Injury on an icy course

[Doon frae Troon]

This could rival the Celtic vs Rangers thread the way its going :rofl:

PLEASE...it was a Rangers thread.

 

[bobmac]

A question for the OP.
If you had to pay for taking the case to court and risk losing money if you lost, would you still sue?

For what it's worth, I think it's wrong to try and make someone else take responsibility and therefor the blame for your inability to put one foot in front of the other and watch where you're going.

Some people say we live in a sue culture copying the Americans, the reason the Americans sue is to claim back money to pay for their hospital treatment as they have to pay for everything over there.
We have the NHS and Homer

I don't care if the law says you can sue and get free money......it's still wrong IMHO

 

[stevie_r]

A question for the OP.
If you had to pay for taking the case to court and risk losing money if you lost, would you still sue?

For what it's worth, I think it's wrong to try and make someone else take responsibility and therefor the blame for your inability to put one foot in front of the other and watch where you're going.

Well said Bob, well said

 

[HawkeyeMS]

Pretty much the reaction I expected given my OP, but a point worth debating I felt.

Just to clarify how I got to where I am now with this. I did not simply fall, break my ankle and see the £££ signs. One of my playing partners reported the incident to the club the next day and gave them my contact details. I was expecting that someone might phone me and make sure I was okay etc etc, perhaps chuck £50 behind the bar for my next visit or offer a discounted membership at best.

My next contact came from the clubs insurers who vehemently denied that there was any liability admission, stated I was not to contact the club or play it until the 'matter' was resolved and subsequently recommended that I appoint a lawyer. Frankly they got my back up with their attitude

So basically no apology or show of concern from the club and a boorish bullying couple of emails from their insurers had me scrurrying along to a no win no fee agent to see where I stood. I dont think they handled it very well because of the compensation culture and the fear of me suing them and essentially their defensive attitude ensured that is what happened.

Yes I could have walked away and put it down to experience, and yes I still may not receive compensation and yes I see the case for me not receiving anything, and wont be grieving or angry if I dont.

But its not a clean cut as me simply walking out of xray right into a lawyers office. In fact if anyone forced it down the legal route it was the club and their insurers. Had the club NOT had liability insurance I wouldnt have even bothered taking it this far. My understanding is that there isnt much of a threat to their premiums should they lose but frankly I am not too concerned with that as they themselves put the case down that road when a phone call and a bunch of floors could have fixed it.

To be honest, If I got that correspondence I would be a bit narked as well, especially if I had no intention of suing. However, I do think the letters you received are a direct result of the compensation culture many on here are against (and I'm not saying that's your fault). In an ideal world (or even one 10-15 years ago), the club would have contacted you to see how you were after your fall, maybe offered you a free round or similar when you are fit, not because they have to but because in polite society it might be a nice thing to do and everyone would be happy.

However, I fully expect that they didn't respond becasue they were told not to by their (or the insurance companies) lawyers. You see, they have no way of knowing if the injured party is going to claim but I suspect these days most do and contacting you to apologise and offer a free round would most probably be seen as an admission of some liability in the court room.

They probably told their insurance company who told them to say nothing and let them deal with it. It comes accross as the club handling it badly but in all liklihood, they are just doing as instructed by their legal team who are acting in a defensive manner expecting to claim to come their way.

 

[Moquillo19]

I've read the entire thread (I'm on holiday, nothing better to do!) and can't believe what a can of worms something like this has opened. It's been a fascinating read. I can see repercussions for all golfers on all courses and I don't think they'll be good.

At least twice a year we end up with a member of my course standing up to his waist in a drainage ditch/dyke cos he's tried to play a shot too close to the edge. The photographic evidence always causes much amusement but with cases like this happening I can see free relief coming from any lie within 3 foot of any ditch. Bunkers will have to go, I'm sure everyone's had an eyeful of sand. Cut all the trees down, I've seen balls ricocheting back off them.

I know golf can be dangerous but I choose to play it. I know it's played on uneven ground often in the middle of mother nature. In Spain they said be careful of snakes in the rough. I DIDN'T GO NEAR IT. But if I had have and had been bitten, could I have sued the course? Isn't it normal to expect icy ground when playing golf in icy conditions and should we really be surprised and shocked if someone falls and injures themselves? I too hope OP makes a speedy recovery but don't believe he can hold anything against the course.
On the other hand, if a member of the greens staff ran me over in a mower whilst mucking about I'd sue the pants off them.

 

[bladeplayer]

What i see in alot of the replys here are people are expressing what they think is right, unfortunatly in law what "WE" (i include myself) think is right , holds no sway ,

Ye must remember If you feel you have been hurt or agrieved by anothers actions you are entitled to seek recourse & recompence through the law & juidical system , that IS YOUR RIGHT , then let the judges decide ..

Did we all feel the same contempt for the guy who lost an eye , thinking back, i cant remember did any of us say he was wrong to claim ? (honestly cant remember)

Ive broken alot of bones over the years playing soccer , all have been through contact , i didnt sue because i accept its part of the game , IN MY OPINION , there is a massive difference in this case ,

the club deemed the course fit for play & i accept they cant inspect every inch of the course , but if you ask any greenkeeper which part of his course floods most , dries out most or in this case freezes over most i would expect them to know .. because of this i would expect them to check these areas first & more thoroughly , if there had been heavy rain or heavy frost first ..

Let me please state i think its the OP own fault & he shouldnt be suing , i wouldnt if i felt it was all or partly my own fault .. but from his later posts it seems the club have also aproached this incorrectly .. ie they should have contacted him personaly when they heard about it to see what happened .. its common courtsey

I know some wont agree with but hey im not a judge , its my opinion & in this case it doesnt stand for didly , what will happen will happen by the law of the land ..

