Judge rules-Abandoned diver can sue charter company

[DanBMW]

I am not an attorney and have not read through all of the threads, but if this were in Florida, I think the "victim" would have to prove damages and sunburn from 4 hours of exposure is not damages. He and his attorney are simply hoping for a settlement, and I hope there is none. Only his estate, and lucky for him, it is not his estate, would really have a claim. He did not die, only got an extended tour of the surface. He should be glad that he was rescued and leave it at that. Four hours adrift, give me a break! The boat learned it's lesson and diving is now safer.

 

[Oside Jimc]

But most importantly the Boat and captain are top notch and very well liked!

Popularity != safety, if they were a top notch operation they would have known a diver was in the water and not moved on to the next site.

I know a lot of people who not just support him, but went to bat for him with the Coast Guard!

The Captain should have lost his license, simple fact. It should not have been permanent, just a few months to remind him that safety is his top priority.

I am telling you this was the DM!

And I'm telling you the untimate responsibility is the boat Captain's alone. No doubt the DM was a major contributing factor (along with the knucklehead that answered for the diver a roll call), but in the end the Captain sets and enforces procedures on the boat.

Many divers would be standing beside the captain to protect him and the operation!

Then they are clueless about how ruthless the sea is in punishing the unprepared. The rules that hold the Captain ultimately reponsible have been developed over centuries of experience by professional seamen, with the rules written in the blood of many dead men. Through my long personal association with the San Diego long range sportfishing fleet I have seen time and again the sea's unrelenting desire to kill you.

If this Captain had established proper procedures and enforced them then there would be multiple levels of checks such as verifying not only a "here", but making visual contact with the responder, then checking for the number of tanks with regs/BCs attatched, then maybe move to the next site.

Probably good this was a career ender for the DM, she sounds unsuitable for the job, but the Captain needs to grow some balls and take responsibility for his failings in this incident, then move on and be a better, wiser Captain for the experience.

 

[MaxBottomtime]

Before this thread gets too far off track, I'll remind everyone of a few of the original statements by Dan Carlock after the trip.
1. He had only been certified for a year or two and hadn't dived in over six months. He had no business signing up for a trip to the rigs. They are ten miles offshore and 250-800 feet deep. Dives are conducted live-boat. You are dropped off near the rigs and are instructed to stay within the legs of the platform. All ascents and descents are made in the same location. When a few divers are together at the location, the boat will come close enough for them to swim to it.

2. He didn't have a dive buddy. He planned to follow a group of three divers, including the shop's instructor.

3. When he had trouble clearing he ascended several feet. He did not alert the other divers. After finally being able to clear, he descended to 108 feet but couldn't find the divers nor the rigs. Rather than surface, he made a three minute safety stop with no rig in sight.

4. As he surfaced he said he was 400 yards down current. He saw the boat and signalled, but was too far away to be heard. Rather than swim toward the boat, he said he assumed they would come for him when they noticed he was missing. He made several mistakes on a dive he was not qualified to make. Neither the other divers, DM nor Captain were responsible for Dan becoming lost.

The Divemaster, Zack Araneta made an incredible blunder by counting him aboard after the dive. I don't recall if someone actually answered for him or not, but as a DM, you need to actually see the person before you count them. After the incorrect roll call, he told the Captain that all were accounted for. They then headed for the next site, the wreck of the Ace One. Somehow Zack compounded his earlier error by counting Dan in the water here. Maybe he saw that Dan and his gear were not onboard and assumed he missed him getting in the water. It wasn't until the final roll call that he was finally noticed as missing and the Coast Guard was called. Eventually, Captain Ray had his ticket pulled for thirty days and the lawsuit, which Dan originally said he would not file was allowed to proceed.

 

[merxlin]

Popularity != safety, if they were a top notch operation they would have known a diver was in the water and not moved on to the next site.

They are still quite successful and well thought of by the dive community. You don't survive an event like this if you aren't a responsible company.

