|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Feb 20, 2008, 5:53 PM
Post #1 of 27
(2644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
From the original report that was published last month,some dude goes to YMCA, climbs up 30 feet on his own and without a belay then while down climbing, he falls.Now , his family is going after YMCA with a lawsuit.
Here is the newest report on his case.I will post additional info as they become publish.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Investigation into YMCA accident continues
Climbing wall remains open
http://www.mtexpress.com/...x2.php?ID=2005119484
Details of an accident that sent 21-year-old Curtis Hopfenbeck tumbling 30 feet to the base of the Wood River YMCA climbing wall have yet to be determined, according to Teresa Beahen, CEO of the YMCA in Ketchum.
The accident, which took place on Friday, Jan. 25, resulted in six cracked vertebrae for Hopfenbeck and a number of questions about what caused the accident that have so far gone unanswered.
Beahen said she is awaiting a report, but is not at liberty to discuss any of the details of the accident, as recommended by the YMCA's attorney. She did not say when the investigation would be completed.
Likewise, Paul Hopfenbeck, the victim's father, said the family's attorney has also instructed them to keep details under wraps until the situation is worked out.
Beahen said the climbing wall has remained open, except for the route that Curtis fell from last month.
After Curtis fell, the YMCA staff called an ambulance, which transported him to St. Luke's Wood River Medical Center.
The YMCA, like other fitness center managers, employs waivers and releases, risk management services and liability insurance.
YMCA of USA requires that members and guests sign a waiver releasing the 168-year-old organization from responsibility in case of an accident and agreeing not to sue "on account of injury to the person or property or resulting in death."
|
|
|
|
|
Sirwoofalot
Feb 20, 2008, 5:58 PM
Post #2 of 27
(2627 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2008
Posts: 2
|
I was at a local gym in the boldering room and took a nasty fall. No, I did not sue. No, I will not sue. If I get on the wall then it is my responsibility to not hurt myself. Climbing is a dangerous activity. KNOW YOUR LIMITS!
|
|
|
|
|
boymeetsrock
Feb 20, 2008, 6:15 PM
Post #4 of 27
(2572 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 11, 2005
Posts: 1709
|
majid_sabet wrote: climbs up 30 feet on his own and without a belay then while down climbing, he falls.
Where did you get this ^^ part Majid. I read the 30' stuff but there was no mention of the injured climber not having a belay (although there was no mention of him having a belay either).
Based on Majid's info this sounds like another case of Gross Negligence on the part of a climber. The lack of personal responsibility in the climbing community (and "adventure" community in general) is disgusting.
Seriously people... Its your life and it is in your own hands.
I certainly understand a law suite resulting from product failure or even mismanagement from the Y. But if the guy climbed 30 feet up with no rope.... then he made his own bed, and he can lie in it. (no pun intended)
It'll be interesting to see where this goes.
|
|
|
|
|
durangoclimber
Feb 20, 2008, 6:18 PM
Post #5 of 27
(2565 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2008
Posts: 179
|
I think the gym should sue the climber. Maybe then people would take this climbing thing seriously.
|
|
|
|
|
kriso9tails
Feb 20, 2008, 7:05 PM
Post #6 of 27
(2506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2001
Posts: 7772
|
I have heard of the odd case of people suing climbing gyms. I'm sure there are some legitimate suits, but those I've heard about largely placed the fault with the patrons and not the gym. YMCA gyms that I'm aware of are often a little sketchy in terms of teaching and enforcing safety standards. Without knowing the details of the accident, it's impossible for me to say who is most liable here.
I don't get why gyms (or their legal representatives) refer to it as a 'waiver'. You don't really waive anything, just acknowledge a certain level of personal liability. I have seen gyms put 'equipment failure' in their waivers. I asked if that meant my equipment or theirs, to which they said 'any equipment'. Yeah, good luck with that in court - if your anchor busts, you're still on the hook.
Typically, I stand by my word, but in this case I think people are being ridiculous. Regardless of what I signed, if a gym costs me money due to their negligence then I expect compensation equal to the amount I was cost (not more, not less).
