The way they worded the US operation was website, phone number and something else - a Mexican dive business with a website in the US using a US cell phone number - I need to talk with an attorney....
Bahama Divers closed after lawsuit
- Thread starter Miyaru
- Start date
Please register or login
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
@Miyaru
In an international forum, we run a great risk of losing credibility when we make gross generalizations about another country or culture.
In the past 12 years of working with EU member nation governments, I’ve diligently tried to stay cognizant of my own country’s shortcomings but have been refreshingly surprised at how enthusiastic they have been about working with us (US representatives).
So, yes, I agree with @The Chairman that we need Tort reform. I, too, get weary of our tendency to first seek to sue rather than take responsibility.
However, one often doesn’t see their own culture’s strengths until dealing in earnest with others and my EU teammates have frequently commented on their appreciation for our efficiency, for being reliable to do the right thing and have shared their own frustrations with the bureaucratic imbroglios and rabbit holes of the EU’s decision-making procedures.
While it’s clear that in the political realm the historically-strong relationship between the United States, not the United Litigating States, and the EU has recently been challenged, I don’t perceive that to reflect the sentiment of the common American who still regards the Old World as our closest friends.
I wouldn’t deny you your right to your viewpoint and clearly you’re aggrieved by this case. But I would ask that you be a bit more careful. Sullying another country’s name really diminishes the attention you may otherwise be afforded.
Just one diver’s perspective.
In an international forum, we run a great risk of losing credibility when we make gross generalizations about another country or culture.
In the past 12 years of working with EU member nation governments, I’ve diligently tried to stay cognizant of my own country’s shortcomings but have been refreshingly surprised at how enthusiastic they have been about working with us (US representatives).
So, yes, I agree with @The Chairman that we need Tort reform. I, too, get weary of our tendency to first seek to sue rather than take responsibility.
However, one often doesn’t see their own culture’s strengths until dealing in earnest with others and my EU teammates have frequently commented on their appreciation for our efficiency, for being reliable to do the right thing and have shared their own frustrations with the bureaucratic imbroglios and rabbit holes of the EU’s decision-making procedures.
While it’s clear that in the political realm the historically-strong relationship between the United States, not the United Litigating States, and the EU has recently been challenged, I don’t perceive that to reflect the sentiment of the common American who still regards the Old World as our closest friends.
I wouldn’t deny you your right to your viewpoint and clearly you’re aggrieved by this case. But I would ask that you be a bit more careful. Sullying another country’s name really diminishes the attention you may otherwise be afforded.
Just one diver’s perspective.
OP
Yes I am. As said before, I'm not familiar with how US court works and the outcome annoys me. I understand that the divecenter should have responded sooner. No, I don't have any ties to this shop. And if you think the title is offending, I'll do something about it.
But. My point is not about law systems, this is about common sense.
If you decide to claim millions of dollars from a divecenter, don't you think that there's a very likely possibility that, if you win the case, it will end in bankruptcy for that divecenter? I am not looking for a legal answer, but a human answer.
I'll do something about the title, since I don't aim at sullying another country's name.
Fact is that a group of certified divers went diving by themselves. Something bad happened and one diver ended up dead. If rental equipment failed and caused death, then yes, liability comes into play. Wasn't the case here.
Still, the widow decides to sue the divecenter.
The accident happened in the Bahamas, but the lawsuit was started in the US, because a lawyer found a possibility to get away with that.
Anger, revenge and greed were the motives for getting back at a divecenter in a different country, that wasn't to blame for this death from a human point of view. The justice system enabled those motives and the result can be read in the article. I think that's regrettable. Nobody has won, everybody lost.
There was a need to make things easy for Americans to call you, hence the US phone number. Now with skype and international calling, It's not nearly as hard. I've often thought of moving SB out of the US. Being sued in the US is a given, even by foreign operatives. Being sued in other countries has their up sides and down sides, but it's usually quite hard for non-citizen to start the process.
OP
That's a legal answer.
Having liability insurance approves claiming millions? As a result of this way of thinking, the costs of such insurances are getting higher after each lawsuit.
Which is why, ahem, I mentioned that we need tort reform.
Most people don't realize the drain insurance is on our economy. It's caused the US medical costs to skyrocket as well as the cost of doing business. Unfortunately, our horrid tort system is great for lawyers and insurance companies. Since most of our legislature is comprised of lawyers and there is a litany of insurance lobbyists trying to influence them. I don't expect it in my lifetime.
In fact, the ambulance chasers will deceptively suggest that you're not actually suing the doctor who tried to help you: you're suing the evil insurance company who simply is greedy and doesn't want to pay what you supposedly deserve. It's the accident lottery system here in the US.
The absolute truth right there.
As a landscape company that also did snow removal - I paid right at 3.5% of gross sales for insurance coverage. They did have an army of lawyers though - snow in itself is a lawsuit rich environment. I heard of guys in New Jersey paying 20% or more of gross for coverage just for snow....
High insurance costs are a result of high medical costs as much as the reverse.
The reality is that it's a systemic issue. In the US, relative to Europe, individuals are responsible for paying for their medical care and we have a very weak social safety net. So if you are injured, your only option is to sue for enough money to cover all your immediate and anticipated costs. This includes medical costs and loss of income that would largely be covered by the government in European countries.
There are examples of this at every level. For example, US physicians have much higher average pay than their European counterparts, the cost of which gets passed on to patients. But the higher pay is necessary to reimburse the vastly higher costs of college education and malpractice insurance in the US. Both of which are again a result of society-wide choices.
So "tort reform" is meaningless by itself. You can't change one part of an equation without affecting all the other parameters.
H.L. Mencken put it best:
Explanations exist; they have existed for all time; there is always a well-known solution to every human problem—neat, plausible, and wrong.
Similar threads
