fcajump 153 #126 June 22, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuote YOU CAN DIE IN SKYDIVING!!! YOU TAKE THAT RISK IT IS NOT FORCED ON YOU!!!! IF YOU DON"T LIKE IT DON'T JUMP PLEASE!!!!! Kallend makes a good point. When one signs the waiver, does he or she expressly state that they are promising to not sue if something happens to them, even if it's due to something like what Kallend is suggesting? I agree that we all accept risk in this sport. However, my problem is this... I also believe that extreme cases of negligence or unsafe practice is relative to the jury hearing the case. I believe that: GROSS negligence (drunk while packing reserves, illegal mods/repairs to aircraft, home-made student rigs*) should render the waiver useless, while normal "industry practice" that may lead to injury or death is what should be covered by the waiver. And in some states, gross negligence is grounds to throw out the waiver (in practice)... its like the 55MPH speed limit... you don't know how it will be enforced from jurisdictionto jurisdiction. Some places 70MPH will get you run over by faster drivers and others will get you arrested. What I would like is a truthful waiver... "we will do our best to ensure your safety while trying to cheat death, but shit happens"... that is then enforced when a DZO, pilot, instructor, rigger goes out of bounds on what should be reasonably expected from them. Taking personal responsibility should include both parties... the jumper and those who supply him with services, equipment or instruction. This is a dangerous sport, and we all need to be careful. If you don't think the others around you are taking it just as careful as you do, DONT GET IN THE PLANE. Blue (safe) skies gentlemen (and ladies), Jim *examples given are from the dark side of the imagination and not something actually seen.Always remember that some clouds are harder than others... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,635 #127 June 22, 2006 QuoteQuote If you don't think the others around you are taking it just as careful as you do, DONT GET IN THE PLANE. Blue (safe) skies gentlemen (and ladies), Jim Fine, but how many skydivers are qualified to evaluate the condition of a jump plane's engines, or know how to tell if a pilot's or rigger's license has been suspended? I believe we are ENTITLED to assume that these aspects of the business have been taken care of when we deal with a commercial operation. There are enough uncontrollable risks in skydiving without adding unnecessary and avoidable risks.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,404 #128 June 22, 2006 >Fine, but how many skydivers are qualified to evaluate the condition of >a jump plane's engines, or know how to tell if a pilot's or rigger's >license has been suspended? Your average skydiver can do a better job of evaluating the safety of an aircraft engine than I can evaluating the skills of every other person in a 400-way. (After all, aircraft engines are pretty simple machines, and many people understand engines.) Yet I can accept the risk of the less-evaluatable hazard posed by all those people. >I believe we are ENTITLED to assume that these aspects of the business > have been taken care of when we deal with a commercial operation. As I have seen skydivers do their level best to ensure those aspects are overlooked, I must disagree. Often DZO's do what their customers demand, even if those things would not be done by an air taxi operator because they would be considered unsafe. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DSE 3 #129 June 22, 2006 Here's a twist to that scenario; Skydiver has 100 jumps. Wants to start jumping a Xaos or other extreme performance canopy. DZO tells him "You're not ready for that" and refuses to order one for skydiver, so skydiver goes to a DZO, Ebay, or used alternative that doesn't ask about skill level, or maybe doesn't care. Skydiver brings rig back to the DZ that has refused to sell him the rig, jumps it, lands it safely, and DZO realizes the skydiver has circumvented him and bought a high performance rig. DZO shakes his head and walks away. The skydiver then proceeds to do a low level hook turn on next jump, breaking his legs and back while taking out one or two other skydivers/spectators on landing. Who is now responsible aside from the skydiver? Anyone? No one? Both DZo's? One DZO? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,404 #130 June 22, 2006 >Who is now responsible aside from the skydiver? From the laywer's point of view? The DZO. That's the problem. Some people here have argued that only serious negligence should be "suable." In your case, we have a DZO who has clearly expressed the view that jumping canopy X is a hazard to the jumper. He then negligently allows the jumper to jump the very canopy the DZO knew was a serious hazard, and had a reasonable expectation of causing this very injury. I know, I know, no skydiver would claim that. But the waivers aren't written for skydivers - they are written for the skydiver's family, and for the judge who is trying the case that the laywer brings. The waiver is intended to make the judge think "you actually jumped that canopy after reading this waiver, which says that the DZO has no responsibility whatsoever, and indeed warned you that such a thing might happen? And now you're suing him?