Nightingale 0 #51 February 20, 2004 yup. It says: "whether caused by the negligence or fault, active or passive, of any of the Releasees, or from any other cause." and again, does not mention "Gross Negligence." I did not sign an agreement not to sue for gross negligence. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,822 #52 February 20, 2004 >If you disagree with the waiver, you can't jump. As it should be. People who do not feel 100% responsible for their own safety shouldn't be jumping. >The DZs put the language in the waiver because they can . . . They put it in because it's real. You CAN be killed by other people's carelessness. 16 people were killed at Perris in 1992 because someone did not ensure the plane's fuel was uncontaminated, and the pilot made some additional errors. One guy (Dan BC) ended up with a broken neck; fortunately he avoided paralysis. It can happen; either accept that it can, or don't sign the waiver. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybytch 259 #53 February 20, 2004 Quoteskybytch states that she feels responsible to know whether the plane is airworthy or not. My problem is expertise in that area. I am pretty much on the ball with lots of things, but turbines and many things to do with aircraft I do not know, nor should I expect to know. Other than an ex who is an A&P and pilot and a son who will be a licensed pilot soon, I have no expertise in aircraft maintainence. But I can look at the plane I intend to jump out of, just as I'd look at a car I intended to drive. Chances are good that an aircraft that looks well maintained - ie recently washed, decent paint, clean windscreens, no drips on the ground where it's parked, etc - is well maintained. I could ask DZ management to see logbooks, but I choose not to. Someday my "eyeball inspection" could prove to be incorrect, much to my dismay. I still wouldn't sue. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praetorian 1 #54 February 20, 2004 Agreed totally, its as simple as this you sign .. or you don't jump. The wording is as extreme as it can be to prevent as many lame ass suits as possible. The language says "we can do anything" and if I remember SDC's waver you promise that should you violate your word and sue.. and win .. that you will personally pay the settlement for them .. to yourself. On a higher plane of thought .. sue? why is money going to give you your eyes/legs etc back? If its an honest mistake or my mistake or a freak accident thats my choice. If the DZO or pilot intentionally makes fraudulent statements, intentionally packs socks in the student reserve container ... well then after the criminal case is settled yea I'll probably go after them I signed a contract so I could jump but would gladly violate my word under EXTREME circumstances as would anyone. But as a matter of principle screw suing money can't fix some things ... thats what revenge is for (now don't freak I'm not talking about getting an instructor for a bad spot, I'm mostly joking) but if you pick the worst of the above mentioned fraudulent downright evil acts .. then yea Good Judgment comes from experience...a lot of experience comes from bad judgment. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,822 #55 February 20, 2004 >and again, does not mention "Gross Negligence." I did not sign an >agreement not to sue for gross negligence. Ah! And it doesn't say "minor negligence" or "substantial negligence" either, so you could sue for those too! I have little patience for legal nitpicks about the waiver. I am sure a good lawyer could find a dozen ways to invalidate the waiver; perhaps they used "you should" where they should have said "you shall" or something. Such legal nitpicks miss the point, which is that the waiver spells out, in language that you can understand, that you can be injured or killed by someone else's mistake, and you shouldn't sign it if you don't accept that. Unless you intentionally misunderstand the waiver, that's pretty clear. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mattsplat 0 #56 February 20, 2004 No, me personaly I would not sue. Hell any of us that due this, well we are jumping out of a plain there got to be something wrong in the chemicle imballence of us. But I would be curious if this person has had previos problems. I was once at a DZ in georga where one of the coaches had whoffo stiched on his rig, that would make me question things sometims. To some up the story I believe the DZ's should be a little more in tune on the people they hire. But even if they did'nt i still would not sue. We all take our own life in our own hands and we should decide if it is a safe DZ to jump at weather it is to tandom or fun jump. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #57 February 20, 2004 then don't sue. that's your right. however, if the aircraft was maliciously ill maintained, and jumpers were permitted in the thing even though the DZO knew full well that it could fall out of the sky at any moment, I hope SOMEBODY sues him and puts him out of business so he doesn't kill anyone else. Maybe the guy who didn't sign the waiver, but whose entire family was killed because a plane fell out of the sky onto his house? Lawsuits exist in part to help put business owners with dangerous practices out of business for the safety of everyone else. