billvon 2,822 #1 February 20, 2004 I am amazed that there are people saying "Yeah, I'd sue the DZ if they did something _really_ negligent and I was _really_ hurt." Skydivers sign waivers; you have to read them and agree to them before you sign them. They are not just formalities. They could end up being the most important thing you ever signed, because they mean that if something really bad happens, you won't be able to sue anyone. Here's an example from the ZHills waiver; all waivers say something similar: -------------------------------------- I know and understand the scope, nature and extent of the risks involved in the activities covered by this Agreement and that some dangers cannot be foreseen. I understand that these risks include, but are not limited to: equipment malfunction or failure to function; defective or negligent design or manufacture of equipment, improper or negligent parachute packing or assembly; improper or negligent operation or use of the equipment; carelessness of negligence of skydivers/parachutists, instructors, JumpMasters, pilots or ground crew; improper or negligent instruction or supervision. I voluntarily, freely, and expressly choose to incur all risks associated with the activities covered by this agreement, understanding that those risks may include bodily and personal injury, damage to property, disfigurement or death. I voluntarily and freely choose to incur such risks and take responsibility therefore. --------------------------------- 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. The key here is to decide BEFOREHAND if you're OK spending the rest of your life in a wheelchair because the DZO didn't overhaul his aircraft's engine. If you are not OK with that, don't sign the waiver (or make absolutely sure the engine is overhauled yourself.) Don't wait until you're in that wheelchair before you decide the risk isn't worth it to you, and don't make us pay for your indecision later. Sign the waiver and keep your word, or don't jump. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaMan 0 #2 February 20, 2004 Just curious, what prompted you to post this?Z-Flock 8 Discotec Rodriguez Too bad weapons grade stupidity doesn't lead to sterility. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JJohnson 0 #3 February 20, 2004 HERE HERE! Now to make it stick start shooting the lawyers that find ways to make the waivers little better than toilet paper.JJ "Call me Darth Balls" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nicknitro71 0 #4 February 20, 2004 As JJ said. I don't even know why we bother to have the thing signed. I will count less than toilet paper in a civil suit. It might be used better against a criminal charge but I sill doubt. Oh this was in response to: thisMemento Audere Semper 903 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
weegegirl 2 #5 February 20, 2004 QuoteJust curious, what prompted you to post this? See the thread on here Poll: Would you sue the dz? /cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=932025;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread ... and look at how many monkeys actually said yes they would! Pathetic! If you even CONSIDER sueing, you are in the wrong sport! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #6 February 20, 2004 I seriously doubt I'd ever sue a DZ no matter what, but there is a limit to what ANYONE should have to let go. A bad spot isn't negligence. A freak engine failure of a properly maintained aircraft isn't negligence. A malfunction on a rig packed my a staff packer/rigger isn't negligence. But are you seriously saying that I shouldn't sue if someone literally tries to kill me? Or is suing an individual not covered by the waiver? There has to be a limit. I mean if the waivers really held up in court, I'm pretty sure the pilot could turn around and shoot me in the head and toss me out of the plane with no rig. I should just let that go? I don't think so. Skydiving has inherent risks. But a DZs negligence, and I mean real honest to goodness "they knew they were doing wrong" kinda negligence, shouldn't be adding to the risks. Poor maintenance is when you change the oil every 60 hours instead of every 50. Negligence is when you change the oil once a year, KNOWING that you are putting lives in danger. Especially if they tell me they change the oil every 45 hours. Yeah, I signed the waiver. And I'm not worried that my dropzone is ever truly negligent because I know that it is very well run. But that doesn't mean I accept the fact that the DZ can literally do anything they want to me while I'm in their plane. Edit: If there was a law that said I couldn't sue a DZ no matter what, I'd be just fine with that too. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,822 #7 February 20, 2004 >But are you seriously saying that I shouldn't sue if someone literally tries to kill me? If someone tries to kill you intentionally, the DA goes after him in a criminal court; the waiver doesn't really affect that. >Yeah, I signed the waiver. . . .But that doesn't mean I accept the > fact that the DZ can literally do anything they want to me while I'm > in their plane. So under some cases you wouldn't keep your word? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reginald 0 #8 February 20, 2004 QuoteAs JJ said. I don't even know why we bother to have the thing signed. I will count less than toilet paper in a civil suit. It might be used better against a criminal charge but I sill doubt. Well, that might be a bit of an overstatement. A waiver will provide some protection to the DZ but not blanket protection. The most likely scenario of a waver being thrown out is gross negligence on the part of the DZ or its staff."We've been looking for the enemy for some time now. We've finally found him. We're surrounded. That simplifies things." CP Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyangel2 2 #9 February 20, 2004 I have stated in my will to my family, than if I were to die skydiving, that they are not to sue anyone associated with the DZ, the gear manufacturers, or anyone else they can think of. I have told them over and over again, I understand the risk that I am taking. Hopefully they will abide by my wish if I do die skydiving.May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view. May your mountains rise into and above the clouds. - Edward Abbey Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cvfd1399 0 #10 February 20, 2004 I would never sue, but that waver is not the end of it all. I forgot how it was said in a class I was in(i was half asleep) , but I think it was like legally you cannot sign away your liability, or something like that. You can make up a waiver to let people know your position, but if you go to court and the judge feels like the defendant(ie dz) tried to write it off their responsibility he can throw out the waiver. You are jumping out of a freaking plane you should accept everything in your control, and everything that you made a decision to do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #11 February 20, 2004 Yeah, I think in an extremely far fetched case, I wouldn't keep my word. But I'm talking about the civil suit I'd have as soon as the crimnal trial is finished. As I said though, make it illegal for me to sue and I don't plan on giving up skydiving. But as it is, I can't actually waive my right to sue. But I wouldn't sue unless I believed the DZ purposely put me in imminant danger (other than the whole falling out of the sky thing). I mean, they'd have to purposely hurt me. I don't expect it to ever happen. I remember a couple years ago one skydiver sued another because of a freefall collision. That's ridiculous. That's a risk I understand am perfectly willing to live with. But if a twin otter pilot decided to see if he could PURPOSELY take my foot off with a prop, that's not a risk I'm willing to accept. Now would you have a problem with me suing that particular pilot and not the DZ? I'm guessing you would. But that's ok. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bendywendy 0 #12 February 20, 2004 While it's true that there can be loopholes found in almost any contract. You would be surprised by how often larger dropzones are sued and how often these waivers we all complain about have held up and kept frivolous lawsuits from putting the dropzones out of business. It always amazing me when I go to a dz like DeLand and there wavier is almost non-existant. California it's on video and Sebastian and CrossKeys both have long detailed waivers. Both of those have been put to the test. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,822 #13 February 20, 2004 >Yeah, I think in an extremely far fetched case, I wouldn't keep my word. But why did you say you would? (by signing it) Is it one of those "well, it's wrong but everyone does it" things? >I remember a couple years ago one skydiver sued another because >of a freefall collision. That's ridiculous. Commonplace now. Skydivers sue gear manufacturers because hard openings damage their canopies or because a poorly set grommet catches a line. Not much different than suing someone who collides with you. >But if a twin otter pilot decided to see if he could PURPOSELY >take my foot off with a prop, that's not a risk I'm willing to accept. That's assault and battery (and maybe attempted murder); criminal activities are not covered under the waiver. We're talking about just what the waiver covers, which is a lawsuit to recover damages. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BETO74 0 #14 February 20, 2004 I don’t see how a bad spotting is DZ negligence. But, talking about negligence, there was a really passionate treat about a reserved canopy manufacture being sue because one of his canopies failed under the specification it was design for and somebody got hurt. I think that’s a different animal but it also has to do with waivers and assumption of risk.http://web.mac.com/ac057a/iWeb/AC057A/H0M3.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyyhi 0 #15 February 20, 2004 QuoteWhile it's true that there can be loopholes found in almost any contract. You would be surprised by how often larger dropzones are sued and how often these waivers we all complain about have held up and kept frivolous lawsuits from putting the dropzones out of business. 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. I would never sue because I am the one who choses to go up and jump out. But I KNOW my dropzone and I KNOW I am safe there. I have yet to venture out. . .________________________________________ Take risks not to escape life… but to prevent life from escaping. ~ A bumper sticker at the DZ FGF #6 Darcy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #16 February 20, 2004 Quote will count less than toilet paper in a civil suit The release of liability forms we sign (waiver is incorrect) HAVE stood up in a civil suit, most recently the civil suit against SD Las Vegas. Basically, the only way that it wouldn't stand up is in a case of gross neglagence.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #17 February 20, 2004 Quote The release of liability forms we sign (waiver is incorrect) HAVE stood up in a civil suit, most recently the civil suit against SD Las Vegas. They have also been set asside. The waiver did little to protect Precision a few monthes back. The fact is that it depends on a lot of things, many of which I don't understand, some of which I do. The known-drunk pilot in alc-anon is a great example. No waiver would protect a DZ in this case, and I won't be loosing any sleep over this fact either. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
