Stella Liebeck Revisited. British Teenager Spills McDonald's Tea and Wants to Sue. Ouch, it was Hot!

A British teenager wants to sue McDonald's (who in the world doesn't? - that's a rich company, you might get loads of cash, right?) because he spilled hot tea on his leg and got burnt.

Young Ben Lewis is 17 and works in an English nightclub run by his mother. One day in early 2010 he went to the local McDonald's in a car driven by his girlfriend and after buying a cup of tea off they went. Ben says that as they went over a speed bump the tea spilled onto his right leg and burnt him. He went to his girlfriend's house and took a cold shower and later went to Welshpool Hospital to get the burn treated. He later complained that he would need two weeks off work, was unable to drive and found showering painful. He was worried he might be scarred for life.

He then called the UK press to say that he was thinking of taking legal action against McDonalds for selling such hot tea.

"It's so dangerous" he protested. "Obviously the lid wasn't properly put on the tea. It only took going over a speed bump to get tea all over me. It was incredibly painful, I screamed when it happened and yanked my trousers down to stop them sticking to me. I went immediately to my girlfriend's house, where I had a cold shower and had to go to the hospital...I took some powerful painkillers, and had my leg wrapped in clingfilm, to protect the burns...The blisters have gone down a bit now, but it's still so painful and sore...It's scary that [McDonald's] serve tea at that temperature with lids that aren't put on right."

His father Tony chipped in to say: "I think we should sue them. McDonald's shouldn't be able to get away with this. What happened was absolutely horrific...The tea must have exceeded the maximum heat that it's meant to be served at. They shouldn't be able to get away with it, and they won't get away with it I hope. I'll be in contact with a solicitor shortly."

Now. You don't have to be a rocket scientist or even a no-win-no-fee lawyer to spot the case young Ben and his father are busy making here. "Obviously" the lid wasn't put on properly and the tea "must have" exceeded the maximum legal temperature.

Except of course that it's not "obvious" that McDonald's "must have" been at fault here. That is no more or less obvious than that Ben was plain daft or even, possibly, actively contriving to make a complaint against McDonald's and sue for a large amount of compensation.

This writer is no fan of the fast food company but no fan either of Britain's lazy, dishonest and babyish compensation culture. The alternatives to McDonalds being at fault in this case are several. Ben perhaps ignored the warning on the cup, yanked the lid off the tea and spilled it on himself before it had a chance to cool? Or, alternatively, his girlfriend hit the speed bump going too fast and knocked it over him before the tea had a chance to cool down. Or, alternatively, Ben had an idea for suing McDonalds earlier in the day, bought some tea from the fast food chain, went home and put some very hot water on one of his legs. That possibility can't be ruled out. And it's one reason why McDonald's should fight this case tooth and nail if Ben and his dad try to take them to court.

The other reason is this. A whole generation of Brits has now been baby-spoon-fed on health and safety twaddle that has absolved them of almost all responsibility for anything they do in daily life. If they walk upstairs in a public building, hand rails are pretty much compulsory. Or else some chancer is likely to sue. If someone trips over a curb, they're likely to sue. If you hit your head on a low doorway or slip on a newly washed floor, you may have "a case". It's got to the absurd point that a young man in a car with his girlfriend can hardly be expected to understand that tea, made with boiling water, is hot. Ben certainly doesn't think that after buying a simple cup of tea and driving away, the responsibility for handling the hot drink he now owns is his. If he spills it and gets burnt therefore, the responsibility "must have" been McDonald's. Or if his girlfriend hits a speed bump and it spills, the responsibility "must have" been McDonald's.

But would Ben and his dad even bother thinking about suing McDonald's if it weren't for the possibility of making a claim for big-bucks compensation? The infamous case of 79-year-old Stella Liebeck is still very widely known in the UK. Stella quite caught the British imagination when she got more than £2million from McDonald's in 1992 after being scalded by a cup of coffee bought from a drive-thru. The court in that case heard that she had balanced the drink - which she must have known very well was made with boiling water - between her legs.

Whatever any of us think of McDonald's as a business, it has to be unreasonable to expect them to take responsibility for what customers do after they've bought a hot drink and left the premises. There is no way of proving the cup's lid wasn't "properly put on". And the tea, if it is to be tea, must be hot.

It will be a clear defeat for reason if Ben becomes the British hot tea version of Stella Liebeck.

Unfortunately, McDonald's responded to Ben's 'story' in the UK press by saying: "We are very sorry to hear of this accident. We will launch an urgent investigation to ensure our usual safety safeguards are in force."

Of course they are obliged to say that. But it would have been better frankly if they'd said:

"You know what Ben? You bought the tea. You're not a baby. You knew it was hot. And there was a warning on the cup. Once you left the premises you were responsible for how you handled the tea. It was a cup of tea, not a landmine. Grow up, get a grip. We're sorry you got hurt but it was either your fault or your girlfriend's fault or just one of those things. You don't deserve two million pounds. And we won't be playing along."