|
tobin_kelly
Nov 13, 2006, 6:26 PM
Post #1 of 53
(13885 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 2, 2003
Posts: 28
|
Has there ever been a case of someone having an accident on a crag caused by bolt-failure and then taking legal action? In the USA or abroad? I know it is an issue people worry about hypothetically but has it ever actually happened?
|
|
|
|
|
redpoint73
Nov 13, 2006, 6:30 PM
Post #2 of 53
(13875 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 20, 2002
Posts: 1717
|
Haven't heard of one, but just a thought:
It would be pretty hard to prove that the person actually bolted the route. As long as its not at a place like Hueco, where you have to apply/register before you bolt a route, there is no documentation of bolting at most crags. You can easily plea "I didn't do it".
|
|
|
|
|
drfelatio
Nov 13, 2006, 6:34 PM
Post #3 of 53
(13862 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 16, 2004
Posts: 475
|
Could you sue the landowner?
|
|
|
|
|
abtisme
Nov 13, 2006, 6:50 PM
Post #4 of 53
(13848 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 50
|
i would like to say that you couldn't sue the landowner, but i'm sure you could.
i know a guy who left his garage door open when he was out of town and a neighbor girl walked into his garage and took a skooter out. (without permission) the skooter was broken and she fell off of it and broke her arm. her parents then sued him and won because he had a broken skooter that their daughter stole and hurt herself on.
woohoo american justice!
-aaron
|
|
|
|
|
breaksnclimbs
Nov 13, 2006, 7:08 PM
Post #5 of 53
(13823 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 9, 2003
Posts: 203
|
Rock Climbing IS NOT SAFE. Don't do it. If you do do it and get hurt, don't blame someone else for YOUR poor judment. If the bolt was sketch, you might not have wanted to climb any further. Even attempting to sue a landowner for your inability to assess risk will make access issues WORSE for the climbing community!!
|
|
|
|
|
krusher4
Nov 13, 2006, 7:16 PM
Post #6 of 53
(13808 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 17, 2005
Posts: 997
|
Yeah! That's how to keep access sue land owners.
|
|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Nov 13, 2006, 8:09 PM
Post #7 of 53
(13772 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087
|
I would like to think that not many serious climbers would be so dumb as to sue the FA or the land-owner, for a bolt that failed, but unfortunately I can't be sure of that.
All I know, if a suit like that ever came about, half of the climbing areas would get closed in a hurry, and the rest of them will make you sign a liability waiver, show proof of insurance, and will start charging steep fees to cover the full-time stuff members that would replace the bolts on the regular basis... Come to think of it, it would be less hassle to just close the area for climbing...
|
|
|
|
|
fluxus
Nov 13, 2006, 10:30 PM
Post #8 of 53
(13691 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 3, 2003
Posts: 947
|
This was one of the arguments that was used against bolting in the Gunk back in the late 1980's that if it was allowed, the land owners would be liable for any accidents resulting from harwear failures. Completely bogus argument considering the context.
Anyway, I've know of a few bolts failing here and there, but in none of the cases was the climber injured. I think in states that put such cases in front of juries anything could happen. If you want to scare yourself, read the liability case law for the state you live in. Its an eye opener.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Nov 13, 2006, 10:53 PM
Post #9 of 53
(13661 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
In reply to: Has there ever been a case of someone having an accident on a crag caused by bolt-failure and then taking legal action? In the USA or abroad? I know it is an issue people worry about hypothetically but has it ever actually happened?
Not that I've heard about. Are there really people out there clipping bolts who don't understand that bolt failure is an inherent risk? Ugh!
|
|
|
|
|
jmeizis
Nov 13, 2006, 11:24 PM
Post #10 of 53
(13614 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2006
Posts: 635
|
I would think that any lawyer with half a brain would argue that the possibility of bolt failure is par of the field and the climber accepted the risks when they clipped the first bolt (or set food on the land). Now on the other hand if the bolt placer did a poor job outside of what we would consider normal standards then they could be held liable. There is the unfortunate possibility that the landowner could be held liable though depending on their relation to the land.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Nov 13, 2006, 11:42 PM
Post #11 of 53
(13591 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
You might ask the dude who opened the "Hike for $$$" Via Ferrata in W Virgina about this... cause I think the answer is WAY UGLY, in that yes, most assuredly you *could* be sued for placing bad bolts.