falxori 0 #18 February 20, 2004 QuoteThe DZO may neglect engine maintenance are you sure this would hold in court? i won't sue because of a bad spot, canopy collision or anything else which is part of the sport but engine maintenance issues are like not having the reserve repacked on time on a student rig, and if i'm not mistaken its also criminal (there are laws about who is responsible for taking care of the aircraft.) do you really expect anyone to check the plane's books and checkup history ? would you do that when you travel with a regular airliner ? how is that different? at least here in israel, courts don't really like "unified contracts" in which one signing can't change anything. as long as it protects the DZ from risks which are a part of the sport (including mechanical failures), ok. let the skydivers know about them and decide whether they want to jump. but poor equipment maintenance ? i doubt it will hold in court. O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #19 February 20, 2004 Waivers do not apply to gross negligence. Gross negligence cannot be excluded by contractual agreement. Gross negligence can be defined as any action or an omission in reckless disregard of the consequences to the safety or property of another. Failure to use even the slightest amount of care in a way that shows recklessness or willful disregard for the safety of others. Also known as the Latin term culpa lata. How this definition is interpreted by the court would decide whether or not the dropzone would lose a suit about improper aircraft or equipment maintenance or usage. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #20 February 20, 2004 With the current legal climate for assumption of risk, esp for an activity as clearly dangerous as skydiving, the waiver does little more than remind the jumper that this isn't a walk in the park. It excuses the DZ from liability for human error, but it does not give it license to be sloppy. The poll said the instructor made a bad spot. It wasn't clear that this meant a student or not. If a AFF-I took a L2 jumper out on a bad spot, then abandoned him on canopy (no radio, no guidance) and it was over an area with no obvious open fields for a PLF, then yes, the AFF-I bears some responsibility if the student wiffs it badly. The AFF program exists because new jumpers can't know all these things right away. It's worth noting that on my first tandem in 1995, Las Vegas (Boulder) was perfectly willing to let me jump without signing the waiver...if I paid an extra $100. They knew that the law, and the jury, will let a victim sue, and will give him nothing unless something way out of the ordinary happened. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #21 February 20, 2004 Waivers won't hold up in court in cases of gross negligence, and they may or may not in other cases. But the question isn't COULD you sue, it's WOULD you. You CAN'T waive your right to sue. So technically no waiver really holds up at all. It just demonstrates that you understood the risks. But I definitely agree that as a customer of a dropzone, I should not be expected to have to put up with gross negligence. The problem is that what one person sees as gross negligence may not be the same as what I see. A jury could think a bad spot is gross negligence. But that's definitely not the kind of thing I'm talking about. So why would I sign the waiver? Cause if I want to jump I have no choice, obviously. I mean I don't want to come across as someone looking to sue a DZ. I'm just saying it's not out of the question if they purposely cause an injury. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,822 #22 February 20, 2004 >are you sure this would hold in court? No, it probably wouldn't. I'm sure you could sue your DZ for not maintaining their aircraft and win. The issue I was pointing out above is that you agreed, in writing, to not do that. Will the law let you anyway? Yes. Does that make it OK to go back on your word? That's up to you. >do you really expect anyone to check the plane's books and checkup > history ? would you do that when you travel with a regular airliner ? >how is that different? I didn't sign an agreement with United Airlines that says "I understand that United's maintenance crews and pilots can be negligent or careless, and I am OK with that." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #23 February 20, 2004 Would you fly on an airliner if they made you sign the same waiver? Would you sue if you were injured in an accident caused by the airline's gross negligence? Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,822 #24 February 20, 2004 >So why would I sign the waiver? Cause if I want to jump I have no >choice, obviously. Well, OK. That's a double edged sword though, because you've just stated that you'll sign things you don't intend to honor if there is some advantage to you for doing so. Keep in mind that can be applied to things other people agree to with you, as well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,822 #25 February 20, 2004 >Would you fly on an airliner if they made you sign the same waiver? Probably not; I'd pay more for one that didn't have that waiver. It would depend on how much I was flying. >Would you sue if you were injured in an accident caused by the >airline's gross negligence? Not if I had agreed to not sue. It's not a legal issue, it's an issue of keeping your word. The onus is on the airline to make it clear _beforehand_ what risks your taking. Once you know and accept the risks, the airline has done its job. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
This Site Is For Sale
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f922i30l.jpg)