"Family of drowned Tennessee diver sues dive shop"

[cerich]

The instructor was insured by an agency that is actually owned by SDI,

Do you have any proof of that statement? I don't believe it is accurate

 

[boulderjohn]

That was my memory of the content of the thread.

 

[cerich]

That was my memory of the content of the thread.

It's not correct, same as some people that say PADI owns V&B

 

[boulderjohn]

I'm pretty sure on this one. He had Willis Insurance. SDI and WIllis were definitely connected in some way.

SDI/TDI/ERDI and Willis Insurance initiative is good news for divers too! | SDI | TDI | ERDI

 

[cerich]

I'm pretty sure on this one. He had Willis Insurance. SDI and WIllis were definitely connected in some way.

SDI/TDI/ERDI and Willis Insurance initiative is good news for divers too! | SDI | TDI | ERDI

Indeed, Willis was the recommended Insurance thru SDI, as at the time First Flight was to NAUI, V&B to PADI and etc. However saying that SDI owned the Insurance company is misleading and inaccurate.

 

[Wookie]

Willis is a massive insurance company which insures PADI instructors everywhere except the USA. Willis Canada got out of the USA insurance business specifically because of the Utah lawsuit, see, it seems that Lincolnshire Management is insured by Willis USA. Willis was given the choice. Get out of the dive insurance business or drop Lincolnshire Management as a client. Lincolnshire Management pays a lot more to Willis than all of the dive business in North America. The choice was clear. Willis Canada was the chosen underwriter for SDI, and now Owl Underwriting performs the same function.

 

[EricTheDood]

So the way I see it is the complaint is pretty weak and there's also some credibility issues.

Would take a news article with a grain of salt. In fact, I'd give it little to no credibility at all from a legal perspective.

Fact is, a diver was lost a drowned. Standard protocol calls for an instructor in the front and an DM in the back. That didn't happen so the rest is superfluous.

Since beginner divers drowning has unfortunately happened numerous times in the past, the result of this case will mostly likely follow past precedents.

 

[CuzzA]

Would take a news article with a grain of salt. In fact, I'd give it little to no credibility at all from a legal perspective.

Fact is, a diver was lost a drowned. Standard protocol calls for an instructor in the front and an DM in the back. That didn't happen so the rest is superfluous.

Since beginner divers drowning has unfortunately happened numerous times in the past, the result of this case will mostly likely follow past precedents.

I agree.

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

Would take a news article with a grain of salt. In fact, I'd give it little to no credibility at all from a legal perspective.

Fact is, a diver was lost a drowned. Standard protocol calls for an instructor in the front and an DM in the back. That didn't happen so the rest is superfluous.

Since beginner divers drowning has unfortunately happened numerous times in the past, the result of this case will mostly likely follow past precedents.

The PADI video I show DSD participants (we do them in a pool here) shows the instructor/AI essentially holding onto two participants. And that is in ideal conditions. I can't see how anyone could have more than that and maintain constant control.

 

[tursiops]

Standard protocol calls for an instructor in the front and an DM in the back.

?? Why do you think this is standard protocol?