Opinions on whether LDS is being fair?

[AmyJ]

Hi there... Which LDS are you at, if I may inquire... we have worked with 3 in the area and of course have opinions. During my OW I had ear problems, couldn't finish the pool work, and although I don't like that LDS for a multitude of reasons, but that is not one of them... They let me come back and have private pool time for my last session I don't THINK I had to pay anything (or maybe I did have to pay a small fee) ... but I can check with my SO who is more likely to remember. However, I was still able to finish in a couple of weeks since we were headed out and had scheduled our check out dives in Mexico. And I didn't have to wait months, just a week or so until the Dr. cleared me. 3 hours and counting (playa del Carmen!! )

 

[StSomewhere]

If it were me, I'd finish my OW course with them (if that was the least expensive route), and then leave it at telling the LDS/instructor one more time that I didn't think they were being fair with me, period. Then I'd -- quietly -- take my business for large purchases elsewhere.

Life is long, and people change, so do their situations. It may feel good in the short-term to be able to say "nah nah nah nah, I bought all my gear elsewhere" but what if you wind up needing that LDS or trainer for something in the long run? None of us can see the future.

 

[Kestrell]

Sounds like bull.

My LDS (Dudas Diving Duds) would never do that; especially since the lesson was missed due to a medical reason.

 

[Mako Mark]

When I first read this post, my reaction was the same as Roturners..... BS..

But there are some situations where I could see this being warranted.

If the equipment rental is NOT included in the course fee and David took it out of the store to the dive site, then used or not, he rented the gear, therefore needs to rent it again.

If there is some fee for the dive site that has already been paid even though David didnt dive, it needs to be paid again.

If there is NO extra costs for the LDS, and the rental was included, then there should be no reason to charge extra to complete a course that has been already paid for in full, unless extra or remedial training is added.

I would politely ask the owner to break down the additional expenses for you, if he can give you a rational financial reason, accept it and move on, if not, come to Cancun, and I will finish your course for a hundred bucks in the sunny carribean.

 

[opiniongirl]

Eh? Am I missing something here? On which planet is the instructor/LDS to blame for a barotrauma to the ears? Has it been established that the instructor helped bring on the barotrauma by descending too fast or whatever? If indeed it was a barotrauma, which we don't know because the orginal poster hasn't provided us with that info.

Customer service is fine, postponing dives for medical reasons is inevitable, but don't go overboard with the whole customer service concept. Advising someone to use an injury for which no-one is to blame as leverage reeks of blackmail.

I'm not saying I agree with the LDS's attitude here, and objectively speaking - based on the only side of the story we've heard - in this case the customer is right.

Thing is: blackmail is just plain wrong...

Blackmail?

Thing is, if a student suffers an ear injury while in a course - where was the instructor? The only time I hear of ear injuries (apart from ear infections) are when the instructor failed to properly supervise a beginner's decent. Different if the diver is certified - but an ear injury is like any other diving injury sustained during an OW class.

That is not blackmail, and if this diver were a family member or relative, I would definitely be looking into the facility for their supervision on the day of that dive. I have never had a student injury in my career, including ear injury. As an instructor, you know how barotraumas are caused - and having a student do an uncontrolled decent causing a barotrauma "reeks" of poor supervision.

The facility, by the statements made, sounds unprofessional at best. The instructors comments (although not complete, it does give a picture of the conversation) hardly give concern to the injury sustained.

I don't need a lecture, and offense taken for the accusation that I was suggesting blackmail.

 

[FatCat]

I don't need a lecture, and offense taken for the accusation that I was suggesting blackmail.

Actually you do need a lecture. One on personal responsibility and one on examining facts.

First off, let's tackle the facts issue. Nowhere in the original post is there any statement indicating that the suspected barotrauma was due to poor supervision. Given the content of the post, we just don't know. We don't know if it was a barotrauma or if it was a bad case of swimmer's ear. It could have been caused by a presymptomatic cold, presymptomatic sinusitis, an outer ear eczema, forceful clearing, whatever. We just don't know.

