• Welcome to ScubaBoard


  1. Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

    Benefits of registering include

    • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
    • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
    • You can make this box go away

    Joining is quick and easy. Login or Register now by clicking on the button

Legal considerations for the Fire on dive boat Conception in CA

Discussion in 'Scuba Related Court Cases' started by onestep, Sep 3, 2019.

  1. ReefHound

    ReefHound PADI Pro

    # of Dives: 1,000 - 2,499
    Location: Houston, TX
    5,254
    1,271
    113
    Ayisha likes this.
  2. KWS

    KWS ScubaBoard Supporter ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: SE TEXAS
    4,121
    905
    113
    I have never sen a waiver that holds anyone accountalbe except the passenger. the waiver is by design a legal loophole to relieve the service provider of responsibility by saying that the customer will not hold the provider accountable for anything. Unless they agree to total exoneration service is denied. You dont have to be inthe business to see that. what happens in the legal world on one thing what is on the waiver is totally different.
     
  3. KWS

    KWS ScubaBoard Supporter ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: SE TEXAS
    4,121
    905
    113
    No I AM SAYING THAT CALIFORNIA LAW SAYS YOU CAN NOT DEMAND FORFIETURE OF YOUR RIGHTS AND PROTECTIONS AS A CONDITION OF RECEIVING SERVICE.
     
  4. KWS

    KWS ScubaBoard Supporter ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: SE TEXAS
    4,121
    905
    113
    ABSOLUTELY true. all costs flow donwnhill.

    The same tactics are used in car parking lots where you have to sign a waiver saying you will not hold the lot owners responsible in the event of vandalism of your car. Motels do the same thing with parking lots. If their mowing people causes a rock to be thrown and breaking your window the motel says they are not responsible. If hotel equipment hits your car they say they are not responsible. As long as there is a financial agreement or a transaction or contracted service, the service provider is responsible for your property while it is on their property.
     
  5. Wookie

    Wookie Secret Field Agent ScubaBoard Business Sponsor

    21,215
    28,445
    113
    But if a landscaper throws a rock at your car or the hotel beans it with a golf cart, they are acting with negligence, and you have every right to sue, and if your lawyer is better than their lawyer, collect.

    Now, if they aren’t negligent (sign posted that mowing will happen today and you are advised to park with caution due to flying rocks), then they aren’t negligent and you exercised free will and parked in the flying rock zone for personal reasons and you will lose.
     
    chillyinCanada and Lorenzoid like this.
  6. KWS

    KWS ScubaBoard Supporter ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: SE TEXAS
    4,121
    905
    113
    I agree with the who is at fault aspect. I had a co worker park his car at a motel The area was posted no parking as of the following monday for painting. The schedule got moved up and they told on one and started on saturday with out notice. the car was speckled from the paint that was sprayed. The motel knew teh schedule moved up they knew he was parked there and failed to contact him. The motel refused to repaint his car. The motels position was that when at the motel you forfieted your right to redress withthe parking waiver. If you refused to sign you had to leave teh motel. A year later and a lawyer bill the motel paid. Same motel groundskeeper driving through the parking lot towing a beem on a trailer,, made a turn and scraped a car. same thing happened all over again. Took a law suit to get restitution. The motels position is that you have to go to your auto insurance to get paid, that that is why you have insurance. Their policy is no waiver no room key.
     
  7. Cowfish Aesthetic

    Cowfish Aesthetic Barracuda

    # of Dives: 50 - 99
    Location: Chicago
    255
    266
    63
    The point is the waiver can say whatever it wants, but that doesn't make it any more effective than the law allows. And I'm not sure what effect you think a waiver has outside of "the legal world."
     
  8. djcheburashka

    djcheburashka Manta Ray

    # of Dives: 200 - 499
    Location: San Francisco, CA
    569
    63
    28
    No, if they throw a rock at your car, that’s an intentional tort. Negligence has nothing to do with it,

    Frank, you are not a lawyer. This is just wrong. You can’t just post a sign and thereby not have a duty of care when you throw rocks on the street.

    Several years ago, you were bragging and laughing about how effective your negligence waivers were, that you had effectively made it impossible for anyone to sue you.

    Let’s use an example. Let’s say, hypothetically, that someone owned a boat, and they sold scuba tours. And let’s say that there was a fire on the boat, and the owner learned that it would engulf the passenger area in seconds, overwhelming onboard firefighting, and that given the speed at which the fire spread, it would have been impossible for the number of passengers regularly booked in that cabin to escape through the means of egress provided.

    Now let’s say that after that fire, the owner continued to book the same number of people, without improving firefighting capabilities in the cabin, or providing better means of escape. Perhaps he installed better fire alarms, but that wouldn’t matter since even a small fire would be immediately lethal to anyone in the cabin. And not only that, the owner didn’t tell future passengers about this design defect in the boat.

    Now let’s say that one day, on a trip, there is a second fire. It doesn’t matter how it started. It could even have been a misbehaving passenger lighting a cigarette.

    All the signs and warnings and liability waivers in the world wouldn’t help that owner. It doesn’t matter if the had signs up that said “don’t light a fire on the boat, and if there is a fire leave the room, dumbass.” Because that owner had a duty of care they don’t have the right to give up.

    That owner was also reckless. They were aware of a serious risk to human life, and they consciously chose to disregard that risk. In fact, depending on the state, that owner would most likely go to prison.
     
  9. ChrisM

    ChrisM Solo Diver

    # of Dives: 1,000 - 2,499
    Location: Torrance, CA
    1,363
    263
    83
    Ok champ.
     
    Cowfish Aesthetic likes this.
  10. ChrisM

    ChrisM Solo Diver

    # of Dives: 1,000 - 2,499
    Location: Torrance, CA
    1,363
    263
    83

    In your storied legal career you’ve never seen that? Huh. Guess that beats my 25 years of legal practice.

    You’re still wrong
     
    Cowfish Aesthetic likes this.

Share This Page