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybytch 259 #58 February 20, 2004 QuoteIf the DZO or pilot intentionally makes fraudulent statements, intentionally packs socks in the student reserve container ... well then after the criminal case is settled yea I'll probably go after them I signed a contract so I could jump but would gladly violate my word under EXTREME circumstances as would anyone. See, that's just it. If someone packed socks in my container or lied to me and I died because of it, my ghost would haunt whoever decided to sue. It's my responsibility to know what's in my container, it's my responsibility to get all the information required to make a safe skydive before I do it. I'm sorry but is it not clear that everything involved with you making a skydive is your responsibility? What part of "I promise not to sue" isn't crystal clear? It doesn't matter why I was injured or died. I won't sue, and my family knows not to sue on my behalf. I find it hard to believe that anyone who routinely jumps out of airplanes could feel any differently. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praetorian 1 #59 February 20, 2004 Word or no word we all understand that there are limits to human behavior, the wording of the wavers is so over the top that most of us sign them knowing that if the DZO goes PSYCHO/EVIL that the contracts signed cant possibly hold no matter what the language. That having been said in those extreme cases no law suit is going to matter, and if my wife/kid (if I should ever have either) sue following such a PSYCHO/EVIL act I have no problem with that Good Judgment comes from experience...a lot of experience comes from bad judgment. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #60 February 20, 2004 you can be injured by someone else's MISTAKE. I accept that. What pisses me off is that you and Lisa are saying that a DZO could DELIBERATELY and MALICIOUSLY put their students at risk (gross negligence...not in the waiver) through giving them faulty equipment ON PURPOSE, and you think they should suffer no consequences whatsoever and be allowed to continue doing exactly what they're doing. If a student asked to inspect the reserve on their student rig, do you think that would be allowed?? HELL NO! they'd simply be told that it was rigger inspected, that they're being paranoid, and to relax. At least, that's the answer I got when I asked. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #61 February 20, 2004 I ASKED to look at my reserve on my second jump. They told me no. I was put in a position where I had to trust that what the DZ told me was in my rig was in fact, in my rig. As an experienced jumper, you can look your gear over. Students are not given that opportunity. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,822 #62 February 20, 2004 >What pisses me off is that you and Lisa are saying that a DZO could > DELIBERATELY and MALICIOUSLY put their students at risk . . . If they kill a student by intentionally sabotaging his gear, then that's manslaughter or murder. Criminal case. You don't press charges, the DA does. No problem there. If they let him die out of carelessness - i.e. they haven't changed the line set in 3000 jumps, or their instructors are too fat to float with the light woman in AFF, or they don't change the batteries in their cypreses, or the reserve got wet and moldy - well, that's EXACTLY what the waiver says can happen. That's why you have to sign it. Do many DZO's do things like this? No. But some may. That's why you have to sign the waiver, because things like this can happen and have happened. > and you think they should suffer no consequences whatsoever and > be allowed to continue doing exactly what they're doing. Not at all! If they do a bad job at plane maintenance - leave. Tell your friends. Get them to leave. If you don't understand airplanes, learn. It could save your life. Once everyone leaves the guy goes out of business and you kept your word. >If a student asked to inspect the reserve on their student rig, do >you think that would be allowed?? Sure. If they were really concerned I'd show them an open reserve on a rig that needed a repack. If they wanted to see _their_ reserve I'd let them jump that reserve on their next jump (which, of course, would not be that day.) If they wanted to watch the rigger repack it, it would be up to him, but I suspect most riggers would let the student at least watch him inspect it. As an instructor I like nosy students because it means that they will take responsbility for their own safety after they graduate - even if they are annoying to accomodate sometimes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybytch 259 #63 February 20, 2004 QuoteWhat pisses me off is that you and Lisa are saying that a DZO could DELIBERATELY and MALICIOUSLY put their students at risk (gross negligence...not in the waiver) through giving them faulty equipment ON PURPOSE, and you think they should suffer no consequences whatsoever and be allowed to continue doing exactly