Divemaster\Instructor Liability

[DannyCap]

Hello everyone!

I've been having what has now turned out to be a heated argument with some other divers, none of which are DM's or instructors. I'm considering getting my divemaster certification and another fellow diver told me that the master diver course would be much better. The reasoning behind this statement is as follows: This person tells me that as a DM you are required to keep insurance (which I agree with). This is where we differ in opinion. She believes that because a person is a DM or instructor you are automatically responsible for ALL divers you are diving with even if you are not a leader of the dive. For example, say I'm a DM and I fly off to Cozumel and get on the first dive boat I come across. I know these people for 5 minutes and we start the dive. If something was to happen to anyone on this dive I would be held liable and could be sued even though I wasn't leading the dive! Now I'm a logical guy and I can't believe this to be true. I do believe this could happen if and only if I was assisting an instructor, leading a dive or doing some other "leadership role" in that particular dive, but in this scenario I'm just a vacationer. Is this true, would I be responsible for all divers anytime I go into the water? If anyone has any input on this I would love to hear it. I would hate to be liable for others on days where I just want to have fun dives.
Thanks in advance!
Danny

 

[philmayer]

First, there's a very big difference between being a Master Scuba Diver and being a Divemaster. If you're not interested in being a dive professional, helping with classes, probably progressing on to instructor -- the divemaster certification isn't what you're looking for. MSD is PADI's highest non-professional rating. DM is their lowest professional rating.

If you are a Divemaster, you are required by PADI standards to keep your dues current and maintain insurance to act as a divemaster.

You are not required to have insurance forever.

As far as legal liability, that's a whole other thing. In Mexico, it's doubtful you'd get sued. In the US, it depends on how cynical you are in your outlook. Yes, you could be sued simply for being on the same boat. That doesn't mean you'd be liable, but you could still have to defend yourself to some point.

Just because you're a DM doesn't mean you have to tell anybody that when you're on vacation. There's no advantage to being a DM over an MSD on vacation. MSD cert is sufficient for any diving you're going to want to do. If the dive op requires you to have deep cert, MSD shows that just like DM. If the dive op wants to see your nitrox cert, you'll have to show the separate nitrox card whether you're an MSD or a DM.

 

[MauiScubaSteve]

You do not have to ever pay insurance if you don't want to pay insurance. In the USA and many other regions you do have to have insurance to be considered in active status. Most employers (95%) require it of their employees where it is mandated.

Many dive shops get a shop policy, so any Pro working for them is covered. Some shop insurance policies might even cover when the DM or Instructor isn't on the policy by name but is a valid employee and working for said shop.

In the USA and others like it, if you have no proof of insurance your agency will consider you inactive. The agencies don't always have it right. I left a shop and it's shop policy two March's ago but I was listed as active by PADI through the term of the policy (Nov). When I started working for another company with a shop policy in Aug, PADI ignored the notification of my new insured status, because they already had me listed as insured (wrongly). Then in Nov. when the first shops policy expired I was listed as inactive by PADI, even though they were notified of my new coverage in Aug. After the first of the year I requested the insurance company to notify PADI again but I was at least up to when I last checked still listed as inactive, with no sticker sent to my knowledge. I continue to work and both my employer and the insurance company are not surprised PADI is confused.

There are thousands of DM's who quit or never payed insurance and I'd be interested in hearing that any of them ever got involved in a legal injury claim soley due to the fact that they were there and a DM. I've never heard of it.

 

[Alex777]

I am an attorney. You can only be liable if there is a duty of care AND if you have fallen below the expected standard of care. Both must co-exist. Here is something I posted a while ago:

You are confusing 2 different concepts: DUTY of care and STANDARD of care. You only acquire a duty of care by agreeing, implicitly or explicitly, to assume some obligation towards another diver. An Instructor teaching a course has explicitly assumed a duty of care towards his students. A buddy implicitly agrees to a duty of care towards his buddy. Just being on a dive boat as a diver does not, in and of itself, mean you have assumed a duty of care towards anyone.

Once you have assumed a duty of care towards someone, the next question is: what is the standard of care you must exercise? On this question, all of your training is relevant. If you are a DM, the expected standard of care is higher than if you are just an OWD. You are expected to use the training you have. However, your level of training has no bearing on the first question of whether you have assumed a duty of care.

 

[Peter Guy]

This has been reviewed any number of times -- and there is a whole lot of misinformation about it.