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites micro 0 #131 June 22, 2006 Quote>Fine, but how many skydivers are qualified to evaluate the condition of >a jump plane's engines, or know how to tell if a pilot's or rigger's >license has been suspended? Your average skydiver can do a better job of evaluating the safety of an aircraft engine than I can evaluating the skills of every other person in a 400-way. (After all, aircraft engines are pretty simple machines, and many people understand engines.) . Not necessarily. In the case of Chris Martin's Twin Bo, the fault found by the NTSB was two fold... operator error (improper operation of the engine that produced internal damage, i.e. rapid throttle movements) and improper servicing of the airplane by the owner/pilot mechanic (Chris Martin) that resulted in the subsequent mechanical failure of the engine crankshaft counterweight (metal was found in the oil 8 days prior to the accident). In this situation, how is a skydiver to know A) that metal shavings were found in the oil of one of the engine during it's last maintenance inspetion and B) that the pilot is manipulating the throttle to that engine too quickly during flight? Perhaps an astute skydiver/pilot MIGHT discover the second thing, but the engine failure that caused the crash happened at 250 feet very quickly after the rapid throttle maipulations occurred... hardly time for a skydiver to say, "um, excuse me, could you stop fuckin w/ the throttle so much please?" I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Hayfield 0 #132 June 22, 2006 Please quit skydiving immediately. Find others of like mind and please take them with you when you go."Remember the First Commandment: Don't Fuck Up!" -Crusty Old Pete Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,404 #133 June 22, 2006 >how is a skydiver to know A) that metal shavings were found in >the oil of one of the engine during it's last maintenance inspetion > and B) that the pilot is manipulating the throttle to that engine >too quickly during flight? I once knew a pilot who could be overloaded very easily. Even the DZO yelling at him (which happened pretty often) put him in overload. He crashed the plane a few months later, killing himself and putting several people in the hospital. (One never walked again.) I saw all the signs; so did most of the people who jumped with him regularly. But I wanted to jump so badly that I overlooked them. Sometimes you can see a potential problem coming. Even a non-pilot could have seen this one in the making. Other times you can't - hence the warnings in the waiver. Keep in mind that the waiver does not say anything about whether the local prosecutor can go after the DZO for criminal negligence. It just says YOU can't. He is still legally liable; you just won't be able to make any money off the accident. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AFFI 0 #134 June 22, 2006 QuotePlease quit skydiving immediately. Find others of like mind and please take them with you when you go. Can I keep skydiving? Pleeeeaaaassseeee???? Putry Please with sugar and a Cherry on top? Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please - Awwwwww, comon, dont make me beg... PLEASE???????? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Hayfield 0 #135 June 23, 2006 I don't know if you remember the original post, but it was advocating the introduction of lawyers, lawsuits, and insurance companies into (my opinion) the greatest sport invented to date. Do you think that's a good idea?"Remember the First Commandment: Don't Fuck Up!" -Crusty Old Pete Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites micro 0 #136 June 23, 2006 Quote>how is a skydiver to know A) that metal shavings were found in >the oil of one of the engine during it's last maintenance inspetion > and B) that the pilot is manipulating the throttle to that engine >too quickly during flight? I once knew a pilot who could be overloaded very easily. Even the DZO yelling at him (which happened pretty often) put him in overload. He crashed the plane a few months later, killing himself and putting several people in the hospital. (One never walked again.) I saw all the signs; so did most of the people who jumped with him regularly. But I wanted to jump so badly that I overlooked them. Sometimes you can see a potential problem coming. Even a non-pilot could have seen this one in the making. Other times you can't - hence the warnings in the waiver. Keep in mind that the waiver does not say anything about whether the local prosecutor can go after the DZO for criminal negligence. It just says YOU can't. He is still legally liable; you just won't be able to make any money off the accident. Good point, Bill. But how was it that in the Tullahoma case that the chick was awarded tons of coin from her lawsuit? (Of course, you may not be able to answer that, I'm just askin... I asked that same question to Chris Martin in the summer of 2003 and his response to me was that the waiver system really was more of a fear tactic used to try and disuade people who shouldn't be skydiving from doing it rather from actually having any legal "meat") I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AFFI 0 #137 June 23, 2006 QuoteI don't know