Make sure you READ the waiver!

[newsstand 0]

Quote

Quote

So if tomorrow you had to rent some gear you would open up the reserve to make sure there were no socks packed in there?

No, I'd look at the packing data card and seal and assume that the rigger who packed it isn't out to get me. I'm comfortable with trusting "a" rigger; I'm comfortable taking on the risk of not physically seeing the reserve.

And if it were packed with socks instead of a canopy and I were injured or died, I or my heirs wouldn't sue.

The same risk I take every time I jump. Actually less because I don't open up the main either. But if I pulled the "rip cord" and laundry came out, even if my reserve worked (get the scenario) I would sue. There is a certain responsibilty on the part of a business to make sure the basics are OK.

A person I know opened his main and was flying backwards. Perfect opening except the main was hooked up 180 degrees out. He cut away and landed fine. Got a lot of crap from "more expreinced jumpers" who said they would have landed it. Packer even admmitted he had a little to much to drink before repacking the main after some sort of total disconnect of the whole system, maybe a reserve repack but I honestly don't know. Did he sue, no because he walked away. But give me a break a drunk packer is someones responsibility.

I don't want to hear about contract labor either.

"Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes

[kallend 1,625]

Quote

So under some cases you wouldn't keep your word?

You are confusing your word with a legal agreement. The DZ doesn't ask for your word. It asks for a legal agreement.

The waivers I've signed clearly state that they are legal documents.

In which case, they mean what the law says they mean. And that is not necessarily the interpretation I would put on the words in the waiver if it were not a legal document. I can't sign away a right that the law expressly says I can't relinquish. I could sign in red white and blue striped ink and it wouldn't make the slightest difference.

The reason we pay attorneys a lot of money is that in legal documents, the meaning of words is not always what it seems.

And if the law in a state says that I can't sign away certain rights in the case of gross or criminal negligence, then regardless of what the wording in the waiver looks like to me, when I sign it I have not actually signed away those rights. I know that, and the DZO knows that, and the DZO's lawyers know that. We have simply engaged in an elaborate charade whose purpose is really to intimidate the unwary.

It's not about breaking my word, because my word was never given in the first place, despite appearances to the contrary that the DZO's lawyer would like the uninformed to believe.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,625]

Quote

What part of "I promise not to sue" isn't crystal clear?

And what part of "there are some rights you cannot agree to relinquish" don't you understand?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Decibel 0]

Quote

And that is EXACTLY what the waivers are for. To keep the frivolous lawsuits at bay so that those of us who want to play in the sky still can.

And that's the sad part of this debate; that DZOs have to spend money coming up with huge waivers and jumpers have to worry that they'll be SOL if they fall victim to a DZ that's truely neglegent (or worse).

[skybytch 259]

Quote

My question: what do you do?

I don't see the relevance... but in that case I'd limp home from the hospital with a splint on my toe and then figure out how I was going to pay my medical bills.

My decision to put that rig on. My decision to jump out of the plane. My toe. My responsibility.

Course I'd probably also post here about my experience with that particular rigger. Heck, I'd probably spearhead a horribly nasty smear campaign against that rigger.

But I still wouldn't sue.

[skybytch 259]

Quote

Quote

What part of "I promise not to sue" isn't crystal clear?

And what part of "there are some rights you cannot agree to relinquish" don't you understand?

I'm not looking at this in the legal sense. In the legal sense you are 100% correct.

For me this is about personal integrity. When I sign a waiver I feel I am giving my word that I won't sue - period. To me the question isn't "What can I get away with even though I signed this document?" it's "How good is my word?"

Obviously others disagree with how I look at this. That's okay. It's good to know who's container I don't want to pack socks up in.

[scottjaco 0]

one little problem dude....

I don't know anything about aircraft maintenance.

If I ask the DZO or the pilot if the aircraft is safe for skydiving, then crashes, who is to blame.

DZO's and pilots need to take responsibility and accountability for the aircraft.

Everything else, I agree with you 100%.

[metalslug 31]

Quote

...If a DZO comes after me with a lead pipe and actually catches me, you better believe I'm gonna use his ass if I didn't put him in the hospital, and maybe even if I did.

That's an unfortunate typo, dude. Use his ass ?

