the company refused. Read how there were more than 700(!) previous claims, many with similar 3rd degree burns. The judge ruled that the company was reckless, callous, and willful.

Even so, as is usual in cases like this, the original punitive damages (2.7M) was reduced in trial court to $480k, then further adjusted by an undisclosed amount. The original damage award gets all the headline, though the actual payment would be much less.

[Sailing Cowboy]

My SIM card has been deactivated in the past with NO notice. That was Globalstar though.

[Scottuk]

After the Rescue: The Kaufman Family Speaks - San Diego Magazine - June 2014 - San Diego, California

[Spleen]

I believe I see a lot of black and white thinking in her article... Either live a life of quiet desperation or live an adventure.

As we all know, life is rarely one or the other.


Oh, and some people never learn... Whether they will be in this group or not remains to be see. Putting your fingers in your ears and singing "lalalalala" doesn't seem very mature, when people have legitimate questions about seamanship of the captain along with other issues.

[who_cares]

Originally Posted by Spleen

I believe I see a lot of black and white thinking in her article... Either live a life of quiet desperation or live an adventure.

As we all know, life is rarely one or the other.


Oh, and some people never learn... Whether they will be in this group or not remains to be see. Putting your fingers in your ears and singing "lalalalala" doesn't seem very mature, when people have legitimate questions about seamanship of the captain along with other issues.

+1. I'd like to go sailing with them, just to figure out exactly how much they know. I mean you can deliver boats up and down the coast all you want, but that doesn't mean you're qualified to go across the Pacific. I also would've liked to have heard someone else's opninion about the seaworthiness of the boat. Pretty sure getting knocked over or "broaching" as they put it, should cause significant water ingress.

Finally I think it's hard to believe that they don't have any regrets. There's got to be something they wish they could've done better, whether it was in route selection, time of year, boat preps, experience, knowledge, whatever. I just think that this whole thing was preventable, and them not admitting it just makes them seem like ********.

[Spleen]

+1 their refusal to admit one thing they think they could have done differently, to me, suggests they know they did plenty of things wrong and don't want to talk about it.

Which is fine. But then say.... We screwed up and don't want to talk about it.

[Scottuk]

I think the photograph says it all.

[sailorboy1]

I feel that latest "article" really says anything other than to say "look how free we are".

[FSMike]

Originally Posted by anotherT34C

re:McDonalds case, google it and read for yourself. See (images too) the 3rd degree burns and skin grafts required, because the coffee was held between 180-190 degrees F (3rd degree burns between 2 and 5 seconds at that temp). Read how she tried to settle for just the medical bills, but the company refused. Read how there were more than 700(!) previous claims, many with similar 3rd degree burns. The judge ruled that the company was reckless, callous, and willful.

Even so, as is usual in cases like this, the original punitive damages (2.7M) was reduced in trial court to $480k, then further adjusted by an undisclosed amount. The original damage award gets all the headline, though the actual payment would be much less.

The National Coffee Assoc. USA recommends that coffee be brewed at 195* to 205*. The NCA recommends that coffee be held at 180* to 185*.
Sounds Like McDonalds was following recommended practice.

Common sense indicates that people should not hold hot liquids in their lap while trying to drive a car.

I prefer not to reward stupidity.

Sorry for the thread hijack folks.
We now return to our regularly scheduled program.

[anotherT34C]

Originally Posted by FSMike

The National Coffee Assoc. USA recommends that coffee be brewed at 195* to 205*. The NCA recommends that coffee be held at 180* to 185*.
Sounds Like McDonalds was following recommended practice.

Common sense indicates that people should not hold hot liquids in their lap while trying to drive a car.

I prefer not to reward stupidity.

Sorry for the thread hijack folks.
We now return to our regularly scheduled program.

Where did you read that she was driving?

[captain58sailin]

Here is an excerpt that I found, seems there was a lot more to this case than first meets the eye.

There is a lot of hype about the McDonalds' scalding coffee case. No one is in favor of frivolous cases of outlandish results; however, it is important to understand some points that were not reported in most of the stories about the case. McDonalds coffee was not only hot, it was scalding -- capable of almost instantaneous destruction of skin, flesh and muscle. Here's the whole story.

Stella Liebeck of Albuquerque, New Mexico, was in the passenger seat of her grandson's car when she was severely burned by McDonalds' coffee in February 1992. Liebeck, 79 at the time, ordered coffee that was served in a styrofoam cup at the drivethrough window of a local McDonalds.

After receiving the order, the grandson pulled his car forward and stopped momentarily so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. (Critics of civil justice, who have pounced on this case, often charge that Liebeck was driving the car or that the vehicle was in motion when she spilled the coffee; neither is true.) Liebeck placed the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the plastic lid from the cup. As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled into her lap.

The sweatpants Liebeck was wearing absorbed the coffee and held it next to her skin. A vascular surgeon determined that Liebeck suffered full thickness burns (or third-degree burns) over 6 percent of her body, including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, and genital and groin areas. She was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she underwent skin grafting. Liebeck, who also underwent debridement treatments, sought to settle her claim for $20,000, but McDonalds refused.