if you remember the original post, but it was advocating the introduction of lawyers, lawsuits, and insurance companies into (my opinion) the greatest sport invented to date. Do you think that's a good idea? In the original post Daniel is simply making an inquiry as indicated by his own words “before starting AFF program and not knowing enough about this sport”. He was just asking a simple question because he does not know how this industry works. Then he later went on to state: “It is not about me wanting to sue. If I die I couldn't care less and If am injured I will use medical insurance that doesn't exclude skydiving. What I disliked about the waiver is the overall message.” Does there really need to be a lynch mob just because someone asked a question because they are new to the sport and they do not understand something? I don’t understand why everyone was so quick to condemn another, simply for asking a question and it is hard for me to believe that so many were so quick to be so slow to understand and educate rather than attack. People have sued over a hard opening, or dropping a kitty carrier on their toe or spilling coffee on their lap, that is the price for living in America where we get to have such freedoms as being able to sue or speak ones mind for or against something. Like we are doing right now. And Micro makes a good point about the waiver being there for a reason other than for DZOs to actually believe that this waiver would hold up in court in a case where blatant, gross negligence is part of the equitation. Shesh...Mykel AFF-I10 Skydiving Priorities: 1) Open Canopy. 2) Land Safely. 3) Don’t hurt anyone. 4) Repeat… Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Hayfield 0 #138 June 23, 2006 Good point. Sometimes we concentrate on one or two sentences in a post rather than the whole thing. However, He wrote: "Of course accepting the liability might mean extra indsurance costs for the packer that are passed to the jumpers but I think it is necessary. I am overconcerned about safety issues and to me that kind of waiver sends the wrong message because, to get back to my example, when I hire a packer I have only the faith in his abilities at my disposal and nothing else. A limited liability for the service performed is necessary everywhere in any industry. " That is what was meant by advocating lawyers and insurance companies get more involved with skydiving. It seems to me the sport has been positively evolving long before I got into it. I don't see how a "packers liability" or any other such crap would enhance its evolution. Please excuse me, I have to go practice packing now..."Remember the First Commandment: Don't Fuck Up!" -Crusty Old Pete Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,404 #139 June 23, 2006 >But how was it that in the Tullahoma case that the chick was >awarded tons of coin from her lawsuit? It seems to be a constant battle between lawyers who try to find chinks in a waiver, and DZO's (with, again, the help of laywers) who try to fill those chinks in. Sometimes one side wins, sometimes the other side does. That's the reason that waivers are four pages long now. They say the FAR's were written in blood - the waivers are written by personal-injury laywers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DSE 3 #140 June 23, 2006 QuoteQuote Does there really need to be a lynch mob just because someone asked a question because they are new to the sport and they do not understand something? I don’t understand why everyone was so quick to condemn another, simply for asking a question and it is hard for me to believe that so many were so quick to be so slow to understand and educate rather than attack... AFFI, I've come to the conclusion that this is a lot of what this community is about much of the time. Sad, but this seems to be the order of the forum. Daniel, as in my original post and answered here, the waiver is to protect, but I think in great part, it's an attempt however strong or frail, to be sure you: a: understand the risks b: are willing to accept the risks for yourself c: set some sort of notice/initial barrier to those that would come in the event of an experience of the consequences of those risks. You have a right to wonder about the necessity of such a waiver, but if the question of the waiver keeps you up at night...then you should probably step back and examine your decision to skydive. One thing I'd mention as well, is that as a production company specializing in extreme situations, you'd be surprised at how short the DZ waiver is compared to what our cameramen have to sign. Big difference is tho, you're in the pursuit of fun and joy, and they're in pursuit of income. I hope you're able to resolve any concerns to the best of your own experience, and you're either jumping and enjoying the experience, or you've let it go for now, and will consider it another day. Azoo’oo’ naan’ tah’ (fly in beauty) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites georgerussia 0 #141 June 26, 2006 Quote He is still legally liable; you just won't be able to make any money off the accident. Want to add, the waiver also makes nearly impossible 3rd party lawsuits on your behalf (and sometime even without your knowledge) - like a life/health insurance company could try to sue DZ to recover their "loss".* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dorbie 0 #142 June 26, 2006 Quote(and sometime even without your knowledge) - like a life/health insurance company could try to sue DZ to recover their "loss". Well I've gotten a couple of their forms in the mail recently. Basically they're looking for anyone they can attach blame to for your injuries. They definitely put some effort into recovering their losses, this is not specific to skydiving of course, but I doubt they'd know where to start without some information & finger pointing from the injured party. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites georgerussia 0 #143 June 26, 2006 Quote Well I've gotten a couple of their forms in the mail recently. Basically they're looking for anyone they can attach blame to for your injuries. They definitely put some effort into recovering their losses, this is not specific to skydiving of course, but I doubt they'd know where to start without some information & finger pointing from the injured party. It depends on how much money they have to pay. If the stakes are high (for example, if the person died or became permanently disabled, and they have to pay millions of dollars), they WILL know all the information no doubt. Those insurance guys are smart, and their investigation teams and companies they hire are very experienced in discovering such things. The waiver in this case will protect a particular DZ, and the sport in general from such a lawsuit.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites cam 0 #144 June 28, 2006 sorry if this was already answered - I didn't read the whole thread. to answer NWFlyer's question about NZ, it is because there is no right to sue for personal damages for anything. Legislation in the 1970s (I think it was then) took away the right to sue in exchange for a 'no fault' accident compensation scheme. the system worked really well, tho I think much later it ran into some problems with being under-funded, so pay-outs to cover long-term injuries were rather low. but overall it is really efficient and avoids all the waste of law suits etc. I don't think it made NZers negligent or uncaring either.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Trae 1 #145 July 2, 2006 in reply to "I am overconcerned about safety issues and to me that kind of waiver sends the wrong message because, to get back to my example, when I hire a packer I have only the faith in his abilities at my disposal and nothing else. A limited liability for the service performed is necessary everywhere in any industry. " ...................................... Phew that was some read Many skydivers are prepared to place their trust in others to guide and protect them. Unfortunately not everyone involved in skydiving is worthy of such trust. The less trustworthy types can create hidden dangers for all of us not just themselves. It is a concern of mine that some of these untrustworthy types hide behind the waiver. The waiver is a one way street in place to protect the established skydiving aithorities -- right or wrong . It is not in place to protect us against wrongdoing . I'm sure I'll be corrected if I'm wrong but not once do I recall seeing the word TRUST in this thread. I skydive because I still have trust and faith in my fellow skydivers . When I lose that trust I'm going back for some more feral animal eradication . bugger the bowling. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mjosparky 3 #146 July 2, 2006 QuoteI skydive because I still have trust and faith in my fellow skydivers .Quote Are you sure that is such a smart reason to jump? After 24 years in the sport I would think that you would know better.My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jim2752 0 #147 July 3, 2006 Thats right. Packers are not perfect. Thats why we are trained in emergency procedures and that is also why a reserve is required to be packed by an FAA certified rigger every 120 days. Please don't take up skydiving. We don't need your type. I think chess would be much more suitable for you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Page 6 of 6 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
billvon 2,404 #128 June 22, 2006 >Fine, but how many skydivers are qualified to evaluate the condition of >a jump plane's engines, or know how to tell if a pilot's or rigger's >license has been suspended? Your average skydiver can do a better job of evaluating the safety of an aircraft engine than I can evaluating the skills of every other person in a 400-way. (After all, aircraft engines are pretty simple machines, and many people understand engines.) Yet I can accept the risk of the less-evaluatable hazard posed by all those people. >I believe we are ENTITLED to assume that these aspects of the business > have been taken care of when we deal with a commercial operation. As I have seen skydivers do their level best to ensure those aspects are overlooked, I must disagree. Often DZO's do what their customers demand, even if those things would not be done by an air taxi operator because they would be considered unsafe. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 3 #129 June 22, 2006 Here's a twist to that scenario; Skydiver has 100 jumps. Wants to start jumping a Xaos or other extreme performance canopy. DZO tells him "You're not ready for that" and refuses to order one for skydiver, so skydiver goes to a DZO, Ebay, or used alternative that doesn't ask about skill level, or maybe doesn't care. Skydiver brings rig back to the DZ that has refused to sell him the rig, jumps it, lands it safely, and DZO realizes the skydiver has circumvented him and bought a high performance rig. DZO shakes his head and walks away. The skydiver then proceeds to do a low level hook turn on next jump, breaking his legs and back while taking out one or two other skydivers/spectators on landing. Who is now responsible aside from the skydiver? Anyone? No one? Both DZo's? One DZO? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,404 #130 June 22, 2006 >Who is now responsible aside from the skydiver? From the laywer's point of view? The DZO. That's the problem. Some people here have argued that only serious negligence should be "suable." In your case, we have a DZO who has clearly expressed the view that jumping canopy X is a hazard to the jumper. He then negligently allows the jumper to jump the very canopy the DZO knew was a serious hazard, and had a reasonable expectation of causing this very injury. I know, I know, no skydiver would claim that. But the waivers aren't written for skydivers - they are written for the skydiver's family, and for the judge who is trying the case that the laywer brings. The waiver is intended to make the judge think "you actually jumped that canopy after reading this waiver, which says that the DZO has no responsibility whatsoever, and indeed warned you that such a thing might happen? And now you're suing him?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
micro 0 #131 June 22, 2006 Quote>Fine, but how many skydivers are qualified to evaluate the condition of >a jump plane's engines, or know how to tell if a pilot's or rigger's >license has been suspended? Your average skydiver can do a better job of evaluating the safety of an aircraft engine than I can evaluating the skills of every other person in a 400-way. (After all, aircraft engines are pretty simple machines, and many people understand engines.) . Not necessarily. In the case of Chris Martin's Twin Bo, the fault found by the NTSB was two fold... operator error (improper operation of the engine that produced internal damage, i.e. rapid throttle movements) and improper servicing of the airplane by the owner/pilot mechanic (Chris Martin) that resulted in the subsequent mechanical failure of the engine crankshaft counterweight (metal was found in the oil 8 days prior to the accident). In this situation, how is a skydiver to know A) that metal shavings were found in the oil of one of the engine during it's last maintenance inspetion and B) that the pilot is manipulating the throttle to that engine too quickly during flight? Perhaps an astute skydiver/pilot MIGHT discover the second thing, but the engine failure that caused the crash happened at 250 feet very quickly after the rapid throttle maipulations occurred... hardly time for a skydiver to say, "um, excuse me, could you stop fuckin w/ the throttle so much please?" I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hayfield 0 #132 June 22, 2006 Please quit skydiving immediately. Find others of like mind and please take them with you when you go."Remember the First Commandment: Don't Fuck Up!" -Crusty Old Pete Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,404 #133 June 22, 2006 >how is a skydiver to know A) that metal shavings were found in >the oil of one of the engine during it's last maintenance inspetion > and B) that the pilot is manipulating the throttle to that engine >too quickly during flight? I once knew a pilot who could be overloaded very easily. Even the DZO yelling at him (which happened pretty often) put him in overload. He crashed the plane a few months later, killing himself and putting several people in the hospital. (One never walked again.) I saw all the signs; so did most of the people who jumped with him regularly. But I wanted to jump so badly that I overlooked them. Sometimes you can see a potential problem coming. Even a non-pilot could have seen this one in the making. Other times you can't - hence the warnings in the waiver. Keep in mind that the waiver does not say anything about whether the local prosecutor can go after the DZO for criminal negligence. It just says YOU can't. He is still legally liable; you just won't be able to make any money off the accident. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AFFI 0 #134 June 22, 2006 QuotePlease quit skydiving immediately. Find others of like mind and please take them with you when you go. Can I keep skydiving? Pleeeeaaaassseeee???? Putry Please with sugar and a Cherry on top? Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please - Awwwwww, comon, dont make me beg... PLEASE???????? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hayfield 0 #135 June 23, 2006 I don't know if you remember the original post, but it was advocating the introduction of lawyers, lawsuits, and insurance companies into (my opinion) the greatest sport invented to date. Do you think that's a good idea?"Remember the First Commandment: Don't Fuck Up!" -Crusty Old Pete Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
