From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Surely its only worthless if the amusement park management were guilty
> of negligence which is a different thing and a disclaimer could not
> protect them from negligence.
No. The amusement park management may often (though not always) be liable
even though they are not "guilty" of negligence. It's not necessarily a
negligence thing, and "guilt" is often not involved. While the words may
fly, it's responsibility that's being discussed here and this should not
necessarily be confused with guilt of any sort.
A very responsible amusement park company may be inspecting their rides and
discover that a critical bolt has a crack in it. They immediately shut down
the ride and order another bolt of the proper SAE specification. When it
arrives, they install it and torque it to the proper specifications,
reinspect the equipment and after properly finding all to be in good
mechanical order, they reopen the ride. All goes well for several weeks, but
one night the bolt breaks, a part of the ride comes apart and several folks
are injured. During an investigation, the bolt is discovered to be flawed.
Internally, the metal is crystalized and therefore brittle, a condition that
might have resulted from impropper heat treatment and which could not be
detected by any external inspection. In other words, the amusement park
personnel did everything right and honest. Well, now you see that the
amusement park is "guilty" of nothing! They were not even negligent! In
fact, they operated in a completely above board and responsible manner!
In the above case, would you say the disclaimer on the back of the ticket
relieves the amusement park of any responsibility for the accident? You
would be wrong if you say yes! They remain finantially responsible to the
accident victums for their injuries and the park's insurance company pays
for the care, expenses and pain and suffering of the injured. The amusement
park accepted this responsibility when they offered the ride to their
customers. The ammusment park (or their insurance company) might attempt to
recover these damages from the maker of the flawed bolt.
> Fair enough, they would still be liable
> if they used a disreputable courier or addressed it to the wrong place
> or put it in inadequate packaging, but only if it was deemed to be their
> fault.
Keep in mind that the bolt might have been bought from the most highly
reputable bolt manufacturer with even better than industry standard quality
control and a clear desire to sell the best quality product in the world.
This was just the honest, accidental one in a billion that was flawed. The
amusement park is still liable.
You are driving down the street and your right front tire blows out. The car
momentarily jerks to the right and bangs a parked car. Who pays the damages
for the parked car? Hey, it wasn't your fault. You did nothing wrong or
negligent. You're right! You're still responsible to the owner of the parked
car. You will not get away with telling the owner of the parked car that
he's out of luck because you weren't negligent. You will not get away with
pointing to a clearly flawed cord in the blown tire and saying, "Hey, don't
talk to me, talk to the tire manufacturer." You (or your auto insurance
company) will pay. Then you (or your insurance company) will go to the
manufacturer of the tire for recompense. The tire company is not responsible
to the poor fellow whose parked car you hit. They had no contract with him.
They are responsible to you! And it's possible that NO ONE IS GUILTY OF
ANYTHING, though there is always a clear chain of responsibility, whether
legal or moral.
It never ceases to amaze me how many folks these days have such a poor
understanding of responsibility and how so many folks seem to think that
guilt and responsibility are synonyms and how so many folks seem to think
that blame is always involved in cases of responsibility. We need more
critical thinkers on this planet. We need folks to understand that there are
some responsibilities in life that just cannot be pawned off on others.
You may have noticed that this is a pet peeve of mine.
Regards,
Bob...
> From: Bob Blakely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Possibly, but I suspect that those simple words might be insufficient.
> Some
> responsibilities cannot be abrogated by a simple statement that the
> vendor
> "is not liable" for certain normal expectations. An example is the
> common
> warning on the back of an amusement park ticket that says that the
> management is not liable for injuries. The statement is almost always
> worthless.
>
> Regards,
> Bob...
>
> From: "Paul Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Would it make any difference if you put in the auction that the seller
> takes
> > no responability for items that are not insured? As a lot of sellers
> do
> put
> > this in there auctions.
> >
> > Cyas
> >
> > From: "Tom Rittenhouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > > No, it applies to private transactions as well.
> > >
> > > Chris does have it right about the seller having the right
> > > to wait until it is reasonably clear that the shipment has
> > > been lost or destroyed and not just temporarily gone astray
> > > before reimbursing the buyer. Most shipping companies demand
> > > two month before they will pay on the insurance.
> > >
> > > Paul Jones wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Wouldnt this only be in regards to a business shipping the item? A
> think
> > a
> > > > transaction between two individuals would be a total different
> deal.
> > > >
>
>
> -
> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
>
> -
> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
>
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
