Liability with buddies

[H2Andy]

basically, anyone can sue anybody else.

in order to do so, they would have to allege that you

1. owed a duty of care to your buddy (you were dive buddies; check)

2. breached that duty to your buddy (here they list what they think you did or didn't do that constitutes negligence)

3. resulting in damages to your buddy or his survivors (here they list all the medical bills or missed work, or lost future income, or whatever).

so, if your buddy or his family (generally wife and children) believes that your negligence resulted in damages to your buddy, they could sue you.

now, the real consideration: do you have enough money to pay a judgment?
it makes no sense to spend $100,000 on a suit, get a judgment against you,
and ... you have no assets they can levy.

that is why, generally speaking, personal injury attorneys only go for "deep pockets,"
people or companies that will be able to pay a judgment against them. professionals
are insured, so they are a target. companies usually have insurance or sufficient
assets, so they are targets as well.

how much of a target is Average Diver? if you think you have assets to protect,
by all means consult with an attorney in your area.

one precaution is to draft a "Waiver" (copy it form a local dive shop)
and have your buddy sign it prior to each dive. it will be better than nothing
if push comes to shove.

this is not intended as legal advice. always consult an attorney licensed to
practice in your state and experienced in the field of law in question.

 

[Cacia]

Don't worry, dive happy. The lawsuit that will bring you down is the one you least expect to occur.

seen this over and over.


Thatsbruce, has posted some interesting interpretations on the liabilty issues. "Insta-buddy troubles.." something titled like that.

Some of us dive "solo with solo". In other words, we don't really dive alone but we dive with like minded individuals, and understand that our kid's college funds are not on the table under any circumstances. If we espouse our solo status, we feel free to dive together and assist each other as determined by the circumstances. (recreational dives only) I no longer insta-buddy even though I have done so happily for many years. It is not the diver's dive performance that has done me in, it is becoming aware of the vulnerabilty financially and changing legal climate. Since most of my friends have the same philosophy, it has not been a problem finding partners.

Buddy, for me, has become a dirty word.

 

[agilis]

The American legal system is thoroughly corrupt, and the tort process is the most debased and horrific element of that system. The only real protection is being poor. On the other hand, if you have money and assets, you can be sued for any reason a judge is willing to entertain. You don't even have to be the dive buddy in a theoretical situation. You might be the person who trained one of the divers, or the driver of the car that was used to get to the beach. There really are no limts. Any disclaimers, or statements people sign giving up any future claims are not worth the paper they are printed on.
Greedy lawyers, looking for their 40%, claim that they are working for their clients interests, and are tying to extend the limits of liability into creative and interesting new areas. If they can convince a judge (also a lawyer), and a majority of the jury (often comprised of morons), they can and will legally take everything you own. Even if they lose, you may bankrupt yourself defending against an absurd claim. The system stinks. It's one of the worst in the world. Ecept for the vampires who do this for a living, we all pay the costs, one way or another.

 

[Flea Dog]

Thank you for the feedback. In our current litigious society, where anything can get you sued. Just the cost of a lawyer to get the case thrown out can cost thousands.

I have seen a person get sued because their car was parked in a parking lot; a lout came up and hit the car. They tried to claim the car was not parked correctly. Of course not, not after he hit the car and pushed it 20 feet.

Maybe I should become a lawyer?

Good thing I’m poor!

Flea Dog

 

[Cacia]

Ecept for the vampires who do this for a living, we all pay the costs, one way or another.

I agree with you except for Andy and justbruce who generously provide us with free legal advice! Let's not bite the hand that feeds us.

One more quick note...if you use a waiver...Legal depatment at PADI advises me the biggest mistake operators make is to use the "Intro" or teaching waiver when guiding certified divers. This is very important because of the implicit language in the document.

One waiver places the client in a student role, the other waiver SHOULD have language speaking to the issue that the diver is responsible for his own profile, etc.

Make sure you follow this very important point, otherwise, the reverse effect is implemented.

If, I am wrong, someone feel free to correct me. Two waivers exsist with PADI.

 

[Aquanautchuck]

Because of the extended liability you incur as a "Professional" I thought about this for over a year before deciding to become a DM. Being an Insurance Broker I am well aware of what can happen in courts. Like Catherine, I dive solo most times and when on trips and have to buddy up neither the resort or the boat knows I am a DM. I don't need to 1.) get buddied up with the "Weakest Link" nor 2.) broadcast that I am a DM.

Now that I am not longer a active and insured DM my personal liability policies cover me. But even then you have to be careful to not charge in anyway so it cannot be construed as a business. When I take people out on my boat I don't charge a penny. It's just for fun and then I cross all appendages.

Charles

 

[Cacia]

hmm. interesting. Can I go "inactive" and "undo it", do you happen to know?

 

[minnesota01r6]

It doesn't take much to file a lawsuit, but it takes a lot to win one! In the research I have done, I have only come across one case where the injured diver won against a DM/Buddy. The one case is from the marianas islands and the case involved an instructor who didn't give basic theory, didn't perform confined water training, and took the diver to 100' on his 2nd dive after the sub-par certification. The court held that the injured diver hadn't "assumed the risk" inherent in scuba diving because he hadn't been properly trained in the risks to begin with.

I have found 10 other cases squarely on point that say that an express assumption of risk will defeat any claim for negligence, and most are the standard PADI form.

 

[Aquanautchuck]

hmm. interesting. Can I go "inactive" and "undo it", do you happen to know?

I checked around one time because I was thinking that I should buy a "Tail" [insurance term describing coverage for a exposure in the past] And pretty much found out that the answer was no. You could not give it back. This thread has gotten me thinking to check and see if I have the correct release that I have people sign when they dive on my boat.

Charles

 

[H2Andy]

It doesn't take much to file a lawsuit, but it takes a lot to win one!

that's true, but having to defend even a worthless suit can get expensive quickly

hence the problem: you can be sure you'll ultimately win, but the process may
break you or put you out of business if you're a small company

realistically speaking, you're talking $10,000 minimum to defend a lawsuit
(a lot less if you can win a motion to dismiss or a summary judgment, but
judges these days don't seem to want to grant either)

not a lot of people have that sort of cash lying around