PS. I agree with you, kallend and Nightingale on this topic.

[Liemberg 0]

Quote

For me this is about personal integrity. When I sign a waiver I feel I am giving my word that I won't sue - period.

I cannot believe someone would be so naive. When I give my word, I give my word. When I sign a legal document that has sentences in it which say "If part of this document is proven not to be in accordance with the law, those parts can be disregarded while all other parts of this document will stil be legaly binding" I don't feel I have given my word, I feel I signed a legal document.

Anyone that wants my word that I won't start a (frivelous) lawsuit against their DZ can get it. I have been around the block long enough to make my assumptions-of-risk. My guesses are pretty educated, so to speak and if someone was running a downright dangerous operation, I'm pretty sure I could avoid those parts of it that would be dangerous to me. (Mind you, that even could include opening the main and reserve container of their rental gear - but normally I would arive with something that is inspected and packed either by myself or someone I already trust with that task.) If there was a question in my mind that I couldn't promise that verbally, because this airplane here looks like it can come apart in the runup, the mechanic appears drunk, the pilot seems clueless, whatever - I WOULDN'T JUMP THERE!!!

The thing is however, they don't want my word.

They want me to sign their waver.

That's OK with me - if they come to jump at my place, I want them to sign MY waver.

If I want their word, I'll ask for it...
For if - at a later stage - their insurance company decides to come after my insurance company, well..., ehm...

"Verba volent, scriba manent?"...

"Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci
A thousand words...

[sdgregory 0]

Quote

That means you know that the pilot might be both careless and negligent. He may forget to check the sumps. He might forget to fuel the plane, or neglect to keep his rating current. The DZO may neglect engine maintenance. And, knowing all that, you still agreed to take the risks that that negligence presents, and you agree not to sue him.

I cannot imagine that this is normal for DZ's. I read the waiver at the only two Dropzones I jumped at and I honestly do not remember anything to the effect of "We can be entirely irresponsible with your life and if you get hurt you can't touch us." I may very well be wrong, and you can bet I will be checking that out and questioning it.

That said, in legal terms wouldn't this fall under "depraved indifference." At the very least it could be "criminal negligence."

I understand the sport is dangerous and I incur certain risks, but to say the DZ has NO LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY to maintain its aircraft or gear would be opening up all kinds of problems and would most likely hurt the sport. I agree that malfunctions happen, engines fail, wind shear occurs, etc. In those cases where the DZ has done everything they can do to be safe, and to maintain all their equipment and ratings, I would not ever hold them responsible.

But this statement is something entirely different. It is almost sinister.

[Kennedy 0]

I was hoping you or bill would have something to say about newsstand's post.

--------
Simple question. If your rigger did everything thing right on repacking your reserve, except he connected it 180 backwards, and you ended up with a broken leg on landing, would you go after him?

If he's a dz employee, you seem to be saying you wouldn't. What if he's not a dz employee, just a rigger you were doing business with?

Honestly, my first reaction was "have Tony go break both his legs," but I wouldn't really do that. Unless he was laughing about it......

Would you sue him?

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

I'm not looking at this in the legal sense. In the legal sense you are 100% correct.

For me this is about personal integrity. When I sign a waiver I feel I am giving my word that I won't sue - period. To me the question isn't "What can I get away with even though I signed this document?" it's "How good is my word?"

Obviously others disagree with how I look at this. That's okay. It's good to know who's container I don't want to pack socks up in.

I agree with you, except on one point: I don't believe the waiver says I'll never sue the releasees for anything. I don't put some mystical all encompassing belief on it. It covers most skydiving related issues, but those are the ones I wouldn't sue for anyway. If they handed me a waiver saying I couldn't ever take legal action for anything, I probably would have to think long and hard about jumping there.

ps - just because a dz rep says it means I can't sue, that doesn't mean it says I can't sue. I've given my word not to sue for a lot of things, and I won't sue over them. But there are things to be considered that are not in the waiver, that probably couldn't be in the waiver.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[pccoder 0]

If suddenly the DOT all across the country said, you must sign the same waiver we sign to skydive in order to drive, would we all stop driving? Probably not, we'd just stop talking on the phone while driving, pay closer attention to our vehicles maintenance, be more cautious behind the wheel, etc.

