Separate names with a comma.
We have a vibrant community here conversing about all sorts of non-snow topics such as music, sport, politics and technology. Simply register to reveal all our Après topics.
NOTE: This notice may be closed.
Discussion in 'Perisher' started by SMSkier, Jan 5, 2020.
I don't agree and not does the code everyone is required to sign prior to skiing.
She didn't. The judge found that it was completely the instructor's fault. He was looking back over his shoulder and swerved right into the poor woman from behind at full speed. The judge clearly rules that the accident was down to his negligence. That part makes total sense.
It's the rest of the judgement that sounds a bit dodgy. The judge seems to decide that even though it was the instructor's fault, the victim knew the risks of skiing, so bad luck. I only skimmed through it, but that seems to be the gist.
FYI from National Parks:
Safety alerts: Perisher pest control program
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) will be conducting a ground shooting program within the Perisher Range Resorts and Charlotte Pass Ski Resort areas between Thursday 26 November and Wednesday 16 December 2020. The areas targeted in this program include:
Charlottes Pass village
Perisher Village (all areas including Blue Cow)
Smiggin Holes Village
The objective of this program is to decrease the impacts associated with rabbits on both the environment and resort infrastructure within the resort areas of Kosciuszko National Park.
The program includes shooting operations undertaken by authorised NPWS officers and NPWS contractors. The operations will be carried out between the 6pm and 9pm each evening. However, no shooting will be undertaken as a component of this program on weekends, public holidays, NSW public school holidays or during public events.
Shooting operations will also be limited to times and areas of low visitation and lodge/accommodation occupancy.
I think the courts decision was a good one. If the decision had gone the other way every collision from now on would end up in court, and that would be the end of skiing in Oz.
Not necessarily. I would have thought that this precedent would only extend to the absence of liability on the part of Perisher, not of the ski instructor? As far as legal action against the individual, I believe that would be covered by personal liability cover for an accident under Home Contents Insurance?
It amazes me that people so readily insure motor vehicles for damage, and feel that it is totally appropriate to pursue legal action following a motor vehicle collision, but seem to think that if someone fails to exercise due care and attention in another activity, resulting in a significant injury to another person - there should be no consequences?
Switching gears for a moment.....
This day last year. Nice and cool!
Sorry, do I need to make that simpler for you?
Cars go smash.
Drivers talk, swap contact information.
Insurers may be involved.
Money is paid.
This is normal.
Skiers go smash.
Skiers talk, swap contact information.
Insurers may be involved.
Money is paid.
This will be the end of skiing as we know it, and the sky will fall, the horses will lay dead in the fields and the rivers will run red as blood.
Why is it seen as normal to accept the financial burden of your actions when driving and causing damage to another person's property (or to the person), but not so when skiing?
I agree with your idea. I think people should take responsibility financially when they are at fault at skiing. It should be changed
The thing is that the rules atm show that when you step out on a field, that’s not how it works and you are 100% at risk.
It’s the mentality I have when I click in.
Always have to be aware about what is going on around you
So are you talking about some type of mandatory insurance policy i.e. no coverage = no ski
In our society skiing or not skiing is an easy choice to make. It is purely recreational. Not so much motor transport.
So therefore you think it's okay for skiers to have no responsibility for their actions?
Skier's should be held accoutable for their actions. 100% agree. If you cause an accident, because you were being actively dangerous (stupid speed, out of control, severely under the influence, cutting people off unecessarily) then there should be serious consequences, both on a resort and higher level. There is a difference between having an accident cause you lost control but were being sensible, or hit ice and slipped out etc. In exactly the same way between getting charged with Dangerous driving vs Neg. driving
I think that this is a pipe dream because PB have made it abundantly clear that they take 0 responsibility for anything that happens on the slopes, both in this case and on every single chairlift that you ride.
Its written in big bold letters. Ride at own risk.......
It's a pipe dream because there is no clear line between the two extremes of genuine accident despite taking reasonable precautions and recklessness. There are two many variables and subjectivity involved.
Do I think that? Thanks for the clarification. The things you find out on the internet.
A yes or no would suffice, no?
PB isn’t responsible for what happens on the slopes or the lifts, in the same way Parks isn’t responsible for what you do in a park. Or the Roads Corporation isn’t responsible for what you do on a road.
But they should be liable when they are at fault, like when a lift drops from the ground or when an instructor doing their business hits a skier to serious injury.
Why would I do that when I have you?
It's P, the B disappeared 11 years ago. Try and keep up.
Not mandatory, but I also feel like people shouldn't be made a pariah just because they are trying to get some compensation when they are injured and not at fault.
Most Home Contents policies include an amount of cover for Personal Liability. I know my maximum amount is $20,000,000, so I am covered if I inadvertently cause a collision on the slopes (or while riding my bicycle).
There you go, interesting was not aware of that.
Understand your perspective, however if the person has no insurance and no significant assets you may not be able to seek compensation.
There are a lot and I mean a lot of people who travel through life without insurance of any kind except that which is proscribed by law. The chances are that the person acting super stupid and took out your ACL or worse was one that does not have such insurance. This is simply a statement of fact when the low rates of insured persons are considered.
It was much simpler in the old days though ,fella did the dumb stuff caused an incident which led to an accident which left a member of my family with a depressed fracture of a cheekbone .................. lets just say lawyers weren't required however justice was prompt ,fair and deserved.Physical violence upon the person was not the justice however the lesson was well understood by the miscreant who had a particularly long uphill walk in deepish snow to the third nearest SP hut where a report was written and the fellow escorted to front office who promptly ripped up his ticket ,5 of 7 day pass as I remember it. The old days may not have been perfect but it worked well.
Meanwhile, another 6.5 months until the Aussie ski season starts again. Yawn ....
And it can't get here soon enough........
I can report that they are note very good shots....
PB had a nice ring to it... sort of like a chook footer
On what evidence do you base that assumption Ret-ro ? Many of us on the western side have done contract shooting over the years and being tightass graziers we hate wasting ammo.
Yup - that's called being judgement proof - whatever damages are awarded against someone with no assets are worthless. Unfortunately I had a car written off by someone like that - driving without taking her medication, she had a seizure behind the wheel and hit my (parked) car, sending it into the car in front. Chassis warped and radiator punctured. Car was only worth $4,000, so not worth insuring for comprehensive cover.
mod note: If you'd like to discuss the legal aspects of skiing and injuries can you please take it to another thread. It's not something that will just affect Perisher even though this case is from Perisher.
One of my early mentors recited this exchange to me:
I'll smash your head in
So what. Your head's still smashed in
The law is an inadequate instrument to change behaviour
Retrospective punishment does not affect the immediate problem
Over here, everyone ....
Quite windy but a pleasant 15 degrees....
Your right retrospective punishment does not affect the immediate problem but it sure can change the future attitude and behaviour. Once damage is done it cannot be undone but the best course of action results in that damage source never being a source again.
And company still trades as Perisher Blue Pty Ltd.
Nice walk today from Burning Log up to Blue Cow Trig with @SalleeGirl. Interesting to see Guthega without snow...especially the trail to Blue Cow.
This day last year...... was still skiing out of resort.
Not bad considering what happened 4 weeks later ........
Surprised at the stat on cigarette butts!
I was surprised as well.
They probably needed to add a bullet point for tips on next trip: bring a portable ashtray or give up smoking.
When I worked up there and things were quiet we used to go out and pick up rubbish in the car park and surrounds. The record was 5 disposable nappies in one day. And you wonder why the NPWS doesn't want the resorts up there.
Doesn't surprise me. Smokers are so selfish and disrespectful.
The mountains are such a magic environment and they trash it.
Looking rather eerie tonight
Smokers are not alone in that.
No I am not a smoker.
Could be a little something brewing.......
High fire danger??????
High is the second lowest rating.
Looks like they have updated
Must've been listening
Possibly winter mix on Guthega cam? Waiting for photos @SMSkier
Suspect a few patches on Thredbo Basin cam...