The Captain should have lost his license, simple fact. It should not have been permanent, just a few months to remind him that safety is his top priority.

And he did.

And I'm telling you the untimate responsibility is the boat Captain's alone. No doubt the DM was a major contributing factor (along with the knucklehead that answered for the diver a roll call), but in the end the Captain sets and enforces procedures on the boat...........Then they are clueless about how ruthless the sea is in punishing the unprepared. The rules that hold the Captain ultimately reponsible have been developed over centuries of experience by professional seamen, with the rules written in the blood of many dead men. Through my long personal association with the San Diego long range sportfishing fleet I have seen time and again the sea's unrelenting desire to kill you.........If this Captain had established proper procedures and enforced them then there would be multiple levels of checks such as verifying not only a "here", but making visual contact with the responder, then checking for the number of tanks with regs/BCs attatched, then maybe move to the next site.

Probably good this was a career ender for the DM, she sounds unsuitable for the job, but the Captain needs to grow some balls and take responsibility for his failings in this incident, then move on and be a better, wiser Captain for the experience.

This particular captain is quite familiar with the power of the sea. And the fact is that while this is under litigation the captain and the employees of the dive op and the dive shop that chartered the boat and supplied the DM are not really at liberty to comment, while the plaintiff can hit the talk show circuit, write a book, and put out any info they want. So "growing some balls and taking responsibility" is a bit much. I'm sure if in a similar position you would not just grab you ankles, say "Sorry" and take whatever came down the pike. Thats not the fault of the Dive Op or Captain, that's our legal system at work.

 

[Oside Jimc]

So "growing some balls and taking responsibility" is a bit much. I'm sure if in a similar position you would not just grab you ankles, say "Sorry" and take whatever came down the pike. Thats not the fault of the Dive Op or Captain, that's our legal system at work.

Touche, good point.

 

[c_figaro]

I've been boat diving in Belize and Mexico. I will make sure to keep my eye on the dive master at all times! I don't trust the court system of any country to sort out my affairs if I was left in the ocean.

 

[perdidochas]

Why would they call out the search and rescue if they did a roll call, and it was answered that he was present, as someone said may have been the case. Do you suggest that the DM on board checks drivers licenses and passports before and after each dive? Perhaps we should all have to enter a password into an onboard computer that only we know -- this would prevent someone else from answering for us.

I don't know the details, and am not pretending too, but if it is the case that someone answered he was on board, then there is much less that could have been done to prevent it.

A simple head count would have prevented it.

 

[sea nmf]

I'm sure this has been answered a long time ago, but what doesn't seem to make sense is that he was buddiless (followed 3 other divers) but someone answered present for him? Who would have done that?

 

[nereas]

I'm sure this has been answered a long time ago, but what doesn't seem to make sense is that he was buddiless (followed 3 other divers) but someone answered present for him? Who would have done that?

Last time I was diving in San Diego, I asked about this incident, and it is still the talk of the town.

It is all very similar to an incident that happened in Florida a few years earlier, and in the Florida case, the divers (a husband and wife buddy pair) won the lawsuit.

Usually you expect things like this to take place in Mexico or Fiji. But I guess the USA is not exempt from these kind of SNAFUs either.

 

[merxlin]

I'm sure this has been answered a long time ago, but what doesn't seem to make sense is that he was buddiless (followed 3 other divers) but someone answered present for him? Who would have done that?

From what I understand, he was actually in a buddy group with 2 other divers but lost track of them. He was not diving solo and following a group. I believe one of the other two divers is who answered for him.

We are for the most part a well meaning bunch. Diver "A" think he saw Diver "B' after the dive, maybe going into the head or to the galley. So maybe on the second call of diver "A's" name, he answers for him. I saw two instances of someone answering for another diver just this Sunday. Neither was accepted by the DM who waited for them to answer and do a face to face. Innocent enough as the diver was right behind the one who answered for them, they knew they were there, but many divers don't realize the problem in doing so. These two do now.