During discovery, McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebecks. This history documented McDonalds' knowledge about the extent and nature of this hazard.

McDonalds also said during discovery that, based on a consultants advice, it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees fahrenheit to maintain optimum taste. He admitted that he had not evaluated the safety ramifications at this temperature. Other establishments sell coffee at substantially lower temperatures, and coffee served at home is generally 135 to 140 degrees.

Further, McDonalds' quality assurance manager testified that the company actively enforces a requirement that coffee be held in the pot at 185 degrees, plus or minus five degrees. He also testified that a burn hazard exists with any food substance served at 140 degrees or above, and that McDonalds coffee, at the temperature at which it was poured into styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat. The quality assurance manager admitted that burns would occur, but testified that McDonalds had no intention of reducing the "holding temperature" of its coffee.

Plaintiffs' expert, a scholar in thermodynamics applied to human skin burns, testified that liquids, at 180 degrees, will cause a full thickness burn to human skin in two to seven seconds. Other testimony showed that as the temperature decreases toward 155 degrees, the extent of the burn relative to that temperature decreases exponentially. Thus, if Liebeck's spill had involved coffee at 155 degrees, the liquid would have cooled and given her time to avoid a serious burn.

McDonalds asserted that customers buy coffee on their way to work or home, intending to consume it there. However, the companys own research showed that customers intend to consume the coffee immediately while driving.

McDonalds also argued that consumers know coffee is hot and that its customers want it that way. The company admitted its customers were unaware that they could suffer thirddegree burns from the coffee and that a statement on the side of the cup was not a "warning" but a "reminder" since the location of the writing would not warn customers of the hazard.

The jury awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages. This amount was reduced to $160,000 because the jury found Liebeck 20 percent at fault in the spill. The jury also awarded Liebeck $2.7 million in punitive damages, which equals about two days of McDonalds' coffee sales.

Post-verdict investigation found that the temperature of coffee at the local Albuquerque McDonalds had dropped to 158 degrees fahrenheit.

The trial court subsequently reduced the punitive award to $480,000 -- or three times compensatory damages -- even though the judge called McDonalds' conduct reckless, callous and willful.

No one will ever know the final ending to this case.

The parties eventually entered into a secret settlement which has never been revealed to the public, despite the fact that this was a public case, litigated in public and subjected to extensive media reporting. Such secret settlements, after public trials, should not be condoned.
-----

[boatman61]

Have they got a 'Sail In' service yet...??

[Greenhand]

I was purchasing hardware for my own boat today in San Diego and heard sounds of an auction. Made me wonder if the Rebel Heart crew was bidding

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by Scottuk

After the Rescue: The Kaufman Family Speaks - San Diego Magazine - June 2014 - San Diego, California

The article comes across as pretty condescending. They're still enjoying or at least participating in their 15 minutes of fame. Her writing seems to be showing disdain for the primary readers of the magazine the article is in. Maybe things will lighten up on both sides after some time passes.

[oldragbaggers]

I was very quick to jump on the bandwagon to defend Eric and Charlotte in the beginning. And considering the viciousness of the attacks that were leveled at them I would do so again. And I am very sorry for what their family went through, no doubt traumatic. But since then I have mostly been watching and listening, trying to get a more complete picture of what actually happened, and haven't had a lot to say about it.

I made a lot of quick assumptions in the beginning that, with what has come out since, I think were a little overly generous in the credit I gave them for their preparedness and expertise, and the overall readiness of their vessel. But, be that as it may, a lot of people with less knowledge and preparation, and less suitable vessels, go out there and make out just fine, largely a factor of luck and good (weather) timing I think.

I think what we are seeing here is the arrogance and hubris of youth. I don't for a moment think that they don't realize that they made mistakes. (At least I hope they do....because, if they don't, they are likely to repeat them.) But, they spent years before the departure holding themselves out as examples of sorts, actively promoting themselves in all kinds of ways on social media and through their website. I have seen some of Eric's past posts and articles which, while not egregious, at the very least sometimes were condescending to others who he felt were less than competent, knowledgeable, or skilled than he. I think some of those people now, and others who defend them, may be just a little touchy over the lack of humility being shown in the aftermath.

Humble pie can be a hard dish to swallow, harder for some personalities than others. I think some of us would just have so much more respect for both of them in this situation (don't get me wrong, I am not by any means saying I don't respect them) if they would just show a little more humility and even just the slightest allusion to something they could have done better or differently, the fact that maybe they overestimated or underestimated one factor or another, that one decision or another could have been better or more timely, or even just (GASP) wrong. Anything at all that would indicate that there has been some introspection that would say that if they were to get another boat tomorrow they would go about it in a different way that would lead to a higher probability of better results.

My hope is that, even though they aren't able to bring themselves to say it publicly, that in the privacy of their own relationship they are having honest discussions about the errors that happened and the lessons they learned from them, that they make honest assessments of their limitations and abilities, and apply those lessons and assessments to their next endeavor. And I hope there is a next endeavor for them.