Diver in California Sues for Being Left

[pilot fish]

I am not so sure that the ins. co. would be a named party...The insurance company merely assumes the liability...It is the parties that go through trial...

I've been a named party in a lawsuit involving a car accident, and my ins. provided the settlement...but the ins. co. was not named. They were bound to my through my policy.

Insurance companies are not named in the action but provide the insured with indemnity when you are sued. IOW, they will pay the bill when you screw up.

 

[RonFrank]

Ron, please don't classify my positon as a "rant." That is not the way to have a friendly discussion. You may indeed be right but I have a different opinion.

I enjoy the discussions here, but you do tend to beat a dead horse. In this case, you seem to want to attempt to defend the Captain. IMO while based on what I have read the Captain was good, that does not dismiss the facts. The facts are that the diver was left, and may have died if not rescued by *ironically* a boy scout trip.

Do you have facts that support something else??

Ron

 

[pilot fish]

I enjoy the discussions here, but you do tend to beat a dead horse. In this case, you seem to want to attempt to defend the Captain. IMO while based on what I have read the Captain was good, that does not dismiss the facts. The facts are that the diver was left, and may have died if not rescued by *ironically* a boy scout trip.

Do you have facts that support something else??

Ron

I'm trying to point out that there seems to be enough blame and liability to go around. It's too easy to JUST blame the Captain and TOTALLY exonerate the diver. I'm just not prepared to do that without all the facts. The diver was left behind, that is a fact, but WHY he was left behind, and what part HE played in that, has to be determined in a court of law, which is why they have trials.

 

[The Kraken]

The waiver of liability deals with injury during the dive.

Did the diver refuse to come back aboard.

Answer one question, did the captain of the vessel exhibit responsibility and take all measures deemed prudent and necessary to determine that all the persons under his aegis were back aboard the vessel before he departed?

 

[RonFrank]

You seem to believe that the diver was at fault. If so how?

If YOU were left at sea, what would your viewpoint be?

Ron

What about the wavier of liability we all sign before we dive? Assumed risk? We are knowingly assuming some risk by diving. There is a case for the diver being partially liable. I do, however, think it is reasonable to assume you will be picked up after the dive, but if you, the diver, violated basic diving rules and contributed to your situation, that can be a determining factor. The diver may even have a case against the other two divers that did not stay with him till he cleared? The boat owner could turn around and bring the other two divers into the case to share in liability. Plantiff will turn to the deepest pocket and move against them.

 

[RonFrank]

There is a very vocal group of divers out here in SoCal (including a prominent LDS owner) who mock this guy mercilessly (they call him "Drifting Dan") and who swear up and down that the entire incident was the diver's fault. Granted, he didn't surface immediately on having equalizing issues and drifting away from the oil rigs at depth, but I don't think that excuses the dive operation at all for checking him in when he was still in the water and then moving the boat and checking him OUT at the next dive site! But this vocal group refuse to acknowledge that and insist he is completely to blame. Unbelievable.

The guy was on a charter. He dove, and the crew did not even know they left him.

The Mocking crew IMO is Full of it. Even if he was the worst diver on the planet, it does NOT excuse the mistake. How hard is it to keep track of people, IMO not very.

If the guy was dead they would be in some serious junk. As it is, expect a BIG settlement.

Ron

 

[pilot fish]

The waiver of liability deals with injury during the dive.

Did the diver refuse to come back aboard.

Answer one question, did the captain of the vessel exhibit responsibility and take all measures deemed prudent and necessary to determine that all the persons under his aegis were back aboard the vessel before he departed?

Answer to your question, NO.

Question, did the diver contribute in any way to his situation?

 

[pilot fish]

You seem to believe that the diver was at fault. If so how?

If YOU were left at sea, what would your viewpoint be?

Ron

I am not blaming the diver totally but it seems that he did not follow some basic rules. I also think the other two divers are at fault. See, my point is there are a few people at fault, not just the captain.

How would I feel if I wer left behind? Sacred and lonely.

 

[MaxBottomtime]

The waiver of liability deals with injury during the dive.

Did the diver refuse to come back aboard.

Answer one question, did the captain of the vessel exhibit responsibility and take all measures deemed prudent and necessary to determine that all the persons under his aegis were back aboard the vessel before he departed?

The waiver of liability deals with injury during the dive.
All the waivers I have signed ask that you understand the dangers of scuba in general and assume all risks related to diving, not just injuries.

Did the diver refuse to come back aboard.
In a sense, yes. Although he could see the boat when he surfaced, he decided to inflate his BC and wait for them to pick him up. Because there were other divers in the water, leaving the area would not be prudent. Dan failed to follow the simple briefing about where to ascend and buddy-seperation protocals.

Answer one question, did the captain of the vessel exhibit responsibility and take all measures deemed prudent and necessary to determine that all the persons under his aegis were back aboard the vessel before he departed?
Unfortunately, he trusted the word of the Divemaster, who was in charge of the diving activities. It was his responsibility to make sure everyone was back onboard. The captain had no reason to believe the DM didn't know what he was doing. Unfortunately, the rules state that he is responsible for everything that happens on his boat. He had his ticket suspended, but the DM was never reprimanded and Dan has never admitted making any errors. Instead, he went to the media blaming everyone but himself and now hopes to get rich because of it. He does not get any sympathy from me. Sorry.

 

[RonFrank]

The fact is the diver was left. Regardless of what smoke and mirrors are there, and even if the diver was a compete idiot, the boat left him.

There is NO way that anything else can discount this fact, and the dive OP WILL pay the ultimate price.

Ron

Has anyone seen this?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/01/28/diver.suit.ap/index.html