So, don't do it.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
fancyclaps
Nov 13, 2006, 11:46 PM
Post #12 of 53
(13579 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 23, 2005
Posts: 210
|
I dont think anyone has answered his question, and because I am interested as well, hopefully I can get the thread back on track.
The issue here is not as much liability and lawsuits, but more specifically are there are any cases of bolt failure which resulted in legal action.
Carry on.
(This post was edited by fancyclaps on Nov 13, 2006, 11:48 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
flamer
Nov 13, 2006, 11:53 PM
Post #13 of 53
(13565 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 2955
|
I would think no under the same rules that apply to chopping them....technically after a certain time(72hrs?) bolts are considered "abandoned property". Well on public lands anyway.
Same reasoning about chopping bolts...you can't get in trouble because the installer doesn't "own" them any more.....
josh
|
|
|
|
|
jmeizis
Nov 13, 2006, 11:59 PM
Post #14 of 53
(13562 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2006
Posts: 635
|
Ok, being that I have a fancy law school database at my disposal I've skipped reading about contract liability and subject matter jurisdiction to search for cases about bolts  . I searched for "bolt failure" & "climb!" on Westlaw and I found two cases, neither of them having to do with rock climbing. I'm gonna guess there aren't any cases. Then again if people wanna generate search terms for me, i'll happily plug them into the search engine since I can't seem to get any better use out of it  .
(This post was edited by jmeizis on Nov 14, 2006, 12:05 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Nov 14, 2006, 8:21 AM
Post #15 of 53
(13501 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
try something like "gear failure" and "climbing". that should generate some results, though it wont be just bolt failures.
anyway, i havent heard of such a lawsuit, but then again, here youd be laughed out of the court.
|
|
|
|
|
microbarn
Nov 14, 2006, 12:59 PM
Post #16 of 53
(13446 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 12, 2004
Posts: 5920
|
I have only heard the story after it ran through the rumor mill, but I understand that Woodland Walls in West Virginia is closed because of this.
The version I heard:
Someone fell and died while climbing. His parents didn't understand that injury is an inherent risk. They sued the land owners. The parents and land owners settled out of court, and now they don't allow climbing on their land. The land owners used to allow people to park their car in their parking lots. Now there is a fence and security guard sometimes.
That being said, I know a lot of people still go there to climb.
Nelson's Rock, WV is closed in part because of the fear that people might get hurt on their land.
(This post was edited by microbarn on Nov 14, 2006, 5:44 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
ja1484
Nov 14, 2006, 5:27 PM
Post #17 of 53
(13392 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 11, 2006
Posts: 1935
|
Bottom line:
Rock climbing is a voluntary activity with an inherent risk. Risk can be minimized, but not eliminated. Should you be on the recieving end of that risk, you are ultimately liable due to your decision to participate in the sport.
If you enjoy skeet shooting and accidentally shoot your own leg, do you get to sue Remington?
|
|
|
|
|
coolklimber
Nov 15, 2006, 1:07 AM
Post #18 of 53
(13348 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 9, 2006
Posts: 299
|
Its up to you to check the bolt before you use it. Climbing is a dangerous sport. If you don't want to take the risk: Top rope.
|
|
|
|
|
ihategrigris
Nov 15, 2006, 1:50 AM
Post #19 of 53
(13307 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 6, 2005
Posts: 757
|
In reply to: I would like to think that not many serious climbers would be so dumb as to sue the FA or the land-owner, for a bolt that failed, but unfortunately I can't be sure of that. All I know, if a suit like that ever came about, half of the climbing areas would get closed in a hurry, and the rest of them will make you sign a liability waiver, show proof of insurance, and will start charging steep fees to cover the full-time stuff members that would replace the bolts on the regular basis... Come to think of it, it would be less hassle to just close the area for climbing...
I think the biggest threat is the family of a climber who died due to failiure sueing a landowner. They're the most likely to be ignorant of climbing safety and inherent risk.
|
|
|
|
|
moose_droppings
Nov 15, 2006, 2:37 AM
Post #20 of 53
(13276 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 7, 2005
Posts: 3371
|
Just to invoke some thoughts on this issue;
If I'm the FA and bolted this route, by leaving them there am I not inviting others to "clip them" and try "my route"?