what they're doing. Even if there were no civil or criminal legal consequences in a situation like that, there would be consequences. This is a very small sport. QuoteIf a student asked to inspect the reserve on their student rig, do you think that would be allowed?? HELL NO! they'd simply be told that it was rigger inspected, that they're being paranoid, and to relax. At least, that's the answer I got when I asked. This is where research into where you learn to skydive comes in... that and the drive to learn all you can about what you are jumping. Once you have your own gear or are no longer under the direct supervision of an instructor what you jump is 100% your responsibility... but until then it's still 100% your responsibility because it's on your back. If you don't know enough about the gear you are using to be comfortable with it, find out what you need to know before you jump it. Even as a student, if you are insistent enough you can get the information you are seeking. And if you have to be too insistent as a student, perhaps it's time to find a different dz to do your student jumps at. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praetorian 1 #64 February 20, 2004 And while word of mouth is trying to close the place down someone who can't believe that a buisness this crazy would be allowed to continue to exist takes the DZO's word that its all rumor (an intentional lie) and dies, but you kept your word and someone who trusted the good will of the world dies. Good Judgment comes from experience...a lot of experience comes from bad judgment. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #65 February 20, 2004 the examples you cited are simple negligence, and would be covered by the waiver (except the moldy reserve one, because of the 120 day inspection requirement...that one would be a grey area). With regards to the plane thing, sure, I won't get on it if it sounds funny. I know how a plane's supposed to sound. However... do you REALLY think they'd let me inspect the engine? somehow I doubt it. They wouldn't even let me look at the gear I was going to be jumping. No amount of plane knowledge is going to do you a damn bit of good if they won't let you poke around in the engine. Also, in a gross negligence case (deliberately giving a student faulty gear, for example, or sending them up on a plane that they know damn well is more likely than not to fall out of the sky), the thing is, if you allow the DA to handle the whole thing, sure, the guy gets charged with manslaughter, pleas out, and gets to spend a couple of years trying not to drop the soap. His business partners, if any, however, are free to continue doing business, and the guy in jail probably doesn't lose any assets. He's just locked up for a little while, and could even have a third party run the DZ. However, if you sue him and get his assets taken away (hell, donate them to another DZ to set up a student scholarship fund if you feel guilty about it) and get his ass shut down so he doesn't hurt anyone else. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praetorian 1 #66 February 20, 2004 sorry that sounded like a personal attack (not meant as one) this should have been an edit in my last post in reply to billvon again sorry (I'm still getting used to all the options in these fourms Good Judgment comes from experience...a lot of experience comes from bad judgment. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praetorian 1 #67 February 20, 2004 actually the waiver at SDC also specifically covers Gross Negligence in its wording (unless I'm mistaken) Good Judgment comes from experience...a lot of experience comes from bad judgment. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
webracer 0 #68 February 20, 2004 Really the skydiver rarely sues anyhow, it is the family. The family doesn't understand, they didn't sign the waiver (and per the courts, the deceased cannot sign away a child or family rights). Just bantering, I think we all pretty much agree, some more extreme than others. The waiver gives the DZ everything and the skydiver nothing. Actually, almost all contracts start one-sided. The waiver says they can be negligent, the law says they can't. Guess who'll win. My money's on the most pitiful one (the dead one). No more arguments from me, I've said my PEACE. I can see suing, but I cannot guarantee my family won't. You can blame me when I'm gone.Troy I am now free to exercise my downward mobility. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,822 #69 February 20, 2004 >His business partners, if any, however, are free to continue doing >business, and the guy in jail probably doesn't lose any assets. You mentioned legal tricks to get around the waiver; DZO's have legal tricks to get around any lawsuit you could propose. Shell corporations, which have no assets and just run the DZ, get sued, declare bankruptcy, and go away. Then the parent corporation creates a new shell corporation and opens the same DZ under a different name with the same gear, planes and instructors. You made no difference. Now, if you get all the up-jumpers (including instructors) to leave, no one else is injured or killed by his actions, and he goes out of business no matter how many shell corporations he has. >However, if you sue him and get his assets taken away . . . . . . you did something that you explicitly agreed not to do, even though the reasons (i.e. you could be injured or killed) were explained to you in great detail. I guess it comes down to what you think your word is worth. I suppose everyone puts a different value on it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #70 February 20, 2004 they don't have their waiver on their website. Could you post a copy? