 Poster: A snowHead
|
In the face of regular litigation from personal injury victims, ski resorts can't escape the new culture of 'risk management'. And that's a positive thing, provided that skiing retains its sense of adventure and challenge.
This news item from today's The Union Leader in New Hampshire is, not surprisingly, restricted in its scope because their reporter was "escorted from the building" where a conference on the subject was taking place.
How does the ski industry manage risk? It's a balancing act, really, between learning from actual law cases and judgements and predicting what might come up in the future. Not an easy thing.
Would you sue if you were injured by an exposed but hidden rock on a groomed run? (e.g. a rock behind a bump)
Or if you skied off-piste and found yourself off-cliff, because there were no fences or signs and the visibility had closed in?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
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?
|
> ...Would you sue if you were injured by an exposed but hidden rock on a groomed run? (e.g. a rock behind a bump) ...
Only if said rock "injured me" by miraculously rising from the snow and hitting me. Otherwise, I'd probably say that I injured myself. 
My response would be the same for your 2nd example as well as some incidents around the base area / lodge (eg, I slip on ice in their parking lot).
OTOH, in the case of certain types of lift accidents and other incidents around the base area / lodge (eg, I fall through rotting floor boards, one of their vehicles hits my car, etc.), I would probably feel that the operators of the area were to blame and would seek compensation for my injuries, damage to my equipment, loss of income, etc.
Tom / PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Although the USA is regarded as the source of the culture of litigation, some states now legally indemnify ski resorts from lawsuits. I don't know how far this has spread now, and how many categories of responsibility resorts are excluded from.
Dan, what hazards - if any - would you expect a ski patrol to be legally responsible for fencing off or signing? Should lift companies be legally obliged to pad pylons or snow guns?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
David Goldsmith, if you stray off the marked piste then it's your risk, i wouldn't blame anyone else if i made a balls up away from a marked piste (unless with an insured guide, then they will have/should have performed a risk assessment - in my eyes. You should be prepared for anything that may come your way.
As for what they fence off/pad, not sure but i guess the cannons, lifts etc and fencing off/marking the runs in such a way to keep people on "safe" routes. Also fencing off areas where rocks etc can fall onto a pisted run.......essentially anything that may be a "hazard" to the piste and the sliders on it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
>...Should lift companies be legally obliged to pad pylons or snow guns?...
IMO, padding should only be legally required on beginners' runs, ie, where there is a presumption that some of the people on these runs may not yet have learned enough control to avoid crashing into this sort of equipment.
On more advanced runs, my feeling is that as long as the large pieces of equipment are clearly visible (eg, not painted white - grin), the operators have done their job and don't need to pad them. With smaller pieces of equipment that might be temporarily located in the middle of the run (eg, portable snow guns & the hoses that connect to them), and that might not be seen in time while skiing at reasonable speeds, the operators need to be careful and put up signs or even temporarily close the run.
Just my $0.02.
Tom / PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As to required fencing, I agree with Dan's comment about "marking the runs in such a way to keep people on 'safe' routes". This is essentially the definition of "on-piste".
However, the other end of this implicit deal is that the people using these pistes can't be reckless, and must be go at reasonable speeds for the trail width and skier density - in other words, you must be able to stop for most obstacles downhill of you. Skiers suddenly merging onto the trail directly in your path (say by jumping out of the woods) is an obvious exception. Then, they are at fault.
Tom / PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Another interesting scenario for couch ski patrollers (no offence):
You know that skiers hate nothing more than closed ski runs. Overnight the mountain has iced up.
Do you close any runs? If yes, what grades of runs? Should your employers be legally responsible if an intermediate loses it on an intermediate run that's turned to sheet ice (the skier slid beyond control and hit something nasty)?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
No i don't feel you should, again if it's a marked run then there may be some case to answer but then the mountain operators should warn lift pass buyers/season ticket holders of conditions before they get on the lift - as they do in all resorts???
Sliders should realise that conditions can change etc (do we sue when there is not fresh powder everyday) due to nature that they can't really control it. They should treat the mountain and the runs with the respect they deserve and not just jump head long into any run without considering the terrain, conditions and your ability - sounds boring but i bet we all do it to some degree all the time wether we realise it or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
>...Do you close any runs?
I know this is rarely done, but in the scenario you gave, I wouldn't close the run. Rather, I would put up a sign that says something like, "Very Icy - The difficulty has increased by at least one level". That should satisfy most people.