It's not so likely this would come up for me.
(This post was edited by kriso9tails on Feb 20, 2008, 7:13 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
happiegrrrl
Feb 20, 2008, 7:11 PM
Post #7 of 27
(2489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 4660
|
DurangoClimber - That's very funny. I think I will take it from here.....
|
|
|
|
|
durangoclimber
Feb 20, 2008, 7:49 PM
Post #8 of 27
(2408 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2008
Posts: 179
|
I wasn't trying to be funny. I managed a gym in the Dallas area for 4.5 years before moving to Durango. There are tons of people who are just oblivious to reality. Even when you make them sign a VERY extensive waiver, give them tons of training, monitor them, they still find ways to do stupid shit. Sometimes I just wish climbing wouldn't/hadn't become so "mainstream". Just my two cents. I just hate it when people don't take responsibility for their own actions. Hey !! Maybe rescue beacons for gym climbers would be a good idea. One where we could wire it to their brains and when the shit is about to hit the fan.....the beacon can trigger a full scale rescue. Now I am onto something here. Guess I better call the inventors submission hotline.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Feb 20, 2008, 7:50 PM
Post #9 of 27
(2403 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
cracklover wrote: majid_sabet wrote: From the original report that was published last month,some dude goes to YMCA, climbs up 30 feet on his own and without a belay then while down climbing, he falls.Now , his family is going after YMCA with a lawsuit. From what "original report"? Can you please cite your source? None of the reports I found online said anything like the above. GO
Go
The first report came last month but I did not want to post it cause I thought this dude is not going to to do anything but then I read that YMCA hired some climbing expert to come and investigate and shortly after this report came. I have to find the original report which I am sure it is out there but I deleted off my email.
|
|
|
|
|
jimo
Feb 22, 2008, 1:19 AM
Post #10 of 27
(2224 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 21, 2005
Posts: 79
|
m_s, could you please provide a detailed, full color diagram complete with lines and arrows for this scenario, it would be much easier to comprehend.
btw, I'd like to sue my gym because the bouldering cave smells like ass, I think I have a good case!
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Feb 22, 2008, 1:48 AM
Post #11 of 27
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
durangoclimber wrote: I think the gym should sue the climber. Maybe then people would take this climbing thing seriously.
I think thats a hell of an idea. He is causing them extreme mental distress through his negligence.
|
|
|
|
|
chilli
Feb 22, 2008, 2:05 AM
Post #12 of 27
(2168 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2007
Posts: 401
|
this is great news! i sued my gym because i decided to get my belayer to give me some slack (about 50ft) so i could jump from one wall to another. as far as i'm concerned it's the gym's fault for not specifically telling me that it was a bad idea to try spiderman tricks while not on an effective belay. they should have super-high tech surveillance at all times and have a billion staff people telling me what i should and shouldn't do! otherwise how will i know what's a good idea?!
anyway, as it turns out, they're not filthy rich, so i just sued for free climbing for life. it's cool except they make me wear a neck brace, water-wings, a padded helmet, and a flak-jacket just in case. they kind of get in the way, but i NEED this monetary compensation to make up for the pain and suffering of them not telling me that maybe there might be some danger when i'm 30ft up and not thinking about what may not be a good idea.
well, i'm going to go pull some more plastic with no regard for the potential danger. maybe my family can make some money from it this time! oh boy!
|
|
|
|
|
Hennessey
Feb 23, 2008, 6:19 AM
Post #13 of 27
(2011 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 3, 2007
Posts: 595
|
The only way I would sue my gym is if the whole climbing wall just buckled and fell on me.
Nah, I couldn't sue my gym because than I would have nowhere to train or climb when the weather was shitty outside. Plus, isn't that why they have you sign your life away in all those waivers?
|
|
|
|
|
josephgdawson
Feb 23, 2008, 6:39 AM
Post #14 of 27
(2006 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 20, 2004
Posts: 303
|
I am going to sue my gym for the mental anguish I have suffered stemming from all of the routes they are responsible for putting up that I cannot flash.
|
|
|
|
|
moditup
Feb 23, 2008, 9:27 AM
Post #15 of 27
(1971 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2006
Posts: 221
|
josephgdawson wrote: I am going to sue my gym for the mental anguish I have suffered stemming from all of the routes they are responsible for putting up that I cannot flash.