Shit happens, and people need to start manning up (sorry ladies) and start taking responsibility for their own actions. Yea, if someone gives you a shit pack job, they are probably negligent. If the pilot is drunk behind the stick, the same. But we are all adults here, we should pay attention and look out for these things when OUR lives are on the line. Life isn't a cake walk where we can disregard all worry of looking out for ourselves and then get to blame someone else when we get hurt (even though we should have been looking out for it). I wish it could be easy, but life isn't. At least me get to enjoy what time we do have (most of the time), so let's stop bitching about who we should or should not sue and just be responsible. Noone is perfect, we can't keep blaming humans (who are very involved in this sport) when they make mistakes. We all do it. Sometimes it's just a matter of luck. And hopefully we can manage to all make it through another day without harm.

OTHERWISE, every time someone mentions a chest strap done wrong, pilot chute hanging half way out (jeez) or something else of that nature, you better start paying them some money cause they just saved your life becaue YOU were negligent.

PcCoder.net

[kallend 1,625]

Quote

If suddenly the DOT all across the country said, you must sign the same waiver we sign to skydive in order to drive, would we all stop driving? Probably not, we'd just stop talking on the phone while driving, pay closer attention to our vehicles maintenance, be more cautious behind the wheel, etc.

Shit happens, and people need to start manning up (sorry ladies) and start taking responsibility for their own actions. Yea, if someone gives you a shit pack job, they are probably negligent. If the pilot is drunk behind the stick, the same. But we are all adults here, we should pay attention and look out for these things when OUR lives are on the line. .

Perhaps you will tell us how you would "look out for" a situation where a DZO hires unqualified, unlicensed mechanics to put an improperly stored old engine on a jump plane, with a replacement propellor that can't be feathered in an emergency, and doesn't follow the operational instructions for that propellor. FAR violations all over, but all behind the scenes.

Do you believe that flying in THAT plane is a risk covered by your waiver?

Twelve skydivers died in it in 1992.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,625]

Quote

Quote

Quote

What part of "I promise not to sue" isn't crystal clear?

And what part of "there are some rights you cannot agree to relinquish" don't you understand?

I'm not looking at this in the legal sense. In the legal sense you are 100% correct.

For me this is about personal integrity. When I sign a waiver I feel I am giving my word that I won't sue - period. To me the question isn't "What can I get away with even though I signed this document?" it's "How good is my word?"

Obviously others disagree with how I look at this. That's okay. It's good to know who's container I don't want to pack socks up in.

See previous post. It IS A LEGAL DOCUMENT. That means I have agreed to what the law says I have agreed to. If the law says I haven't agreed to assume the risk of gross negligence or criminal negligence, then I haven't, regardless of what the words in the waiver might appear to say.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Nullified 0]

Quote

For me this is about personal integrity. When I sign a waiver I feel I am giving my word that I won't sue - period.

So, in an uncongested landing area, you've just come to a stop following a nice docile straight in approach. Before your canopy has a chance to touch the ground, the DZO swoops in to you from straight behind you and breaks your back.

You find out that he or she had been smoking crack before the load.

In my opinion, this scenario does not fit the spirit of the agreement that I made when signing the waiver, and I would sue.

OK, this is a very unlikely and extreme scenario, but would you agree in this situation?

Stay safe,
Mike

If you're gonna' be stupid, well, then you're most likely stupid.

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

But give me a break a drunk packer is someones responsibility.

Yeah, yours. Nobody made you use a packer. Nobody made you use a packer that you couldn't trust. Most people are perfectly capable of packing their own main parachute. If you flip someone a five-spot and get screwed, well, shame on you.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[Praetorian 1]

Quote

If suddenly the DOT all across the country said, you must sign the same waiver we sign to skydive in order to drive, would we all stop driving? Probably not, we'd just stop talking on the phone while driving, pay closer attention to our vehicles maintenance, be more cautious behind the wheel, etc. Shit happens, and people need to start manning up (sorry ladies) and start taking responsibility for their own actions.

