Recommended Posts
pack40 0
Here in Hungary you can not jump with a rig that
was involved in an accident/ctastrophe. Even instructors can not jump with it.
OVER
was involved in an accident/ctastrophe. Even instructors can not jump with it.
OVER
Upon which regulation? Ruleset nr 39? I dont think so.
There may also be an assumption of risk argument. Anyone in skydiving now has signed the waiver. The risks are known. The borrowing of a rig would show an "implied" assumption of risk.
Also, in terms of having someone pay you to borrow the rig, if I were a plaintiff's lawyer, I'd hammer on that point, since now it becomes a business transaction. The lender should have known about this, and if he's charging for it, he would be able to spread the cost of his rentals. And if there is some defect in the rig, a plaintiff's lawyer would have a field day saying, "This wasn't a case of a friendly loan. This guy CHARGED for the rig."
No need to charge for the rig. That moves it into a contractual relationship. That implies duty. You do not want any duty. God, when I say that I sound like an absolute ghoul.
Sounds good, but you're still in for some time wasting...
My wife is hotter than your wife.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites