Accident on Mariner

[emdia43]

https://www.nbcmiami.com/investigations/Man-Plummets-to-Deck-From-

Edited March 20, 2019 by emdia43
Oops - link not working

[emdia43]

https://www.nbcchicago.com/investigations/Man-Plummets-to-Deck-From-Cruise-Ship-Adventure-Ride-507361991.html

[Bloodgem]

45 minutes ago, emdia43 said:

https://www.nbcchicago.com/investigations/Man-Plummets-to-Deck-From-Cruise-Ship-Adventure-Ride-507361991.html

Thank you for posting the link.

[S.A.M.J.R.]

I broke my pelvis in a car accident when I was 17.  "Life changing", it was not.  Maybe because of his age, he'll have longer lasting issues.  I didn't see where the story said what his recovery was going to be (did he lose use of his legs permanently?).

 

And the security guy blocking the camera, while I think was a bad decision, I think an argument can also be made that he was protecting the guy's privacy.  Claiming "ALL the staff should have been helping tend him" seems a little extreme to me.

 

That being said, I think the guy MIGHT have a case.  It would depend on whether they could prove inspections haven't been done or if the training was inadequate.  Saying there was "no warnings" doesn't seem right to me.  I find it hard to believe RCI doesn't have a waiver stating you accept there is a possibility of injuries.  Again, IMO, if they can prove RCI was negligent, they are due more than just hospital bills. 

 

I'm guessing RCI settles before the case ever goes to trial. 

[rebeccac]

I've been on that ride on the Mariner and you definitely have to sign a waiver before you go on the ride.  I have to admit, I only glanced through it, so I could not tell you any of the exact terms.  I did not last more than a couple of minutes since I found the bindings very uncomfortable.  

[rimmit]

While waivers offer some protection for RCI, those waiver go out the window if basic maintenance was not performed or they were found negligent in their duties to maintain the attraction.  Waivers will help protect RCI from just bad luck accidents, such as if you are rock climbing and when you land after you rappel down the wall you twist or break your ankle, or lose your grip on while climbing and hit the wall hard and crack a rib,  but if their auto block hitch at the top breaks while climbing, and it was found to have been rusted out and broke due to rust, then you may have a case. 

 

Waivers are great, but they do not make a company immune to lawsuits.

Edited March 20, 2019 by rimmit

[LMaxwell]

1 hour ago, rebeccac said:

I've been on that ride on the Mariner and you definitely have to sign a waiver before you go on the ride.  I have to admit, I only glanced through it, so I could not tell you any of the exact terms.  I did not last more than a couple of minutes since I found the bindings very uncomfortable.  

 

Waivers are not enforceable if the equipment fails and/or the company is not operating the equipment properly.  Guests have a reasonable presumption of safety when using these features.  

 

I really see no way to defend RCI here.  Lucky he didn't split his head open and die.  

[SRF]

Let's see, you want 500 videos of you laying on the ground in pain all over the internet.  Then he would be complaining about not protecting his privacy.

 

And he wants people NOT trained in medical care to be helping???????  REALLY????
 

Yes, if there was deficient maintenance or inspections, there is an issue.

 

[Hootss]

1 hour ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

I broke my pelvis in a car accident when I was 17.  "Life changing", it was not.  Maybe because of his age, he'll have longer lasting issues.  I didn't see where the story said what his recovery was going to be (did he lose use of his legs permanently?).

 

And the security guy blocking the camera, while I think was a bad decision, I think an argument can also be made that he was protecting the guy's privacy.  Claiming "ALL the staff should have been helping tend him" seems a little extreme to me.

 

That being said, I think the guy MIGHT have a case.  It would depend on whether they could prove inspections haven't been done or if the training was inadequate.  Saying there was "no warnings" doesn't seem right to me.  I find it hard to believe RCI doesn't have a waiver stating you accept there is a possibility of injuries.  Again, IMO, if they can prove RCI was negligent, they are due more than just hospital bills. 

 

I'm guessing RCI settles before the case ever goes to trial. 

I interpreted that as meaning "life changing" because of his very active lifestyle and fear that he may not be able to do some of those things again.  

[mayleeman]

When I saw the security guy stopping the filming, I thought the objection would be that they were preventing preservation of evidence that might show whether the emergency response was appropriate or not. The idea that this security guy should have been tending to the victim is bogus (but only if the staff tending to him was inadequate).

 

These accidents are, unfortunately, a result of why the rides are exciting--you get an adrenaline rush from going up to the edge. When some low-paid or minimally trained person fails to do their job right, or the mfr of equipment switches to a cheaper supplier, you can go over the edge and there is little or no margin for error.  We rode on a water slide like the one where that teen got killed and almost upended twice because the staff let a 300 lb person ride and unbalance it--no more going near the edge for me.

[GarlicBread]

Security are a part of the emergency medical response team. You'll see if there's ever one called, and you're trying to get on or off the ship, half of them will run to the call and gang way operations will slow.

Their job is to clear the area and crowd control. Not assist medically. They security guy was just doing his job...

[blueridgemama]

2 hours ago, LMaxwell said:

 

Waivers are not enforceable if the equipment fails and/or the company is not operating the equipment properly.  Guests have a reasonable presumption of safety when using these features.  

 

I really see no way to defend RCI here.  Lucky he didn't split his head open and die.  

 

We have no way of knowing if the equipment failed due to negligence so that will be determined through the proper channels. RCI does not need US to defend them. They have many highly paid lawyers to do that. However, anytime you go on a ride or take advantage of an attraction there is a chance of an accident but that should not prevent you from enjoying them otherwise we would go through life as spectators.

[JeffT237]

It looked like to me that what ever was anchoring the bungee cord on his left failed, not sure if that was the anchor itself or i'm guessing a carabiner that attached the cord to the anchor.  If, and I stress if that's the case I would think this guy has a claim even if a waiver is signed.  As many have stated a waiver would only protect the company in the event of an accident to the participant that was not due to negligence or improperly maintained or defective equipment.  As far as the security officers attempt to block the video from being taken, I'm sure he was doing just as he was trained and his actions did not prevent what looked like appropriate medical care.  Plus providing medical care is not his responsibility.  Taking video or pics at an accident often adds more stress to an already chaotic situation.

Edited March 20, 2019 by JeffT237

[S.A.M.J.R.]

4 hours ago, LMaxwell said:

 

Waivers are not enforceable if the equipment fails and/or the company is not operating the equipment properly.  Guests have a reasonable presumption of safety when using these features.  

 

I really see no way to defend RCI here.  Lucky he didn't split his head open and die.  

*IF* it can be shown that RCI took the proper steps regarding maintenance & training, then yes, I think they are off the hook.  But wouldn't it be the responsibility of the suing party to prove they DIDN'T do the right inspections/maintenance/training?  How do you prove that? 

 

[Cruiser_1977]

23 minutes ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

*IF* it can be shown that RCI took the proper steps regarding maintenance & training, then yes, I think they are off the hook.  But wouldn't it be the responsibility of the suing party to prove they DIDN'T do the right inspections/maintenance/training?  How do you prove that? 

 

Since the ship is not a US flagged vessel, the laws that US citizens are used to don't apply. I would hope that whatever country's flag the ship sails under has laws regarding the inspection/maintenance/training for this type of "attraction". Usually you have to  fill out a form when the inspection/maintenance/training is done. Once the suit has been filed, it enters the discovery phase where the young man's attorney will request documentation regarding these items. 

[ShillyShally]

7 minutes ago, JennyB1977 said:

Since the ship is not a US flagged vessel, the laws that US citizens are used to don't apply. I would hope that whatever country's flag the ship sails under has laws regarding the inspection/maintenance/training for this type of "attraction". Usually you have to  fill out a form when the inspection/maintenance/training is done. Once the suit has been filed, it enters the discovery phase where the young man's attorney will request documentation regarding these items. 

This, and unfortunately so many are surprised ships don't sail under US flag typically!

[TBone2K]

Also keep in mind that many of the claims are so-called "shotgun approach" personal injury lawyer boilerplate. You accuse RC of doing everything wrong in the hopes that you hit on one that RC can't defend.

Same goes with calling it "life changing". It's all about presentation.

 

Having said that, if any of the kids want to go on one of those bungee trampoline things at the mall, one thing I will be checking for is if all the elastics/bungees are connected through one carabiner.

[johnjen]

..and here come the infamous "armchair sea lawyers" who know EVERYTHING about legal issues on cruise ships (MOAN)

[S.A.M.J.R.]

3 hours ago, JennyB1977 said:

Since the ship is not a US flagged vessel, the laws that US citizens are used to don't apply. I would hope that whatever country's flag the ship sails under has laws regarding the inspection/maintenance/training for this type of "attraction". Usually you have to  fill out a form when the inspection/maintenance/training is done. Once the suit has been filed, it enters the discovery phase where the young man's attorney will request documentation regarding these items. 

I thought part of the terms of contract was any filings needed to done in Miami. 

[Cruiser_1977]

"Written notice of the claim..." The RCCL office have to be "served" at their Miami offices if it's a Personal Injury/Illness/Death claim. The attorney still has to prove that the cruise line acted negligently by failing to maintain, etc. the "attraction". I think @chengkp75 with his first hand knowledge of the cruise ship workings may know best about the particulars of something like this....

Edited March 20, 2019 by JennyB1977

[Aquahound]

I don't think there's any question whether or not this guy has a legit claim.  The question is whether or not RCI is liable.  It's possible....I've seen this before in personal injury cases....that the claimant might have to go after the manufacturer of the harness rather than RCI.  Just doing a quick search on similar cases, I found an example where a guy was injured by gym equipment.  Because he had a waiver on file with the gym, he had to sue the maker of the equipment.  

 

Just conversation.  I'm not a lawyer.  Just someone who has been on the witness stand a lot.    

[holiday-shrek]

11 hours ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

And the security guy blocking the camera, while I think was a bad decision, I think an argument can also be made that he was protecting the guy's privacy.  Claiming "ALL the staff should have been helping tend him" seems a little extreme to me. 

I have seen this behavior too - RCI doesn't want any evidence!

[SAmome]

No one likes frivolous lawsuits but this guy wasn't doing anything odd like drunk and climbing things around ship he shouldn't; he was just bouncing like the ride indicates.  RCCL should make it right with him AND the rest of us AND themselves.  

 

He needs some $, the rest of us need to know the cause is understood and a remedy in place so that it doesn't happen again and cost them more $.

 

I wouldn't blame RCCL for knee and ankle injuries that are common to trampolines but if something breaks and I end up on cement, something went horribly wrong and RCCL is responsible.   

[Jasukkie]

This is a horrible story. I hope RC does right by him and settles this to his satisfaction. He's a very sympathetic victim. 

[GarlicBread]

38 minutes ago, holiday-shrek said:

I have seen this behavior too - RCI doesn't want any evidence!

Of course that's one reason. 

 

But also, if youd just been injured and in pain and laying on the deck. Would you want videos of it all over the internet without your consent before you even made it to the next port? 

Maybe you would. But I know I wouldn't and I'm probably not the only one. 

Yes, we know now the guys knew each other, but you let one person film, you let everyone and more people gather and then you can't comfortably deal with the person that needs the help.