Ironically, he'd probably have a better claim if suing for this (if he can show real injury) than just falling, unless the attendants were drunk or all on break or something.
|
|
|
|
|
acorneau
Feb 23, 2008, 6:44 PM
Post #17 of 27
(1857 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2008
Posts: 2889
|
southtxtraveler wrote: Theres nothing better than a high school kid whose had the four hour orientation trying to stop you from belaying a climber on the wall because a belay loop is not strong enough, and you need to thread that biner through both points.
Old habits (aka: Dogma) sure die hard. It's just a matter of bringing people up to speed on the newest information.
|
|
|
|
|
southtxtraveler
Feb 23, 2008, 9:40 PM
Post #18 of 27
(1810 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2005
Posts: 41
|
Hey Allen, you gonna be at reimers next weekend?
|
|
|
|
|
acorneau
Feb 23, 2008, 10:48 PM
Post #19 of 27
(1780 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2008
Posts: 2889
|
southtxtraveler wrote: Hey Allen, you gonna be at reimers next weekend?
Unfortunately, no, but I'll be out at Erock the Saturday after (March 8th).
Enjoy the Limestoner without me!
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Feb 27, 2008, 4:32 PM
Post #20 of 27
(1617 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
majid_sabet wrote: cracklover wrote: majid_sabet wrote: From the original report that was published last month,some dude goes to YMCA, climbs up 30 feet on his own and without a belay then while down climbing, he falls.Now , his family is going after YMCA with a lawsuit. From what "original report"? Can you please cite your source? None of the reports I found online said anything like the above. GO Go The first report came last month but I did not want to post it cause I thought this dude is not going to to do anything but then I read that YMCA hired some climbing expert to come and investigate and shortly after this report came. I have to find the original report which I am sure it is out there but I deleted off my email.
Okay, so how about it? Because if this isn't real, then *you* should be prepared to be sued for libel (or slander, I can never keep them straight). You stated "facts" about the case that I suspect you made up, and that could seriously slant a jury's verdict on the case.
You need to either put up or shut up. Either cite your source, or retract your BS (and seriously consider the implications before the next time you do this nonsense.)
GO
|
|
|
|
|
roy_hinkley_jr
Feb 27, 2008, 5:17 PM
Post #21 of 27
(1579 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2005
Posts: 652
|
As much as GO loves to bash on Majid, the original post was essentially correct. The fallen climber was not being belayed by anyone or an autobelayer and he apparently wasn't attached to a rope on the ground. But part of the reason for the lawsuit is because the lawyers won't allow the YMCA to say anything.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Feb 27, 2008, 7:35 PM
Post #22 of 27
(1539 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
roy_hinkley_jr wrote: As much as GO loves to bash on Majid
Huh? I enjoy his posts. Maybe you're thinking of someone else. But I draw the line at people (anyone, not specifically majid) claiming to be able to speak about details in serious accidents when they weren't there. Such statements go far beyond the general talking shit on the net we like to do, and can have real lasting impact.
In reply to: the original post was essentially correct. The fallen climber was not being belayed by anyone or an autobelayer and he apparently wasn't attached to a rope on the ground. But part of the reason for the lawsuit is because the lawyers won't allow the YMCA to say anything.
