 Poster: A snowHead
|
A Sheffield woman who suffered serious knee damage on a black run in France will receive £15,000 damages from First Choice Holidays which sold her the instruction she was taking.
Lynn Birch, 51, of Sheffield, was on holiday in Serre Chevalier in France. Her claim was that an instructor took her up a steep draglift to ski a run beyond her ability: a black mogul piste. She fell twice on the bumps, rupturing her anterior cruciate ligament on the second fall.
The out-of-court settlement was agreed after First Choice realised they could not secure the ski instructor's appearance as a defence witness.
This report from Yorkshire Post does not reveal which ski school was involved.
Any comments?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Ridiculous. The TO surely cannot be held responsible for the actions of their agents' employees. Or perhaps, given that the TO felt they would lose in court, they can. Still ridiculous (IMV, of course).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
Red Leon, I guess Ms Birch had a contract with the TO, not the school, so that's the only entity she could sue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
IMHO another example of our gradual drift towards the US lawyer dominated society where every misfortune is attributable to somebody else and every accident results in 'compensation'. I don't know the facts of this case in particular, but in general how many of us have fallen over in snow and immediately looked to sue somebody? How many will that be next year? where does it end?
The end result will of course be increased prices from the TO's and increased insurance costs for skiers as all involved look to recoup the legal costs of defending more and more compensation claims. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Sounds like someone at the tour op will be getting a bollocking for slackness in their contractual arrangements. General settlement is of course a joke - if she was, presumably, not an absolute beginner she should have been capable of judging that the terrain was far beyond her ability level and refused. I know of no ski instructor that forces people down mogul fields at gunpoint but settlement may have been cheaper than arguing the whole thing out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Thanks Lynn for cocking it up for the rest of us! Im sure they'll all see this as an opportunity to hike up prices etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The law firm's press release (which the Yorkshire Post article mostly rehashes) provides some more details:
| Quote: |
| We handle claims for many clients who are injured in skiing accidents although most of them settle with compensation being paid without the need for court proceedings. In Mrs Birch's case, First Choice denied liability to compensate her for over 4 years. This meant that we were forced to take her case all the way to trial for her. I am delighted that she has now won the compensation she deserves. I hope that other tour operators take note of this case and ensure that they take steps to avoid similar incidents in the future. Holidays are meant to be enjoyable with memories and photographs as reminders of the experience as opposed to pain and hospital treatment. |
PressRelease
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hmm. I wonder what ability she claimed to have? In my experience of a wide range of ski schools of different styes, different levels and in different countries, no instructor has ever taken me onto runs I felt were too difficult. If I had fallen and hurt myself (instead of falling and not hurting myself) I would certainly not have claimed it was the fault of the piste, or the ski school. But I have been in classes with people who can hardly ski, who take classes at too high a level. I did one this last winter, with an independent French ski school, where one participant grumbled a lot, and fell a lot, on an unpisted red run, of very moderate pitch. It was a class III, and he shouldn't have been in it. Another woman fell constantly, and was more good natured about it, but she shouldn't have been there either. She could scarcely manage blue slopes. If they had been injured, could they have sued? No ski school, surely, would take someone on a black mogulled piste unless they were in a fairly advanced class? I agree that the "sue somebody" mentality is generally bad news, but maybe a few cases like this could be a good thing, if they made ski schools more likely to sort people out into the right classes in the first place. In the class I was in only 2 out of 9 skiers were at the level supposedly required (which was parallel turns on red slopes). The TO probably settled to avoid a hassle, or maybe there is more to this case than was in the newspapers?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
Its interesting that the discription for the piste where the ill-fated event took place, could only be L'Eychahda. I can't comment on 2002 but the last couple of seasons at least, there has been a 3rd way down, an access road which could be classed as a blue run or red at the most. The 2 black runs are proberbly the most difficult runs in the Serre Che and it would be madness to attempt the moguled run without a lot of previous experience of steep, bumpy terrain. 15k ain't a lot for a mashed up knee!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whether the claimant's solicitors have a point depends very much on Lynn Birch's ski ability.
The Yorkshire Post story gives very little clue as to her ability and confidence, relative to the terrain (which we know precious little about, too).
Many many cases like this have actually gone through the legal motions in the UK, with not many trials reported (because most of them are settled out-of-court, or collapse).