First if the DOT required it, the wording would never be as extreme as it is at the dropzone, never in America would the government allow one drunkcrazyunlisenced driver to hurt another and be judgment proof, or smash up $90000 worth of cars(cars) and their owners would be dependent on him to have the good will to pay what he owes. Second as to "Manning up" I agree, and for all of the post that talk about all risks being on the jumper I fully expect to see all of you watching the packer you pay to pack up your chute, after administering a piss test and a field drunk test, I'll expect you to look over the maintenance logs of the plane, the pilots log book, and then watch the next engine overhaul BEFORE you jump .... no "Manning up" is for everyone, if you make a mistake and it hurts someone you feel sorry and try to make amends and waiver or not they shouldn't sue. But "Manning up" also means everyone we trust is doing their best, that they are not intentionally screwing with our safety behind our backs and telling us to our face its all good, when you do something underhanded (intentionally not replace all the batts on you student AADs) and you say you have .. then part of "Manning up" is expecting to reap the pain in some way when that intentional act harms someone

Good Judgment comes from experience...a lot of experience comes from bad
judgment.

[oldnewbie 0]

Hi Jimbo

What does the law say about a packer??
Since most are not riggers, are they not legally supposed to be under the supervision of a rigger?? So, who is responsible for the packer??

[Jimbo 0]

Who is responsible for making sure that his gear is safe, and ready to jump? I could give a rat's ass who a packer is or isn't working under the supervision of. That rig (all of it, including the reserve) is my responsibility from the second I put it on until the second I take it off.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[Nullified 0]

Quote

I could give a rat's ass who a packer is or isn't working under the supervision of. That rig (all of it, including the reserve) is my responsibility from the second I put it on until the second I take it off.

FAA doesn't quite see it that way.

I agree with the spirit of what you're saying, but there are laws regarding supervision of packing mains and reserves. If and when the FAA shows up on your DZ, I'll bet somebody will be 'giving a rat's ass' pretty damn quickly.

Stay safe,
Mike

If you're gonna' be stupid, well, then you're most likely stupid.

[Jimbo 0]

A packers job is to put the parachute into the bag, and then the bag into the container. That's it. That's where his responsibility ends. A riggers job is to certify that the reserve system is safe when it's sealed, and that it will likely remain that way for 120 days, or until its next use.

It's my responsibility to make sure that my gear is ready, and safe, to jump. Not my packers, not my riggers. Mine.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[skybytch 259]

Quote

OK, this is a very unlikely and extreme scenario, but would you agree in this situation?

Nope. I wouldn't sue. I would expect that the DZO would offer to pay my medical expenses, but I wouldn't sue him.

There is no skydiving related situation/incident that would cause me to sue skydivers.

I don't expect everybody to agree with how I choose to interpret signing a waiver. I care more about my sport and the people who participate in it than I do about my legal rights.

Perhaps that makes me naive. I'm okay with that.

[Nullified 0]

Quote

In Reply To
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


OK, this is a very unlikely and extreme scenario, but would you agree in this situation?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Nope. I wouldn't sue. I would expect that the DZO would offer to pay my medical expenses, but I wouldn't sue him.

There is no skydiving related situation/incident that would cause me to sue skydivers.

I don't expect everybody to agree with how I choose to interpret signing a waiver. I care more about my sport and the people who participate in it than I do about my legal rights.

Perhaps that makes me naive. I'm okay with that.

I don't have any problem at all with your feelings towards this. That would be your decision and I respect that completely.
I will say this...If the person in question weren't drunk or on crack or whatever, I wouldn't sue. It was an accident...a really stupid and bad one, but an accident nonetheless. Hopefully, either way, this person would take it upon themself to help get me through whatever crippled state they've put me in.

Only thing I will say is, if a drunk driver took me out on the road, I'd sue. Why would having a canopy over your head be any different than being behind the wheel of a car?

I won't criticize you for how you'd handle this or a similar situation, but I do feel that you'd have every right, morally, ethically and legally to seek reperations by any means necessary.

Stay safe,
Mike

If you're gonna' be stupid, well, then you're most likely stupid.

[SkyDekker 1,123]

Quote

basically, mistakes shouldn't be lawsuit material, but intentional harm should.

I guess the question then is, why do you sign your name to a document saying that you will not do that?