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #71 February 20, 2004 You NEVER explicitly (or even non-explicitly) agreed not to sue under conditions of gross negligence. Agreeing not to sue, never, ever, ever, is not in the waiver. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praetorian 1 #72 February 20, 2004 I'm doing this from memory sorry I dont have a copy I can post. However let me make clear that though the SDC waiver is extreme it is also the nicest best DZ I've ever checked out/jumped at (not that I'm an expert but I looked at quite a few places before I took my best friends and then girlfriend out with me on our first jumps (at Kapowsin Air sports in Washington state) Good Judgment comes from experience...a lot of experience comes from bad judgment. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #73 February 21, 2004 QuoteDA to handle the whole thing, sure, the guy gets charged with Drug trafficing, pleas out, and gets to spend a couple of years trying not to drop the soap. His business partners, if any, however, are free to continue doing business, and the guy in jail probably doesn't lose any assets. He's just locked up for a little while, and could even have a third party run the DZ. Change one word and you've got one of the largest DZ's in the country. See how the little details can make all the difference? Said DZ has had mostly unfounded reports of safety issues in the past but it remains open and thriving since the jumpers took personal responcibilty and choose not to sue and neither did their families. I knew nothing about airplanes when I started jumping. Now I knew enough to tell good vs bad maintence practices, proper limits for planes (most DZ's ignore them ), what an engine is to sound like and when the pilot should be doing things like adjusting the feathering and the flaps. I also took the time to learn about my reserve and will have my riggers rating this summer. Personal responcibility takes over at some point. I just choose to leave all my legal options at the door of a DZ and procede on my own judgement from then on knowing I will not sue. If I don't know something I find out. I've told my family time after time not to sue, I've got it writing that no one is to sue anyone no matter the level of negligence (even stamped by a notery). This is my love and I will do everything I can do not to screw it up for others after I'm dead.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #74 February 21, 2004 in some circumstances, not suing can screw it up for everyone. you have a DZ with a rediculously high student fatality rate. Students don't know this. They're newbies. So, people keep coming to the DZ to do AFF, and they keep going in, because the DZ is knowingly using moldy reserves. Nobody sues. The DZ stays in business. Sure, maybe some of the fun jumpers go away, but the DZ does some agressive marketing and makes up for it with more students and tandems... more and more keep getting killed or hurt because of bad equipment. Skydiving statistics look bad. All of a sudden, we have 80 or 100 more fatalities per year. Statistics like that hurt everyone. I recognize that is an extreme example, but, if nobody does anything, it definitely could happen. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #75 February 21, 2004 >you have a DZ with a rediculously high student fatality rate. Students don't know this. They're newbies. So they are excused because they are ignorent? Nice excuse... They failed to do any research at all before they did an activity like skydiving then expect to be compensated if they are hurt? You have to have the staff to run a DZ... Extremely dangerous practices rapidly run staff off. It really screws up your week when you have to spend it cleaning the blood off the containers. Lets not mention the press. One story of a skydiving fatility has put more DZ's in the red then the lawsuits have. Running a piece on the 5 oclock news about a skydiving fatility at X DZ just killed the student business for a month there. Have a story run every month or two due to unsafe practices? Bye bye student business for months and with out students DZ's go in the red fast. Skydive Chicago looked like it might be headed towards trouble when the Tribune was running stories on a weekly basis about how dangerous it seemed to be there and how much higher then average their fatility rate was. That press did more damage to the student business then a lawsuit would have done with all the shells at the DZ.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
This Site Is For Sale
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f922i30l.jpg)