If the instructor took her on a run that was significantly out of line with her ability then he had something to answer for. If Lynn Birch had skied stuff like that before, without problems, then she had something to answer for.
It sounds like the instructor was a non-Brit. If he was British he would have been under some pressure to appear in the witness box.
I don't know if First Choice (or rather their insurers) can claim against the ski school. With big claims, the agent of the tour operator (the ski school here) is sometimes pulled into the case as a 'third party' in the trial. I think. I'm not a lawyer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| Whether the claimant's solicitors have a point depends very much on Lynn Birch's ski ability. |
| Quote: |
| Mrs Birch commented: "I have been skiing on several occasions and class myself as an intermediate skier. I would have never attempted such a difficult run as a black mogulled run." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
If she was able to give convincing evidence to the Judge on that, she might well have won the case.
Instructors have to work to the 'safety-enjoyment-learning' maxim, otherwise they just scare people and confidence collapses.
It's a shame it didn't go to court, really.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I class myself as an intermediate skier and would have no worries tackling a so called "Black Mogul" run. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
How's this for a cliche?
"What started off as a dream holiday unfortunately turned into a nightmare."
There was a choice of 2 runs only 1 of which was apparently mogulled - yet she had "no choice"?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Of course, she didn't actually say any of that stuff. It's from the law company's press release and will have been written by their PR bunny.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Hmmmm.... if life and everything around us were perfect, we wouldn't need laws, or gaols or insurance. Regrettably it's not and sometimes the stupidity or malfeasance of others leaves you no choice but to go to Court. The Court listens to both sides of the story and makes a decision to one favour or the other, or even equal responsibility but imaging this:
I bought some X-hire skis in a November sale (virtually for pennies) The bindings were seized and completely beyond safe use, they'd obviously been used hard in their three year life and had probably never been serviced ... so who would have been responsible if the last punter who'd hired them had fallen and destroyed a knee. If there weren't crooks or people taking short-cuts with our safety we wouldn't need laws.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
I don't care how good or bad a skier she was, it's a sport FFS, as they say poo-poo happens.
Quite frankly, if it happened to me in those circumstances I wouldn't even have though about a claim - it wouldn't have crossed my mind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
She's a bint.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Surely ski instructors are supposed to help us push our limits - how else do we improve?? Many more ridiculous lawsuits like this & I can see instructors only taking us on easy blues/reds & everyone having to sign mountains of disclaimers before we get anywhere near the piste.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
marc gledhill, What if your instructor is encouraging you and overstating your talents so that you willingly place yourself in a position of harm? Add to that the differing responses and requirements of various ski types/construction that require time and practice to understand and adapt to.
Stories like this are rare but they help to educate us all to both good and bad practice in the hire of equipment and the acquisition of skills.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
I doubt if equipment was an issue in this case, because it was an ACL rupture and that injury is an inherent risk of state-of-the-art correctly-adjusted equipment.
But it's probably true that an instructor's No.1 responsibility is appropriate selection of terrain.
I'm hoping that one or two additional bits of evidence might leak to us from this case ... and there's some hope, because it's already gone more public than would be normal for an out-of-court settlement.
Last edited by You'll need to Register first of course. on Fri 28-04-06 18:51; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Masque, your example of dodgy equipment differs - in my mind anyway. That's just lazy if they don't do the fitting and setting up correctly.
I hope my instructors do egg me on to do things I wouldn't otherwise do. You never know till you try.
In this case the instructor may have thought she was up to the run, but she fell anyway. You'll notice that they settled only because the defendents couldn't get the attendence of the instructor in court.
This sort of action will lead to people suing their mates for saying " Yeah, course you can do it." 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think terrain selection by instructors is about striking a balance - taking you 5-10% outside your comfort zone (some of the time, after coaching the necessary techniques in tamer terrain), rather than 50-100% outside the comfort zone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| marc gledhill wrote: |
| Masque This sort of action will lead to people suing their mates for saying " Yeah, course you can do it." |
of course not, there's no contract, real or implied. But if he was teaching you, even if the remuneration was just a beer, it'd be another story.
It's a minefield, and common sense has to play a part, thus the Court system is a way for both sides of an argument to be decided by an impartial observer.
