I started diving off of starting blocks when I was eight years old. I am now 51, and train at the Y, almost always alone, as there is no Masters program in the county where I live, or in any of the immediately adjacent counties. (There are several age group programs.) I want to work on my starts, but none of the Y's where I swim will let me use the blocks - saying that a national Y policy prohibits anyone from using the blocks unless a team/club coach is on the deck.
I have never heard of anyone suing a YMCA because of an accident on a starting block.
Yes, perhaps a coach would be valuable to me in this regard, but I'm not looking for a coach - I need and want a cooperative facility. The age groups' program schedules are not conducive to my schedule, and besides, the age group coaches already have enough on their hands during those times with lanes full of kids working their programs. I also am not excited about having to dodge those kids to do the work I need to do.
Anyone find a way to conquer this litigation-fear-induced insanity yet? Thank you.
Originally posted by botterud
To Aquageek: I can tell you, however, that cases where there is no insurance tend to resolve much more quickly and efficiently than those where there is an insurance policy. I could explain why, but it would be a treatise.
Please re-read the facts of the case. McDonald's sold coffee at temperature that was not fit for human consumption. McDonald's had notice of multiple injuries from their practice. McDonald's could have paid her medical bills and been done with it, but decided to press the matter to trial.
No treatise needed, it's ultra simple. A company that has no insurance is not subjected to outrageous claims where the plaintiff's bar sues for all they can get. Additionally, the plaintiff's bar knows there's little to no money in these cases so of course they go quickly. A company with no insurance also can't afford to hire quality defense counsel that is provided standard with every insurance policy so it's easier to push them around. From the plaintiff perspective of course they are quick and efficient, no one puts up a fight against ludicrous claims.
I'd also like to know of a single restaurant where you can walk in and chug a cup of coffee fresh from the machine and not burn yourself. I, for one, like my coffee hot and am smart enough to realize this fact and avoid spilling it. Apparently that standard is not universal.
Originally posted by botterud
To Aquageek: I can tell you, however, that cases where there is no insurance tend to resolve much more quickly and efficiently than those where there is an insurance policy. I could explain why, but it would be a treatise.
Please re-read the facts of the case. McDonald's sold coffee at temperature that was not fit for human consumption. McDonald's had notice of multiple injuries from their practice. McDonald's could have paid her medical bills and been done with it, but decided to press the matter to trial.
No treatise needed, it's ultra simple. A company that has no insurance is not subjected to outrageous claims where the plaintiff's bar sues for all they can get. Additionally, the plaintiff's bar knows there's little to no money in these cases so of course they go quickly. A company with no insurance also can't afford to hire quality defense counsel that is provided standard with every insurance policy so it's easier to push them around. From the plaintiff perspective of course they are quick and efficient, no one puts up a fight against ludicrous claims.
I'd also like to know of a single restaurant where you can walk in and chug a cup of coffee fresh from the machine and not burn yourself. I, for one, like my coffee hot and am smart enough to realize this fact and avoid spilling it. Apparently that standard is not universal.