Tom / PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
I agree with you. It's a question of signs and warnings, but it's a tricky area. Ice can present a very serious risk at certain gradients, and I've seen people slide long distances.
A ski patroller might be much more aware of that specific risk than an intermediate skier. I think I'd close seriously icy runs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
This might be simplifying things horribly, but don't the dangers of skiing contribute to the buzz we get from the sport. I know that there is potential for injury and do all I can to limit this, but appreciate that there are things out there that I can't control.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The introduction of terrain parks - which are more artificial than natural - is, I think, the key issue these American resorts have been discussing.
Here, the resorts put themselves in the situation of effectively designing theme parks, and we'd all sue a theme park if a negligent piece of design or maintenance defect maimed us.
Wouldn't we?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Quote: |
I know this is rarely done, but in the scenario you gave, I wouldn't close the run. Rather, I would put up a sign that says something like, "Very Icy - The difficulty has increased by at least one level". That should satisfy most people
|
- And the "upgrading" of runs (blue to black, etc) is something that does happen, commonly, in North American resorts. I've also frequently seen signs laid out by the ski patrol with words like "Marginal conditions: not recommended", which probably protects the ski area's liability if you rip the edge off your ski on a partially exposed (or very thinly covered) rock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Quote: |
I think I'd close seriously icy runs
|
Or re-sign them "Steep Rink".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Physicsman wrote: |
>...Do you close any runs? Rather, I would put up a sign that says something like, "Very Icy - The difficulty has increased by at least one level". That should satisfy most people.
Tom / PM |
Isn't the problem, though, the various interpretations of what differing views will present? Also, if one were to apply a standard it would only take one instance where a sign wasn't erected that could lead to litigation in the event of an accident.
Without wishing to go over old ground, what does one make of instances where there are heavily skied off piste areas adjacent to which there is a pisted run on one side and an unmarked cliff on the other?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Another case, this time from down under. Perisher is being sued for alleged negligence following an accident some 8 years ago now. Rather limited detail in the article, but it seems she may have been skiing off piste...
| Quote: |
In September 1996, Anne Maree Thomas was skiing in an area of the resort known as Wombat's Lament, when she fell and crashed into a large boulder and the remnants of a shed. |
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200409/s1195691.htm
With respect to Perisher, I came across the following on the Net, examples of the sort of claims people are bringing against ski resorts these days....
* Claim by skier who fell over and injured his leg and back whilst skiing backwards videoing a friend when one of his skies came off because he admitted he had not properly attached it to his ski boot.
* Claim by 18 year old snow boarder who suffered very serious spinal injuries in his unsuccessful attempt to jump a concrete road in order to have a photograph taken of himself to put in a snow boarder magazine. The incident did not occur on an area set aside for skiing and was not serviced by any chair lift. The snow boarder constructed his own "jump" and ignored verbal advice that he should jump elsewhere and could suffer serious injuries if he fell short which were given to him by one of my company's employees. The claim has a potential quantum of several million dollars.
* Claims by skiers who have been hit by other skiers/snow boarders whilst skiing on the slopes notwithstanding that the reasons why the collisions took place are not known.
* A claim by a skier who fell over and broke his leg but later claimed that the ground beneath the snow had suddenly subsided causing him to fall into a ditch allegedly due to my company's failure to adequately back fill trenches dug to install snow making equipment. The claim was eventually withdrawn after we were able to prove that this was a physical impossibility and that there was no negligence on the part of my company as the snow making equipment was installed under the supervision of an American expert in the area, who has been responsible for supervising the installation of snow making equipment in approximately 50% of snow resorts in the USA and Canada.
* Claims are also frequently made by skiers/snowboarders who claim to have been injured on the slopes but who do not, at the time, seek any assistance for their injuries from the Ski Patrol provided by my company. When such claims are made, often years after the event, we have no record of them and are place at an enormous disadvantage in any litigation in attempting to disprove or dispute the Plaintiff's allegations. Under the laws of evidence, if we cannot challenge the Plaintiff's evidence in Court then, in most cases, it will be accepted and my company found liable in a case which, if it had been possible to investigate at the time of the injury, facts may well have been discovered which would have exonerated my company.
* Claims have also made against the Snowsports School because instructors have taught people how to ride a ski lift or to ski but have failed to teach them how to fall over!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
There are some interesting cases listed here...
http://www.skilaw.com/
As well as details of the current status of 'ski law' in different US states....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