Personally, I have had symptoms resembling those of a barotrauma which were in fact caused by a waterlogged ear canal due to eczema buildup. I have had one OWD student leave the water with barotrauma-like symptoms due to excessively forceful clearing during an easy and controlled descent. There was no barotrauma found at the subsequent medical examination, just mild irritation. Some people's pain threshold is lower than average. As an instructor I can not gauge how forcefully someone clears. I can only monitor the descent and verify the act of clearing.

We don't know in what circumstances the first two dives were concluded. We don't know what the descents were like. Were they midwater descents with or without visual reference? Or were they descents following the slope of the bottom?

Are you noticing a pattern here? WE DON'T KNOW!

You gave advice on a liability issue where there is no evidence of liability.

Now for the personal responsibility issue. The subject matter of equalizing, the techniques for equalizing, of diving with airway infections, of breaking off a dive when unable to equalize is covered extensively in each and every dive manual. It is repeated during classroom sessions. It is repeated in confined water briefings. It is repeated in open water briefings.

You'd suspect that the student knows what to do, wouldn't you? If I were to have damaged my ears by performing an excessively forceful valsalva maneuvre, I wouldn't dream of trying to shift blame. I'd take responsibility for my own actions. But then again, I don't live in a litigious society. Over here we don't run to the court every time we stub our toe on someone's doorstep.

But again, we don't know what caused the symptoms. What we do know is that the instructor forbade the student to dive unless a medical examination had taken place and a medical release form was presented. What else do you expect by way of care?

The orginal poster doesn't even give us the time interval between the second and third dives. We can infer from his statement that he "showed up for the third dive" that there was at least an evening and a night's interval between the two dives. Time enough to consult a doctor about the ear problem.

But again: we don't know. We don't know if the original poster even mentioned the ear problem to the instructor after the second dive. It isn't in his post.

You can huff and puff all you like, it doesn't change the fact that you jumped to a conclusion without knowing all the facts.

 

[alcina]

And the original poster has not been back here to provide more information from his side of things to answer some of the questions that have been raised so that his original question "is it 'fair'" can more objectively be answered.
Two points that I see are:
- gear included in cost or extra fee
- showed up for dive that had to be paid for in advance, then didn't dive

Regardless, perhaps talking to the store and finding out exactly what has been covered with payment and what is now expected then negotiating a solution would be the best bet. You may find that there are palatable reasons that simply have not been explained very well.

If the store is being unreasonable in your eyes, then go elsewhere. Let your money talk.

 

[MikeFerrara]

Are you saying that you agree with the shop's handling of this, Mike? I can see charging extra for extra training and/or extra flexibility but only if it's something that the student can control. What do you think?

R..

I guess I'm saying that it depends on what was agreed on when the class was sold.

Why would extra charges only come in to play if it's something that the student can control? Have you ever baught one of those non-exchangeable, non-refundable airline tickets? The plane flies. If you're there...great but if not you still pay so the plane can fly. A concert ticket? If you get a flat tire on the way they don't wait for you and they don't give you your money back even though it's not your fault. Your seat is there waiting for you though.

If the situation isn't in the shops control either then why should they foot the bill? It's one thing if something comes up in advance and the shop has a chance to try to schedule around it but if a person takes up a spot in more than one class it costs somebody money.

I don't know where this class was but I think some folks figure the shop is ging to be diving anyway and they always have room so it doesn't cost anything extra. Around here you travel a couple of hours, often use hotels and have meals on the road...and just getting there costs a fortune. You pay to get your assistants into the park and cover their breathing gas. A weekend of OW easily costs a couple hundred bucks cash not to mention the time. If a diver is sick, has car trouble or whatever who can afford to just toss that in as a gift? I used to spend several weekends each season doing nothing but make-ups. I'll be that before I changed my practices I easily spent over 25% of my OW teaching time doing make ups. In the classroom I'll bet it was more like 50%. I can't even count the times I had a class of six where every one needed a special schedule (at the last minute of course) and I taught the class 6 times. As a business you can either charge for that service up front so you can afford to do it (in which case every one pays) or you can charge only those who need the service. Which is fair? If you just don't charge for it then it's charity which is fine if you can afford it.


