1. Stephanie visits the Leura Miniature Railway Park which is run by an association of amateur railway enthusiasts. She enters into three different contracts at the park: paying $10 to park her car in the park grounds, paying $8 to hire a stroller for her small child, and a third ticket for $5 for a half hour ride on the Scenic Railway conducted within the Park. She expected to see spectacular valley views from the scenic railway train and had been looking forward to the excursion for months. However her day was a disaster. While she is walking in the park grounds, her child is injured when the hired stroller suddenly collapses. Stephanie gets a ride back to the car park on the Scenic Railway but is herself injured when the carriage step breaks as she is getting off. The final straw is that when she returns to her car she finds it has been damaged by one of the staff who was playing football. Stephanie has very clearly voiced her anger about these events in a letter to the association and has demanded compensation. You are an employee of the association and you have been handed Stephanie's letter of complaint. You are aware that in the car park there is a notice stating that all cars are parked at owner's risk. What you realise now is that that sign is partly hidden by some shrubs. Further, on the back of the ticket obtained from the stroller attendant is a notice which states: \"No responsibility accepted for accidents to children\". Still further, there is a notice on the scenic railway ticket stating: \"There is no liability for any physical injury to passengers whether caused by negligence or othenlvise.\" You need to decide what the best course of action is for the association to take, within the law, in dealing with Stephanie