micro 0 #136 June 23, 2006 Quote>how is a skydiver to know A) that metal shavings were found in >the oil of one of the engine during it's last maintenance inspetion > and B) that the pilot is manipulating the throttle to that engine >too quickly during flight? I once knew a pilot who could be overloaded very easily. Even the DZO yelling at him (which happened pretty often) put him in overload. He crashed the plane a few months later, killing himself and putting several people in the hospital. (One never walked again.) I saw all the signs; so did most of the people who jumped with him regularly. But I wanted to jump so badly that I overlooked them. Sometimes you can see a potential problem coming. Even a non-pilot could have seen this one in the making. Other times you can't - hence the warnings in the waiver. Keep in mind that the waiver does not say anything about whether the local prosecutor can go after the DZO for criminal negligence. It just says YOU can't. He is still legally liable; you just won't be able to make any money off the accident. Good point, Bill. But how was it that in the Tullahoma case that the chick was awarded tons of coin from her lawsuit? (Of course, you may not be able to answer that, I'm just askin... I asked that same question to Chris Martin in the summer of 2003 and his response to me was that the waiver system really was more of a fear tactic used to try and disuade people who shouldn't be skydiving from doing it rather from actually having any legal "meat") I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AFFI 0 #137 June 23, 2006 QuoteI don't know if you remember the original post, but it was advocating the introduction of lawyers, lawsuits, and insurance companies into (my opinion) the greatest sport invented to date. Do you think that's a good idea? In the original post Daniel is simply making an inquiry as indicated by his own words “before starting AFF program and not knowing enough about this sport”. He was just asking a simple question because he does not know how this industry works. Then he later went on to state: “It is not about me wanting to sue. If I die I couldn't care less and If am injured I will use medical insurance that doesn't exclude skydiving. What I disliked about the waiver is the overall message.” Does there really need to be a lynch mob just because someone asked a question because they are new to the sport and they do not understand something? I don’t understand why everyone was so quick to condemn another, simply for asking a question and it is hard for me to believe that so many were so quick to be so slow to understand and educate rather than attack. People have sued over a hard opening, or dropping a kitty carrier on their toe or spilling coffee on their lap, that is the price for living in America where we get to have such freedoms as being able to sue or speak ones mind for or against something. Like we are doing right now. And Micro makes a good point about the waiver being there for a reason other than for DZOs to actually believe that this waiver would hold up in court in a case where blatant, gross negligence is part of the equitation. Shesh...Mykel AFF-I10 Skydiving Priorities: 1) Open Canopy. 2) Land Safely. 3) Don’t hurt anyone. 4) Repeat… Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hayfield 0 #138 June 23, 2006 Good point. Sometimes we concentrate on one or two sentences in a post rather than the whole thing. However, He wrote: "Of course accepting the liability might mean extra indsurance costs for the packer that are passed to the jumpers but I think it is necessary. I am overconcerned about safety issues and to me that kind of waiver sends the wrong message because, to get back to my example, when I hire a packer I have only the faith in his abilities at my disposal and nothing else. A limited liability for the service performed is necessary everywhere in any industry. " That is what was meant by advocating lawyers and insurance companies get more involved with skydiving. It seems to me the sport has been positively evolving long before I got into it. I don't see how a "packers liability" or any other such crap would enhance its evolution. Please excuse me, I have to go practice packing now..."Remember the First Commandment: Don't Fuck Up!" -Crusty Old Pete Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,404 #139 June 23, 2006 >But how was it that in the Tullahoma case that the chick was >awarded tons of coin from her lawsuit? It seems to be a constant battle between lawyers who try to find chinks in a waiver, and DZO's (with, again, the help of laywers) who try to fill those chinks in. Sometimes one side wins, sometimes the other side does. That's the reason that waivers are four pages long now. They say the FAR's were written in blood - the waivers are written by personal-injury laywers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 3 #140 June 23, 2006 QuoteQuote Does there really need to be a lynch mob just because someone asked a question because they are new to the sport and they do not understand something? I don’t understand why everyone was so quick to condemn another, simply for asking a question and it is hard for me to believe that so many were so quick to be so slow to understand and educate rather than attack... AFFI, I've come to the conclusion