First of all, you must remember, EVERY jurisdiction has slightly different rules (or perhaps greatly different when you compare Coz to Florida or Egypt) regarding liability. I can only give the GENERAL RULES relating to "common law" jurisdictions.

It isn't really the designation of Dive Master that may enhance your liability -- it is the training involved in becoming a Dive Master (or AI, or Instructor, or....). With increased training and experience comes a more involved definition of "reasonableness of actions." What might be "reasonable" for an OW trained/experienced diver might be "unreasonable" for a DM. BUT, just because you may be judged on a "higher level" due to your training, that doesn't mean you have any liability whatsoever.

IN THEORY, to to be liable for a negligent action, two things must exist:

1. You must have a duty of care towards the injured party; AND

2. You must have violated that duty of care through an unreasonable (negligent) action.

Just being on a boat does NOT create a duty of care to others -- you are just another diver. So even if you do act in an unreasonable manner, there should be no liability.

But whether you have a duty of care can be tricky AND often depends on the very specific facts of each incident.

BTW, the training one gets in becoming a DM is so different from that one gets in becoming a "Master Diver" (within the PADI system) that there is no way of attempting to reconcile the two. They are totally different.

 

[Coldwater_Canuck]

If the dive op requires you to have deep cert, MSD shows that just like DM

A bit off the general point, but I don't think that's correct. I've never seen deep cert as a requirement for either Master Scuba Diver or Divemaster. Did I miss something?

All MSD really shows for training is that you have Advanced and Rescue (so you are qualified to 100 feet and have rescue training). The specialties can be anything really. I don't believe DiveMaster requires any specialties, only Advanced/Rescue (but I could be wrong on this, haven't really looked into it).

 

[Doc]

I am an attorney. You can only be liable if there is a duty of care AND if you have fallen below the expected standard of care. Both must co-exist.

Me, too- but I am in recovery:angel: The real point of the thing is that anyone can be sued. The use of insurance? It pays for the legal defense of that Divemaster.

Just because you're a DM doesn't mean you have to tell anybody that when you're on vacation.... If the dive op wants to see your nitrox cert, you'll have to show the separate nitrox card whether you're an MSD or a DM.

I throw down a nitrox EAN card (only) wherever I go in this world. I hear of some folks having to produce an additional card to go below a certain depth, but that has never happened to me, ever.

This has been reviewed any number of times...

What he said..........................

 

[rockjock3]

If the dive op requires you to have deep cert, MSD shows that just like DM. If the dive op wants to see your nitrox cert, you'll have to show the separate nitrox card whether you're an MSD or a DM.

Not true. The primary reason I got my MSD card was because I didn't want to pay $35 to get one the cards I already had with EANx on it. I had EANx and all the other requirements met so I paid the $35 to get my MSD/EANx card. That way if I go diving on a recreational boat I only have to show one card andor remember one number for all my diving needs. If I go on a tech dive I show my NAUI Trimix II (no numbers to remember) and that covers me there.

 

[DevonDiver]

You only need to buy appropriate insurance and pay PADI membership annually if you wish to maintain Active Status for working as a Divemaster. If you don't plan on seeking employment as a Divemaster, then you don't need to worry about this.

If you only wish to undertake the DM course as a vehicle for improving your scuba skills, experience and confidence, then you need not worry about that. Becoming a DM does not change your legal status, especially if you are not active status or employed in a supervisory capacity..... and, thus, you are only liable for anything under the general good samartian laws that cover everyone.

To compare the Divemaster course against the Master Scuba Diver rating is like comparing chalk and cheese. One takes you to a professional level of dive leadership, wheras the other is a level of recognition that you have completed a breadth of recreational training and minimum 50 logged dives.

 

[DannyCap]

BTW, the training one gets in becoming a DM is so different from that one gets in becoming a "Master Diver" (within the PADI system) that there is no way of attempting to reconcile the two. They are totally different.

I've seen a couple people say this and I understand that the training will be vastly different between the two certs. I think the point my diver friend was trying to get at was don't go for the DM because of the legal issues, but get this one instead so you aren't responsible for other people.

Just for the record, I find it fascinating to help other\newer divers which is one of the main selling points of becoming a DM. I want to help with classes and maybe one day become an instructor, but not necessarily. I have no interest in doing it to make money like I see other trying to do on here. I just want to learn as much as I can about all the different areas of diving, not just being in the water but servicing gear, helping in the dive shop, ect, ect , ect

Thanks everyone for your feedback and now that I've read some of your thoughts I don't think I will let the "legal" issues hold me back.

Danny