Refused tandem because of waiver

[skydance1954 0]

A concept that seems to have gone by the wayside here. All the fine talk about the contract, and rights and so on are all fine. But we seem to have forgotten the original reason for the waiver, and it's not to weed out the sue happy idiots, although that is the end result - but it's to remind people that they must take personal responsibility for their actions when performing non-mandatory activities.

It's sad that intelligent people (ie the lawyers and the lawyers children/spouses, etc. in this case) read these things and realize at some level that they must now accept any consequences of thier actions without being able to "blame" (in a legal sense) someone else for anything that may go wrong.

Yes, they made an informed descision. Yes, they did the right thing for them. And we're better off for it. But DAMN! Why is it that they cannot accept that sometimes the only person to answer to is yourself?

I've found over the years that the vast majority of skydivers have this attitude in all facets of their lives. And that attitude means that they stand up for themselves when right, and accept consequences when wrong, and then take that experience forward so that they become better people.

If you accept responsibility, your life is much richer than if you're always pointing the finger elsewhere when you have shortcomings.

Sorry, end of rant.

Mike Ashley
D-18460
Canadian A-666

[ChangoLanzao 0]

Quote

A concept that seems to have gone by the wayside here. All the fine talk about the contract, and rights and so on are all fine. But we seem to have forgotten the original reason for the waiver, and it's not to weed out the sue happy idiots, although that is the end result - but it's to remind people that they must take personal responsibility for their actions when performing non-mandatory activities.

There are two kinds of idiots. The sue-happy idiots and those that need "reminders". We don't need either of them to be skydiving

[skydance1954 0]

Quite so.

This thread reminds me of a guy back in the day who came out to make his first jump at an unnamed DZ in Canada. We were still using T-10s back then. (yeah, it was a very long time ago) He shows up in his Mercedes with his 18 year old trophy girl friend (he's in his mid-40s) who's dressed in an evening gown and heels while going to a farm that happens to have a runway.

Anyway, this guy was trouble from the start, he knew everything about everything, and kept interrupting the instructor during class. On the actual jump, he fell out like a sack of potatoes, and did not follow instructions, even though his radio worked fine. He landed on a fence and broke his back. The good news is that he was not paralyzed. The bad news was that he immediately sued. Even though he signed the waiver, he kept claiming that "no one told him this was dangerous."

He had deep pockets and he wanted someone to pay for his embarassment. Since this was in Canada, medical bills were not an issue. The waiver held up in court, but he kept appealing the issue, hoping in his own words, to bankrupt the DZ, if nothing else. Unfortunately for him, he eventually got to a court that threw it out, and forbid any further appeals. And still, after all this, he insisted that he was the victim, in spite of the fact that the judge chastized him for not understanding that skydiving is by nature, dangerous.

It still cost the DZ over $10,000 to defend itself, though.

Mike Ashley
D-18460
Canadian A-666

[chrismgtis 0]

I think any sane person knows that skydiving has it's risks. You're falling thousands of feet from the sky at 120mph with nothing but two parachutes to save you. Dropzones are offering you the chance to take part in this activity. Why should they have to suffer, you happened to be the one that got hurt out of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of jumpers?

There are people out there that don't understand this and that's probably more or less the reason for a waiver. Then you have those that for some reason do want to jump out of a plane at 14,000 feet, hoping to get hurt so they can sue. I don't know why they wouldn't just rather try and slip on some spilt butter at a local theatre, but some people are just screwed up.

I'm doing my first jump on September 9th and I've done my research. I'm fully aware of the waiver and have absolutely no problem with it because I understand the reason for it being there.

Rodriguez Brother #1614, Muff Brother #4033
Jumped: Twin Otter, Cessna 182, CASA, Helicopter, Caravan

[skydance1954 0]

Glad you're making an informed decision. Now for the good part - you're going to learn why the birds sing - and why we all feel like Superman when we're in the sky.

And on that note - shortly after seeing the new movie - I was on a jump with my team, doing video for them, and it just so happened that with the background clouds, the angle of the sun, the team in front of me, and the manover that I had to do to get the sun at my back immediately after exit, I had what most would call a "Superman moment". I was riding the hill "upstream" past the team and it all came together just perfect. I was flying just like Superman, and it was awesome. I was grinning like a cheshire cat for the rest of the dive.

Waiver? Who cares about a stupid waiver? We get to fly! And yeah, it's worth it.

Mike Ashley
D-18460
Canadian A-666

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Posting it OK. But accepting a waiver printed and signed at home? That actually has potential to be a really dumb idea. If your staff doesn't have the waiver memorized and checks every word, someone could make small changes rendering it useless.

You can make PDFs read only.

Not sure how it would play out in the courts if one altered the document silently. Seems like it would be fraudulent.

Many other sports do allow people to download and sign.

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

Posting it OK. But accepting a waiver printed and signed at home? That actually has potential to be a really dumb idea. If your staff doesn't have the waiver memorized and checks every word, someone could make small changes rendering it useless.

I had that very conversation with someone this weekend about Dublin registration.


.

[slug 1]

Quote

Quote

Posting it OK. But accepting a waiver printed and signed at home? That actually has potential to be a really dumb idea. If your staff doesn't have the waiver memorized and checks every word, someone could make small changes rendering it useless.