Where is this info coming from? If it's true, why can't you name your source? Were you there? Do you know someone who was? Was it published by a reputable reporter? Otherwise, sure sounds like hearsay (or worse) to me.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Feb 27, 2008, 7:56 PM
Post #23 of 27
(1508 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
cracklover wrote: roy_hinkley_jr wrote: As much as GO loves to bash on Majid Huh? I enjoy his posts. Maybe you're thinking of someone else. But I draw the line at people (anyone, not specifically majid) claiming to be able to speak about details in serious accidents when they weren't there. Such statements go far beyond the general talking shit on the net we like to do, and can have real lasting impact. In reply to: the original post was essentially correct. The fallen climber was not being belayed by anyone or an autobelayer and he apparently wasn't attached to a rope on the ground. But part of the reason for the lawsuit is because the lawyers won't allow the YMCA to say anything. Where is this info coming from? If it's true, why can't you name your source? Were you there? Do you know someone who was? Was it published by a reputable reporter? Otherwise, sure sounds like hearsay (or worse) to me. GO
Go
you are turing in to one of the RC wabbit haters
http://www.mtexpress.com/...er.php?ID=2005119351
Accident at YMCA still under investigation
Curtis Hoffenbach recovering from back surgery
by DANA DUGAN
On Friday, Jan. 25, Hailey resident Curtis Hoffenbach, 21, was climbing on his own at the climbing wall at the Wood River Community YMCA in Ketchum. He had just reached the top and was resting before coming back down when in a split second he had crashed 30 feet to the floor.
In that split second his life changed. The YMCA staff called an ambulance and he was transported to St. Luke's Wood River Medical Center.
"Something happened. It wasn't Curtis' fault," his father, Paul Hoffenbach, said. "The YMCA personnel took good care of him. After the actual accident itself they were very careful. And the ambulance guys were stellar."
Although the hospital released him on Sunday, saying his injuries were "minor" within a few days, it became evident to the Hoffenbachs that a second opinion was needed.
"We went to Dr. Verst on Monday and got a brace," Paul said. "But we called (Dr.) Tim Floyd, (who is now) with Boise Orthopedic. He looked at the X-rays and said, 'Get him down here. He'll probably need surgery.'"
In fact, Curtis had six cracked vertebrae, two of which were burst fractures, Thoracic 10 and Lumbar 2. In order to stabilize them, the L8 through T12 were fused together and the L1 through L3 were anchored with titanium screws.
Curtis, who is back home in Hailey, will spend six weeks flat out. He is allowed to sit for three, 20-minute sessions a day and can use a walker minimally.
He'll be in a brace for six months with no activity other than physical therapy. Paul said the doctors think that within a year Curtis should be able to resume some minimal activity such as bowling, which he enjoys.
"He'll loose some mobility," Paul said. "We just focus on the idea he's not handicapped."
The YMCA closed the part of the climbing gym where Curtis had been climbing and according to program developer Jason Fry, conducted an in-house investigation into the accident, which was completed last Friday.
Redwoods Group, one of the YMCA's main insurance companies and risk management services, sent a climbing expert following the accident to Ketchum to evaluate the incident and garner testimony from staff and witnesses.
"We haven't seen a report yet," Fry said. "Our thoughts and prayers are with Curtis to have a speedy recovery.
"The Y is doing everything we can to ensure that an accident like this or any other accident doesn't happen again," he said. "We had a review of the accident, and also had a safety review for the entire building. There are certain practices that we're going to implement immediately. This weekend we're applying a non-slip surface on the pool deck. We have a new floor treatment for the locker rooms. We are taking actions to make sure it's as safe as possible."
The Y employs Red Cross-trained lifeguards, and utilizes Climbing Wall Association industry standards, Fry said. Before the opening of the Y last fall, the entire staff went through substantial training for climbing, fitness, life guarding and working with kids.
Safety at health clubs is essentially the responsibility of the participant. The Y, just like other fitness center managers, employs waivers and releases, risk management services and liability insurance. The most common claims appear to be in three categories: slip-and-fall or wet area accidents, injury to participants engaged in athletic activity, or incidents involving an employee.
The YMCA of USA requires that members and guests sign a waiver releasing the 168-year-old organization of responsibility in case of an accident and agreeing not to sue on "account of injury to the person or property or resulting in death."
|
|
|
|
|
roy_hinkley_jr
Feb 27, 2008, 9:28 PM
Post #25 of 27
(1458 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2005
Posts: 652
|
cracklover wrote: That could just as well mean that he was being belayed by a staff member, or that he was using an auto-belay.
Suffice to say, no and no.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