It's not right to just label litigation a frivolous, every situation has a multitude of facets that have to be weighed and measured, the people involved are the last ones able to be impartial, as are those who make judgements based on a news report. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe a judge would look at it like this: if you pay for a ski lesson you might fairly expect the experience to involve a lower risk of injury than if you'd gone skiing by yourself. But that's only a point of context to the facts, and causes of the accident.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| fatbob wrote: |
| she should have been capable of judging that the terrain was far beyond her ability level and refused. I know of no ski instructor that forces people down mogul fields at gunpoint |
Almost exactly what I was thinking. It's only happened to me once, and the instructor allowed me to walk down the powder at the side of the piste to where everyone else was meeting - a couple of us did it actually. If she was willing to blindly follow the guy then she has partial (or even significant) responsibility herself - we all have brains (so biologists say) and we should try to use them at least every now and then.
To use the same quote as earlier:
| Quote: |
| Mrs Birch commented: "I have been skiing on several occasions and class myself as an intermediate skier. I would have never attempted such a difficult run as a black mogulled run." |
Well, that's a misleading statement, if she would never have attemped a black, mogulled run, then why did she? If she's that confident that it was outside her ability, then a simple 'no' would be in order.
Then of course, there is as others have alluded to, the potential effect on holiday/insurance/instruction prices to cover such cases as these. I am completely against the pathetic sueing nature that has crept in from across the pond. The number of times I read something in the paper and choke on whatever I'm eating or drinking at some of the cases that are brought - if I were a judge, I'd be laughing half of the claimants out of court...
EDITED to acknowledge slight over-statement of my point - misuse of the word 'lie'.
Last edited by snowHeads are a friendly bunch. on Fri 28-04-06 19:31; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
skisimon, I don't think you can call it a lie. If she says 'I never would have attempted such a difficult run ... ' she's simply pointing out that the instructor had selected the terrain and approved its suitability for her. She means she never would have skied that run on her own initiative, and the truth of that claim could only be judged on a full examination of her ski history and what witnesses say, etc.
There can be many situations on a mountain where a pupil can't realistically say to an instructor 'I quit'. What if the tricky terrain is encountered after the entry point, with no alternative descent?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OK, I probably mis-interpreted her meaning - I suppose she meant 'on her own' (although I think that it was sloppy to miss that bit out - I probably had an inkling that is what was meant. But then I'm a say what you mean, mean what you say type of person...  ).
I do though, still maintain that there are other methods of 'bailing out' than just skiing a different run.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
skisimon, OK, so what do you do if an uninsured driver hits you or any one of a million non-skiing things screw up your life? We can't make judgement without the full story and neither can we just say 'skiing's dangerous, suck it up and live with it'. It's a matter of balance and there are bad practices on both sides that can include chalet owners that have no third party insurance for people who fall down the chalet stairs that don't meet letting standards. It's a two way street and unfortunately it sometimes needs the cooler heads of others to decide with all the facts. The claimant may be forced to go to court because the other party may be uninsured or even deliberately obfuscating their responsibility.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Again a mis-interpretation has occured - I've been a little sloppy this evening...
When I say the 'pathetic sueing nature that has crept in from across the pond' I am referring to the 'pathetic' cases that are brought before the court (I wasn't trying to imply that all cases are pathetic). There are of course many occassions when a just and more than acceptable case are brought - your example of an uninsured driver being a very good example.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Masque wrote: |
| marc gledhill wrote: |
| Masque This sort of action will lead to people suing their mates for saying " Yeah, course you can do it." |
of course not, there's no contract, real or implied. |
Oh, yet in the US people are afraid to serve drinks at private dinner parties (you have to help yorself) in case you get your guest drunk, they fall or get banned from driving and sue - er - you! For providing too much booze.
No contract, real or implied, that I can see - possibly the opposite in fact
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| fatbob wrote: |
| I know of no ski instructor that forces people down mogul fields at gunpoint but settlement may have been cheaper than arguing the whole thing out. |
Sure.. but day 1 of an ESF course in Les Menuires, Half-term freezing cold and snowing. End of a long, long day mostly doing blue runs and the odd easy red. Was my second weeks skiing but I was ok with the group on the pistes. Then with about 15 mins to go the end of lesson the instructor whips off piste on a narrow track (0.5m) wide through the trees, and then encourages her punters to follow with general sarcastic comments. One or two people manages it ok, 5 or 6 fall over or crash into trees. Leaving me and this other guy left at the top. Lots of peer pressure to give it ago, he goes for it falls over and is 'off games' for 3 days. I decide discretion etc, and sking gently down the piste, whereupon have huge ruck with instrctor .. WTF  did she think she was doing, to difficult, unneccessary, to be met with gallic shrug - "it's fun"
Gunpoint - No, Unnecessary - Yes, Beyond mine and most of the groups abillity - definately !!