I had that very conversation with someone this weekend about Dublin registration.


.

No way print and sign at home

Read at home so they don't have to drive for hr's and then get hit with the surprise waiver.

IMO the only way it can work make sure no one can hack your PDF file on websight and then they have to sign a identical copy of your printed waiver (maybe a Numbered copy so no switchee) in front of the nice manifest lady.

There's lots of smart folks in the industry We have confidence that you'll come up with a bullet resistent solution.
R.I.P.

[skyberdyber 0]

Quote

You can make PDFs read only

Print out, scan into Acrobat, make changes, re-save PDF. I thought that Acrobat does that. If not, there's other software out there that will.

http://www.skydiveatlanta.com
http://www.musiccityskydiving.com

[skinnyshrek 0]

Just out of the top of my head(scary) Could USPA make a universal one for all dropzones.

http://www.skydivethefarm.com

do you realize that when you critisize people you dont know over the internet, you become part of a growing society of twats? ARE YOU ONE OF THEM?

[slug 1]

Quote

Just out of the top of my head(scary) Could USPA make a universal one for all dropzones.

[itllclear 1]

Quote

Just out of the top of my head(scary) Could USPA make a universal one for all dropzones.

Each state, and some counties and cities, have different laws that must be addressed by the waiver. One size won't fit all.

"Harry, why did you land all the way out there? Nobody else landed out there."

"Your statement answered your question."

[bob.dino 0]

Quote

Just out of the top of my head(scary) Could USPA make a universal one for all dropzones.

That's the situation in Australia. I don't know if all dropzones use it, but all the ones I've been to have the standard APF wavier printed with their name at the top.

But, as itllclear notes, the pesky federal system in the United States of America means things probably need to vary by state.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

You can make PDFs read only

Print out, scan into Acrobat, make changes, re-save PDF. I thought that Acrobat does that. If not, there's other software out there that will.

You can always get around it at the level of scanning and substituting type.

But...if you have a Jan 2006 Rev 1.22 Waiver read only PDF on your web site and some clown modifies it while leaving those version tags on it, and then tries to use the changes in a suit - seems like it ought to be easy to call the plaintiff on that. Premeditated deceptive behavior.

You can get around it by just having it for viewing, though even then they might be able to substitute it on site.

[PhreeZone 15]

Lots of DZ's print them on colored paper, makes it hard to bring in a copy if you don't know what color it needs printed on.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[yim666 0]

damn lawyers!

don't sweat the petty things and don't pet the sweaty things

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Lots of DZ's print them on colored paper, makes it hard to bring in a copy if you don't know what color it needs printed on.

do they change the color daily?

Even if so, print one of every color!

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Quote

Lots of DZ's print them on colored paper, makes it hard to bring in a copy if you don't know what color it needs printed on.

do they change the color daily?

Even if so, print one of every color!

Except you got it correctly before, Kelp: it would be fraudulent.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Okay, then what do you call the typical tandem waiver? Is that not a contract the adherent has no choice but to sign if he wants to jump?

That's not "adhesion." You are speaking of the second type of adhesion contract, which a person has no choice but to sign for a matter about which the person has no real choice, i.e., "Sign this or die" or "Sign this or go out of business."

This isn't a contract like that. It's not in restraint of trade. The fact that most people go their whol elives without skydiving make it an optional activity.

Race car drivers sign waivers aiving negligence. It's why you dont' see lawsuits over every crash in a race. You don't sign the waiver, you don't get to race. That's not a problem under the law. Same with boxers. This isn't an adhesion contract situation.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Airman1270 0]

...I've found over the years that the vast majority of skydivers have this attitude in all facets of their lives. And that attitude means that they stand up for themselves when right, and accept consequences when wrong...
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

My wakeup call occurred in the months following my first jump while recovering from my broken ankle. (T-10, "forgot" the PLF.) I was exuberant about the jump and eager to return and try again. During these months I spoke with many people who suggested I sue the DZ.

This caught me by surprise. I explained that the accident was my fault. They insisted there was something wrong with the gear, or that I wasn't trained properly. I said "NO! They trained me just fine. The gear worked well. But I failed to follow instructions, that's all." They weren't persuaded. Their determination to fabricate an excuse to hold someone else responsible was frightening. It occurred to me that these are the people who end up on juries.

There was another point, as well. While sitting in the field, my useless foot hanging off my ankle, lines and canopy fabric all around, waiting to be found, I KNEW I'd be back someday to jump again. I saw little to gain by suing the guy who'd be packing my parachute.

Cheers,
Jon S.

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

these are the people who end up on juries.

Some juries - but certainly not all. In personal injury cases, liberal counties tend to have pro-plaintiff juries that render a lot of larger verdicts. Conservative counties tend to have pro-[civil]defendant juries that tend to render a lot of lower or outright defense verdicts.

It just seems to non-lawyers that taking a PI case to trial is a ticket for sure money. Not hardly; far from it in fact. The only reason it seems that way to non-lawyers is that it's only the large plaintiffs' verdicts that hit the news media. Except for big cases like Vioxx and such, you almost never read about defense verdicts in the newspapers.