Question re Death This Week in SoCal ...

[wedivebc]

If a cab driver drops you off in a known bad area of town, should he check to see if you have a black belt in Karate first? Could he be held liable?
I have seen both ends of this spectrum. I remember one operator who advertised on SB a few years back who said he would not let anyone dive off his boat unless they had full on DIR gear (with plugged burst disks) and he had done some check-out dives to ensure they were good enough. Of course that operator took some flak and he pulled all his posts but my point is are those who are deciding who is qualified to perform a certain dive, qualified to make that decision? That is why many charter operators allow a free spot for a shop to include an instructor or DM when booking a trip. They recognize that the shop instructor is more knowledgeable on that matter.
When I was working for a charter boat who's owner was also a lawyer he said unless you see them doing something blatantly stupid don't get involved in how they dive anymore than discretely checking that their tank valve was open all the way.
I wish all boat operators worked that way.

 

[covediver]

Thirty years ago: Yes, I would probably let the diver go solo that soon after finishing basic OW. I began soloing at around dive 10-12 post OW in 1976, and it would be presumptuous for me to assume I was "ready" but another similarly-trained diver was not.

I worked on a lot of southern California dive boats about that time. Not one of them let anybody go solo which gave rise to the concept of the California dive buddy, "same day, same ocean." Shop owners who chartered and vessel owners who ran open charters were quite adamant, everybody went into the water with a buddy. About the only folks who got to dive solo were the folks who worked on the boats. The trend toward solo diving began (or perhaps "restarted") in earnest around 1990 of so. I recall Darren Douglas writing that it was divemasters on a powertrip that made people dive solo. I took him to task on that in print stating that as long as that was the accepted industry practice (which it was) the rule had to be enforced for liability sake and as long as the boat operator and shop chartering the boat required it. divemasters had to enforce it. In many ways the acceptance of solo diving may have made the divemaster's job easier as it no longer requires them to play "matchmaker" or dive with an unbuddied diver on their free time dive. Requiring everyone to have a buddy turns a boat deck into a speed dating site. You have a very short time to judge compatibility before moving onto the next table.

 

[mikeyjoe]

No - he made the choice to dive without an official "buddy".

I noted he was diving "solo" amongst the "group" - in the news article.

If this is so, this happens countless times a day on dive boats.

When in Coz, unless you came with a buddy - spouse, friend, what have you - you didn't get paired up unless you made an effort to do so. For the record, I did not come with a buddy (my wife is now certified so that has now changed) and I dove with the group, careful not to stray from them.

So my question is this - do you consider diving with a group, but not officially paired up with someone, "solo diving"? I guess in my mind solo diving is something you do all by yourself, out of sight from others - more than a breath of air away from anybody else.....

 

[all4scuba05]

Disclaimer -- I attended law school, I practiced law for 10 years, I ran my own business for 20+ years, I am now retired and starting to teach Scuba.

a. Should the boat operator be liable? Maybe, possibly but absolutely NOT a definite No. The operator is an expert in the operations of a dive boat and has, and should have, a duty of care to his paying customers which includes that the operator do what is REASONABLY PRUDENT to ensure his customers dive safely. To me, being a REASONABLY PRUDENT dive boat operator is going to require obtaining some basic information about the dive history of each passenger and then doing what is REASONABLE UNDER THE THEN EXISTING CIRCUMSTANCES to match the customer with prudent dive practices.

So it's just a matter of time before a law is passed stating that cruise ships can be held liable for people drowning in their swimming pools since the ships capt was supposed to first make sure the deceased actually knew how to swim in the pool?

 

[Diver560]

1. Should the diving boat be held legally liable for allowing a diver with only 14 dives under his belt to leave their boat solo?

2. Regardless of legal liability, if it was your boat, would you allow a diver with only 14 dives under his belt to leave your boat solo?

Regardless of the fact we know very little around this event, our community has suffered the loss of a member who certainly shared some of the passion SCUBA offers all of us.
*****questions*******
1. I agree with comments posted by those pointing out there is not being enough documented/known to make an informed decision here. Not willing to answer.

2. A solo diver would certainly need some higher level of experience and training. How mush experience/training?....for my own sake, it was a little after the PADI Dive Master level (or equivalent in other Agencies). I asked many with more training & experience their opinions on this and only realized it for myself while working with & observing other DMs. Its was the training to avoid accidents/injuries within a group of divers as well as methods on how to rescue others that I got confiendce enough to solo dive while "diving within my own limits".

 

[ereediver]

A quick point here is, that no where in the article does it say he was solo diving. The article just said he was alone. I have sometimes boarded charter boats alone. Meaning I go there by myself. It does not mean I dive alone. I have had an insta buddy on several occasions. My wife does not dive, my kids don't dive, so on family vacations, when I get to dive, I go alone. I have always been paired up with someone, or stick with the DM. In my situation thats what I have to do sometimes if I want to dive. So to assume a solo dive is rather presumptuous. This could be a case of a bad buddy. Putting blame on the Captain before the facts are known, as has been said are wrong, but when has that ever stopped anyone........

 

[LeadTurn_SD]

....So my question is this - do you consider diving with a group, but not officially paired up with someone, "solo diving"? I guess in my mind solo diving is something you do all by yourself, out of sight from others - more than a breath of air away from anybody else.....

Interesting question. My usual definition of "solo" is "alone", nobody in sight. On some solo dives (I shore dive), not only am I the only diver in the water, I'm the only person at the beach!

I understand your point, and agree that I typically consider "solo" as being completely alone; but I believe that you can be "solo" even in the midst of a group. For example, an instructor taking a small class on their 1st OW dive could be considered a "solo" because in an emergency the chance of a student recognizing a problem with the instructor and acting quickly to aid the instructor is probably pretty low. The student is too task-loaded with their 1st dive to really have enough awareness to react quickly.

I think a lot of divers are making solo dives without realizing it. Their buddies are not paying attention, wandering off, taking photos, etc.

Best wishes.

 

[tc]

My definition of solo- If your buddy is too far away to provide immediate assistance with an emergency you are effectively solo.

 

[scjoe]

In my experience, buddies being too far away to provide immediate assistance is pretty much the norm. Countless times I see one person leading and the other following or buddies otherwise physically close but simply out of the field of vision of each other. The flip side is that in good viz divers regularly assume that because they can see each other they are in contact even when the distance between them is way beyond a few kicks.

 

[Teamcasa]

I have two questions for the forum:

1. Should the diving boat be held legally liable for allowing a diver with only 14 dives under his belt to leave their boat solo?

2. Regardless of legal liability, if it was your boat, would you allow a diver with only 14 dives under his belt to leave your boat solo?

A dive buddy is no guarantee of being safe. YOU are the only one responsible for what happens when you dive.

My definition of solo- If your buddy is too far away to provide immediate assistance with an emergency you are effectively solo.

While I and in complete agreement with merxlin and TC, let me answer the OP's questions.

Number 1, If the boat knew he only had a few dives and still endorsed his solo diving choice then yes, they may very well be held liable. If they did not realize he was such a new diver and believed he was diving with a buddy, then no.

Number 2, Absolutely not.