Some where further up the post someone replied that one could just deny putting in the bolts. How does this pan out in respect to the FA having the right to say how the route gets climbed or retrobolted? In other words, is it his route if all is good, but when something bad happens its not his route?
I don't think for a minute that one should fully trust any hardware left on the wall, but could an attorney convince a jury that bolted sport routes are intended to be clipped with a reasonable amount of trust and are put in to minimize the risk of climbing?
I agree 100% that climbing is an inherently dangerous sport and one must take responsibility for their own actions.
(This post was edited by moose_droppings on Nov 15, 2006, 2:42 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Nov 15, 2006, 4:12 PM
Post #21 of 53
(13239 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087
|
In reply to: I think the biggest threat is the family of a climber who died due to failiure sueing a landowner. They're the most likely to be ignorant of climbing safety and inherent risk.
True!
|
|
|
|
|
desertdude420
Nov 15, 2006, 4:38 PM
Post #22 of 53
(13223 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 20, 2006
Posts: 294
|
Anyone suing the person who placed a fixed anchor (either faulty or bomber), should be dragged out into the street and shot! Life on earth is dangerous! Climbing is even more dangerous! What if you pulled a hold off a highball boulder problem and decked? Would you sue the landowner for possessing a defective boulder? Pointing fingers every time something doesn't perfectly to plan is a serious character flaw!
|
|
|
|
|
drfelatio
Nov 15, 2006, 4:44 PM
Post #23 of 53
(13218 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 16, 2004
Posts: 475
|
In reply to: Bottom line: Rock climbing is a voluntary activity with an inherent risk. Risk can be minimized, but not eliminated. Should you be on the recieving end of that risk, you are ultimately liable due to your decision to participate in the sport. If you enjoy skeet shooting and accidentally shoot your own leg, do you get to sue Remington?
Did Remington produce a faulty product that led to your accident?
Don't get me wrong, I agree with most of your assertion. Were I to get injured climbing, I wouldn't take legal action against the bolter or the landowner so long as there isn't some form of gross negligence on their part. Say a bolt fails because it was installed improperly or something. On the surface it looks fine, but underneath it may not be as stong as it could/should be. I dunno, just thinking hypothetically really and trying to play Devil's Advocate here. Basically what I'm trying to say is, what if a failure occurs that I could not have forseen? A failure beyond the scope of acceptable risk? Whose liable?
I understand that, for the most part, I am ultimately responsible for my own safety when it comes to rock climbing. And again, unless there was some gross negligence or some malice intended, I wouldn't even think of taking legal action, but unfortunately there are people out there that would. Our legal system says that they deserve their day in court like anyone else.
Sorry to keep going off-topic.
|
|
|
|
|
tobin_kelly
Nov 15, 2006, 5:12 PM
Post #24 of 53
(13184 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 2, 2003
Posts: 28
|
Thanks for the database search. I suppose being strictly statistical that the riskiest moment for an incident that could spark litigation may be at the 20 year plus point where a bolt may still look somewhat safe but may be badly rusted or placement impaired underneath. Given that US sport climbing had only just begun 20 years ago maybe it is too early to judge whether this is a real issue or not?
Context point: Like others on this thread I subscribe utterly to the 'at your own risk' view of climbing and am revolted at the idea that any climber might sue another. I'm thinking about this purely from the perspective of the bolter. Maybe, to be totally prudent, guidebooks should never record the name of the original equippers of sport routes?
|
|
|
|
|
ja1484
Nov 15, 2006, 5:30 PM
Post #25 of 53
(13166 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 11, 2006
Posts: 1935
|
In reply to: Say a bolt fails because it was installed improperly or something. On the surface it looks fine, but underneath it may not be as stong as it could/should be. I dunno, just thinking hypothetically really and trying to play Devil's Advocate here. Basically what I'm trying to say is, what if a failure occurs that I could not have forseen? A failure beyond the scope of acceptable risk? Whose liable?
Even properly installed, nice'n'shiny new bolts can be worthless after one season. No, you don't get to take action against an improperly installed bolt (or bolter, rather), or against someone who makes bolts if the bolt was mank.
Gear manufacturers have this little thing called disclaimers: i.e. "By using this product you agree not to hold us accountable for anything bad that happens, including gear failure."
There is no implied "good faith" contract with anyone who bolts a climb. It's a use-at-your-own-risk situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