that this is a lot of what this community is about much of the time. Sad, but this seems to be the order of the forum. Daniel, as in my original post and answered here, the waiver is to protect, but I think in great part, it's an attempt however strong or frail, to be sure you: a: understand the risks b: are willing to accept the risks for yourself c: set some sort of notice/initial barrier to those that would come in the event of an experience of the consequences of those risks. You have a right to wonder about the necessity of such a waiver, but if the question of the waiver keeps you up at night...then you should probably step back and examine your decision to skydive. One thing I'd mention as well, is that as a production company specializing in extreme situations, you'd be surprised at how short the DZ waiver is compared to what our cameramen have to sign. Big difference is tho, you're in the pursuit of fun and joy, and they're in pursuit of income. I hope you're able to resolve any concerns to the best of your own experience, and you're either jumping and enjoying the experience, or you've let it go for now, and will consider it another day. Azoo’oo’ naan’ tah’ (fly in beauty) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites georgerussia 0 #141 June 26, 2006 Quote He is still legally liable; you just won't be able to make any money off the accident. Want to add, the waiver also makes nearly impossible 3rd party lawsuits on your behalf (and sometime even without your knowledge) - like a life/health insurance company could try to sue DZ to recover their "loss".* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dorbie 0 #142 June 26, 2006 Quote(and sometime even without your knowledge) - like a life/health insurance company could try to sue DZ to recover their "loss". Well I've gotten a couple of their forms in the mail recently. Basically they're looking for anyone they can attach blame to for your injuries. They definitely put some effort into recovering their losses, this is not specific to skydiving of course, but I doubt they'd know where to start without some information & finger pointing from the injured party. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites georgerussia 0 #143 June 26, 2006 Quote Well I've gotten a couple of their forms in the mail recently. Basically they're looking for anyone they can attach blame to for your injuries. They definitely put some effort into recovering their losses, this is not specific to skydiving of course, but I doubt they'd know where to start without some information & finger pointing from the injured party. It depends on how much money they have to pay. If the stakes are high (for example, if the person died or became permanently disabled, and they have to pay millions of dollars), they WILL know all the information no doubt. Those insurance guys are smart, and their investigation teams and companies they hire are very experienced in discovering such things. The waiver in this case will protect a particular DZ, and the sport in general from such a lawsuit.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites cam 0 #144 June 28, 2006 sorry if this was already answered - I didn't read the whole thread. to answer NWFlyer's question about NZ, it is because there is no right to sue for personal damages for anything. Legislation in the 1970s (I think it was then) took away the right to sue in exchange for a 'no fault' accident compensation scheme. the system worked really well, tho I think much later it ran into some problems with being under-funded, so pay-outs to cover long-term injuries were rather low. but overall it is really efficient and avoids all the waste of law suits etc. I don't think it made NZers negligent or uncaring either.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Trae 1 #145 July 2, 2006 in reply to "I am overconcerned about safety issues and to me that kind of waiver sends the wrong message because, to get back to my example, when I hire a packer I have only the faith in his abilities at my disposal and nothing else. A limited liability for the service performed is necessary everywhere in any industry. " ...................................... Phew that was some read Many skydivers are prepared to place their trust in others to guide and protect them. Unfortunately not everyone involved in skydiving is worthy of such trust. The less trustworthy types can create hidden dangers for all of us not just themselves. It is a concern of mine that some of these untrustworthy types hide behind the waiver. The waiver is a one way street in place to protect the established skydiving aithorities -- right or wrong . It is not in place to protect us against wrongdoing . I'm sure I'll be corrected if I'm wrong but not once do I recall seeing the word TRUST in this thread. I skydive because I still have trust and faith in my fellow skydivers . When I lose that trust I'm going back for some more feral animal eradication . bugger the bowling. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mjosparky 3 #146 July 2, 2006 QuoteI skydive because I still have trust and faith in my fellow skydivers .Quote Are you sure that is such a smart reason to jump? After 24 years in the sport I would think that you would know better.My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jim2752 0 #147 July 3, 2006 Thats right. Packers are not perfect. Thats why we are trained in emergency procedures and that is also why a reserve is required to be packed by an FAA certified rigger every 120 days. Please don't take up skydiving. We don't need your type. I think chess would be much more suitable for you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Page 6 of 6 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