Last edited by Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person on Fri 28-04-06 20:07; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
marc gledhill, I'd like to think that on this side of the pond, people live in less fear of life and have less base avarice in their heart. You have to understand that America is a feral and grossly uncivilised place, however bright the ribbon they tie round the turd they call their society.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
bertie bassett, I've seen similar mayhem with a children's group. There has to be some accountability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Masque, yet, sadly, we follow their tracks with no thought to the consequences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
i've skied with a "ski improvement" course in Whistler where the instructor LOST half the group in the trees.... she decided to have fun and ski a different run.... 2 fell into tree wells.... I don't remember what happened to the rest.....
That is NOT suitable teaching style.... if i had fallen in tree well and been hurt I'd have been tempted to sue her..... run just too hard for teh ability level of the group...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The woman had a choice - she could have said no. If she had said no, she could have side-slipped or at least traversed down the slope with very wide turns (she did state that she was intermediate level after all). On the other hand, it might not have been a bad thing to try and attempt the slope and, if she did not feel up to it, then she could finish the slope by side-slipping or wide turns. I think this has been blown out of all proportion - everybody is responsible to themselves. She wasn't forced to go down that slope. First Choice should basically have told her to get lost.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
I class myself as an intermediate skier and would have no worries tackling a so called "Black Mogul" run.
|
Last years' instructor in Canada classed my group as intermediates and wouldn't have taken us on a black mogul if we'd paid him extra
| Quote: |
I know of no ski instructor that forces people down mogul fields at gunpoint
|
Previous to the Canada holiday I was in France and completely lost confidence by the end of the first day. Told the ESF instructor the next day that I needed to go down a class because I was utterly cr@p and struggling on the blues, and was told that the group was being split that morning and I should ski with them to judge which class I should be in at the split. She proceeded to take us to the top of a red run, all the instructors skied down and left us at the top. Not having a piste map I had no choice but to follow and shatter any remaining confidence I had. Was severely unimpressed and finally after that got moved down a class. Would never take lessons with ESF again. And it may not have been a black mogul, but it was beyond anything I was remotely comfortable with, and the instructor was aware I was struggling on the easier slopes.
Most instructors may be sensible and a good judge of their groups, but some are downright stupid and irresponsible.
One of my friends was involved in a court case after hiring skis whose bindings were incorrect (resulting in one ski not releasing in a fall, and a spiral break of both tibia and fibular. The broken leg is now shorter than the other and her foot is slightly squint). As I remember it, the TO were not held to be responsible because of some legal technicalilty to do with the hiring process, and it was in Andorra and not in the EU.
Yes, it's a risky sport, but that doesn't mean that you should take full responsibilty for _any_ misfortune, all TOs and service providers have a Duty of Care to their customers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Quote: |
One of my friends was involved in a court case after hiring skis whose bindings were incorrect (resulting in one ski not releasing in a fall, and a spiral break of both tibia and fibular. The broken leg is now shorter than the other and her foot is slightly squint). As I remember it, the TO were not held to be responsible because of some legal technicalilty to do with the hiring process, and it was in Andorra and not in the EU.
|
That is why no ski shops in North America will "crank up" your bindings higher than the suggested DIN value from the chart - or even lend you a screwdriver so you can do it yourself.
To get back to the instructor situation - obviously, no-one would ever learn to ski tougher terrain if they only skied the stuff they could do already. So instructors have to push skiers' limits slightly. But somewhere there is a line between that, and clearly taking someone on to terrain that puts them way out of their depth. Where is that line? I suppose there are some cases where there will be no alternative but to let a judge decide. But with every successful case like this, it may get just that little bit harder to find that instructor who will "push your limits".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One of the reasons i hire a instructor is that he will lead me down slopes that I would not attempt on my own. A good instructor would increase the difficulty gradually so that your confidence rises. I have however been in some ski classes when the instructor suddenly decides to take the class down a run which is way above the standard skied up to that point with the expected result , half the class fall with big loss of confidence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