However it's handled, though, it should be stated up front.

 

[jbd]

However it's handled, though, it should be stated up front.

This may be what the over all problem is in this case. I would bet that many issues between shops/instructors and the clients/customers is a lack of full disclosure.

 

[opiniongirl]

Actually you do need a lecture. One on personal responsibility and one on examining facts.

First off, let's tackle the facts issue. Nowhere in the original post is there any statement indicating that the suspected barotrauma was due to poor supervision. Given the content of the post, we just don't know. We don't know if it was a barotrauma or if it was a bad case of swimmer's ear. It could have been caused by a presymptomatic cold, presymptomatic sinusitis, an outer ear eczema, forceful clearing, whatever. We just don't know.

Personally, I have had symptoms resembling those of a barotrauma which were in fact caused by a waterlogged ear canal due to eczema buildup. I have had one OWD student leave the water with barotrauma-like symptoms due to excessively forceful clearing during an easy and controlled descent. There was no barotrauma found at the subsequent medical examination, just mild irritation. Some people's pain threshold is lower than average. As an instructor I can not gauge how forcefully someone clears. I can only monitor the descent and verify the act of clearing.

We don't know in what circumstances the first two dives were concluded. We don't know what the descents were like. Were they midwater descents with or without visual reference? Or were they descents following the slope of the bottom?

Are you noticing a pattern here? WE DON'T KNOW!

You gave advice on a liability issue where there is no evidence of liability.

Now for the personal responsibility issue. The subject matter of equalizing, the techniques for equalizing, of diving with airway infections, of breaking off a dive when unable to equalize is covered extensively in each and every dive manual. It is repeated during classroom sessions. It is repeated in confined water briefings. It is repeated in open water briefings.

You'd suspect that the student knows what to do, wouldn't you? If I were to have damaged my ears by performing an excessively forceful valsalva maneuvre, I wouldn't dream of trying to shift blame. I'd take responsibility for my own actions. But then again, I don't live in a litigious society. Over here we don't run to the court every time we stub our toe on someone's doorstep.

But again, we don't know what caused the symptoms. What we do know is that the instructor forbade the student to dive unless a medical examination had taken place and a medical release form was presented. What else do you expect by way of care?

The orginal poster doesn't even give us the time interval between the second and third dives. We can infer from his statement that he "showed up for the third dive" that there was at least an evening and a night's interval between the two dives. Time enough to consult a doctor about the ear problem.

But again: we don't know. We don't know if the original poster even mentioned the ear problem to the instructor after the second dive. It isn't in his post.

You can huff and puff all you like, it doesn't change the fact that you jumped to a conclusion without knowing all the facts.

Retract the claws...

Perhaps I am biased, and perhaps I did jump to a conclusion. That dosen't warrant an accusation of blackmail, nor your condecending tone. Sounded like classic symptoms of middle ear squeeze to me, and his impression of how they handled it and what happened makes my blood boil.

My student who was prevented from finishing her OW due to a trip to the ER (now figured to be carbon monoxide poisoning) didn't get a refund either - she's medically prohibited from diving due to the stores gross negligence. I advised HER to do the same.

We're not considered litigous in Canada, so the comment about running to the courts is unwarranted. But come to Vancouver sometime, and you'll see divers getting injured due to standards violations, negligence, and absolutely abhorrent practices.

After being involved in several rescues, shaking my head at what goes on sometimes, and witnessing a senseless student death last year, the year before, and the year before - I've become an advocate that the only thing that'll shape up our industry here IS the fear of litigation. Perhaps then facilities and instructors won't be placing innocent lives in jeopardy because they're cheap or lazy.

Sure, it could've been exzema, or something else, but the symptoms described sound like a classic middle ear squeeze, and the facility was still being unfair and unprofessional in their handling.

And I'll huff and puff (even if it results in accusations of being litigous) until sloppiness isn't such an obvious factor in student injuries (at least here).