georgerussia 0 #141 June 26, 2006 Quote He is still legally liable; you just won't be able to make any money off the accident. Want to add, the waiver also makes nearly impossible 3rd party lawsuits on your behalf (and sometime even without your knowledge) - like a life/health insurance company could try to sue DZ to recover their "loss".* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dorbie 0 #142 June 26, 2006 Quote(and sometime even without your knowledge) - like a life/health insurance company could try to sue DZ to recover their "loss". Well I've gotten a couple of their forms in the mail recently. Basically they're looking for anyone they can attach blame to for your injuries. They definitely put some effort into recovering their losses, this is not specific to skydiving of course, but I doubt they'd know where to start without some information & finger pointing from the injured party. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #143 June 26, 2006 Quote Well I've gotten a couple of their forms in the mail recently. Basically they're looking for anyone they can attach blame to for your injuries. They definitely put some effort into recovering their losses, this is not specific to skydiving of course, but I doubt they'd know where to start without some information & finger pointing from the injured party. It depends on how much money they have to pay. If the stakes are high (for example, if the person died or became permanently disabled, and they have to pay millions of dollars), they WILL know all the information no doubt. Those insurance guys are smart, and their investigation teams and companies they hire are very experienced in discovering such things. The waiver in this case will protect a particular DZ, and the sport in general from such a lawsuit.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cam 0 #144 June 28, 2006 sorry if this was already answered - I didn't read the whole thread. to answer NWFlyer's question about NZ, it is because there is no right to sue for personal damages for anything. Legislation in the 1970s (I think it was then) took away the right to sue in exchange for a 'no fault' accident compensation scheme. the system worked really well, tho I think much later it ran into some problems with being under-funded, so pay-outs to cover long-term injuries were rather low. but overall it is really efficient and avoids all the waste of law suits etc. I don't think it made NZers negligent or uncaring either.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trae 1 #145 July 2, 2006 in reply to "I am overconcerned about safety issues and to me that kind of waiver sends the wrong message because, to get back to my example, when I hire a packer I have only the faith in his abilities at my disposal and nothing else. A limited liability for the service performed is necessary everywhere in any industry. " ...................................... Phew that was some read Many skydivers are prepared to place their trust in others to guide and protect them. Unfortunately not everyone involved in skydiving is worthy of such trust. The less trustworthy types can create hidden dangers for all of us not just themselves. It is a concern of mine that some of these untrustworthy types hide behind the waiver. The waiver is a one way street in place to protect the established skydiving aithorities -- right or wrong . It is not in place to protect us against wrongdoing . I'm sure I'll be corrected if I'm wrong but not once do I recall seeing the word TRUST in this thread. I skydive because I still have trust and faith in my fellow skydivers . When I lose that trust I'm going back for some more feral animal eradication . bugger the bowling. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 3 #146 July 2, 2006 QuoteI skydive because I still have trust and faith in my fellow skydivers .Quote Are you sure that is such a smart reason to jump? After 24 years in the sport I would think that you would know better.My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jim2752 0 #147 July 3, 2006 Thats right. Packers are not perfect. Thats why we are trained in emergency procedures and that is also why a reserve is required to be packed by an FAA certified rigger every 120 days. Please don't take up skydiving. We don't need your type. I think chess would be much more suitable for you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Page 6 of 6 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
jim2752 0 #147 July 3, 2006 Thats right. Packers are not perfect. Thats why we are trained in emergency procedures and that is also why a reserve is required to be packed by an FAA certified rigger every 120 days. Please don't take up skydiving. We don't need your type. I think chess would be much more suitable for you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
