Do DZ Liability Waivers Hurt the Sport?

[justintime1983 0]

Quote

Now if you throw the PC and a bunch of laundry comes out (Fandango), yeah, that might be over the line.

Wonder how much beer that packer would owe.

I keep telling my friends skydiving will fix all your problems, Im a fibber you just let go a minute at a time. Choose what to do with it.

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

Mr. Chicken, I'd like to introduce you to Mr. Egg. Mr. Egg, Mr. Chicken.

sigh

HAHA, I was thinking the exact same thing right around post #11 in this thread

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[billvon 2,400]

>If DZ liability waviers were magicly made invalid in the US, how would
>DZOs change thier operations to respond?

Let's see. Basically preventing injuries/deaths is going to be their #1 defense in that case. So:

1) Ban all wing loadings under 1 to 1 (or pick your own favorite number.) Sure, you can break yourself under any canopy, but the bigger it is, the less likely the "family of the deceased" will be suing you.

2) Require all RW to be done with an RW coach. Will help prevent collisions, exit separation problems etc. No RW over 8 people.

3) Ban freeflying. Our gear isn't designed for it, and that is a clear legal liability.

4) Require AAD's and RSL's for all jumpers. That's a no-brainer.

5) Have an "approved equipment" list so you can exclude reserves like the Micro Raven and the older Swifts.

6) Have an equipment age limitation so you can ground older (possibly unsafe) gear.

>So what are the obstacles to making those risk reduction changes NOW?

They would suck.

[jsaxton 0]

the tandems get a traditional waiver

Quote

Quote

Have you ever been to an amusement park? Ever look at the back of the ticket or the fine print?

Have you ever been to Lodi? The back of the jump ticket is their entire waiver.

Blues,
Dave

[squarecanopy 0]

Quote

Feel free to open your own dropzone and not use a waiver.

Blue ones

I second this idea. Let us know how it works out.

Safe Landings

Just burning a hole in the sky.....

[wolfriverjoe 1,341]

Quote

I always get in arguments with my buddies about who can sue and when. What my friends don't seem to get (and I do because I'm an attorney) is that the first question is not *can I win a lawsuit* but rather *do I have atleast a shred of an argument such that I can make it expensive for the other side*.

Ergo, blame the lawyers.


I did my AFF1 my second year of lawschool. I read the waiver and laughed to myself. No waiver is bulletprrof because certain things cannot be waived by contract. The waiver I had was so outrageous I figured (if need be) a good lawyer could get most of it severed.

The reality is that almost any provision of any waiver can be challenged in court. Challenge is often sufficient to get settlement leverage.

This comes closest, but no one really seems to appreciate how civil suits work. (somone might, but hasn't said so yet)
If a victim gets hurt and decides to sue, he gets a personal injury attorney. The attorney then contacts the business, the business contacts their insurance company. The insurance company then has THEIR lawyers look at the suit - circumstances of accident, any waivers and their applicability ect. They then decide the chances of winning the suit, the cost of fighting (including the settlement and/or appeals if they lose). THey then offer a settlement to the plaintiffs attorney. He then figures out the cost/benefit of fighting the suit (including getting no fee if he loses) and a settlement is usually negotiated. The majority of cases never go to court. (Korbin-this is why there is so little case law on it).

Having no insurance, DZs really can't do this. And they don't have any pockets, let alone deep ones.

A wavier isn't a magic shield against lawsuits. Is is a discouragement from them being filed and a defense if they are filed. But judges can still throw out some or all of them and allow the suit to proceed. At which point the DZ can close, sell off all its assets and pay a settlement; or close, sell off all its assets and pay a defense attorney.

Parachutist had an interesting article about just such a lawsuit back in summer of 2005. The DZ ended up winning, but it was a major fight.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[tbrown 26]

Quote

Have you ever been to an amusement park? Ever look at the back of the ticket or the fine print? You think they don't try hard to provide as much safety as possible to the customer? Yet they still have "fine print" or signs posted at all entrances.

Excellent point Lou. Take Disneyland f'rinstance. While Disney has the kind of cash flow and legal staff that even the big DZs can only dream about, they are extremely aggressive in defending ALL lawsuits. Disney won't settle, period. Unless somebody's kid gets killed. Disney World once settled with a family when their kid slipped through the railing on the riverboat, fell into the lake and drowned. But that was a rare exception and the details were kept secret by court order. Mickey Mouse don't mess around, that rat has teeth.

Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity !

[korbin 0]

I'd be very interested in reading a up a bit more on that particular case.

And anyway, everyone here is pretty right. DZs without insurance is kind of tough. The cases you do see about liability waivers typically have no insurance or practical reason to possess insurance.

It'd be cool if there were fairly inexpensive insurance companies for DZs, but that might encourage the suits.

[skybill 19]

Hi angle,
Dude, please take into consideration that Skydiving is a "Dirty, Rotten, Dangerous job!!!" and nobody is holding a gun to your head to make you do it!! So, if you want to do it, then "Sign ze paper old man!" Other wise, "Hit the road Jack!!" This is NOT a "SAFE" sport!! Waivers are about assets and liabilities, NOT Skydiving!!!!!

SCR-2034, SCS-680

III%,
Deli-out