To the Op i wish you a speedy & full recovery , i hope whatever ££ you get is worth all the hassel & the different light people will see you in because of it ,

because despite what you may think, the friends that brought you along will be seen differently at their club from now on , their & others attitude to bringing you or other guests /outsiders with them willn change forever , i hope their attitude to your friendship doest change over this also , maybe not immediatly but over time you will notice less "invites"

Good Health

 

[Doon frae Troon]

To put some balance to this thread, I managed municipal golf courses for 20 years.
The green fee/season tickets included insurance.
The amount of claims was very small, generally about 3 to 4 a year and usually involved damage to neighbouring properties or cars.
The courses [12 in total] averaged 40,000 rounds a year.
So over that period 800,000 rounds of golf played on courses with a varied standard of player and no personal injury claims.

 

[BTatHome]

let me clarify that. I became aware of the change in underfoot conditions and immediately fell. I had no time to make an informed decision to carry on at that point. The decision for me to go no further was made for me.

it wasn't 'icy' up to that point. It was 'frosty'

just a couple,of points that might not be clear. The terrain changed from Frosty to ICY at the tenth hole for an area which was not a patch but which covered two or three of the most exposed holes at the upper level. The ice wasn't apparent to the naked eye and only made itself known when i stepped on to that part of the course and immediately fell.

just to clear this up, you slipped at the point the frost became ice, and broke your ankle. Hobbled off the course and contacted the club the next day?

So who told you that the 3 holes in front were iced up?

 

[williamalex1]

Honestly I can accept your point of view on this as far as claiming or not claiming is concerned but that statement above is utter garbage.

If you win your claim and get a few grand, do you think the course will open in the future if its frosty, risking futher claims against them.

 

[MadAdey]

To put some balance to this thread, I managed municipal golf courses for 20 years.
The green fee/season tickets included insurance.
The amount of claims was very small, generally about 3 to 4 a year and usually involved damage to neighbouring properties or cars.
The courses [12 in total] averaged 40,000 rounds a year.
So over that period 800,000 rounds of golf played on courses with a varied standard of player and no personal injury claims.

How long ago was that though mate? It's over the last few years this no win no fee culture has arisen. I bet if you were managing them now you would see a sharp increase in the amount of claims being made/

 

[chrisd]

Yes, definitely, the greens keepers should have the means to determine the condition of the course and implement their own safety strategies which the OP has stated weren't followed.

The OP said that the ice wasn't apparant to the naked eye, can you explain to me in a non complicated way how the greenkeepers "should have the means to determine the condition". Most courses have only, maybe 5 greenkeepers to cover a huge area of land and they are supposed to see something that wasn't apparant to the naked eye!!

Also, how did the OP know what the maens were, and, furthermore, to know subsequently that they wern't followed??

 

[Slab]

The OP said that the ice wasn't apparant to the naked eye, can you explain to me in a non complicated way how the greenkeepers "should have the means to determine the condition". Most courses have only, maybe 5 greenkeepers to cover a huge area of land and they are supposed to see something that wasn't apparant to the naked eye!!

Also, how did the OP know what the maens were, and, furthermore, to know subsequently that they wern't followed??

They might use some kind of stick maybe
(sorry I know that's flippant)

The green keepers will be well aware of the susceptible areas on the course, they don’t need to check everywhere, just make reasonable checks to the areas that are routinely affected

Still not sure whether I support a claim in this scenario though

 

[Doon frae Troon]

How long ago was that though mate? It's over the last few years this no win no fee culture has arisen. I bet if you were managing them now you would see a sharp increase in the amount of claims being made/

Up to 2002.
I stay in touch with my old colleagues and no one has mentioned a problem with increased insurance claims.
There were a few 'dodgy' claims in my time which I generally sorted out before bringing in the insurers. A broken window claim 300 yards from the golf course which would have involved about 5 ricochets off neighbours walls springs to mind. A neighbour told me his own kids did it when messing about will golf clubs and ball.

On enquiry involved a broken patio window. I asked how he was so sure that the window was broken by a golf ball and not a stone or air gun. He laughed then told me the ball was lodged between the window pane glass.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

They might use some kind of stick maybe
(sorry I know that's flippant)

The green keepers will be well aware of the susceptible areas on the course, they don’t need to check everywhere, just make reasonable checks to the areas that are routinely affected

Still not sure whether I support a claim in this scenario though

Just think of those yellow 'slippery when wet' [icy, snowy, dry] triangles dotted around future golf courses.

 

[MadAdey]

Reading through all the things that the OP has said. I just find it amazing what has been said.

It was frosty but did not show any real sings of being dangerous to play on and there was no patches of ice obvious to the naked eye, even when he got to the place that he had the accident. Well if that is the case then how can you reasonably expect the golf club to know about the ice if it was not visible, so how can they be held responsible?

This run of 3 holes where all iced up. You have said that you fell as soon as you got to this area that was vulnerable to being icy, so how do you know about the next 3 holes?

You are only suing them because they followed the advice of their solicitor and let their insurance company contact you. So going on that you did not think there was much of a liability issue, until the actions of the club highlighted this to you and the £ signs started ringing through your head.

You feel annoyed that the golf club did not contact you giving you some free golf or a bunch of flowers. Well that can be seen as an admission of guilt, as the club are trying to make a settlement to you.

Let me ask you one question and give me an honest answer Colin: How much responsibility do you feel the club has to take for what happened and how much do you?

I think that it is a case of 80/20 with you being the 80% as ultimately you chose to play, but the club could have maybe done a better check of this area and shut the course to prevent it.

 

[duncan mackie]

If you win your claim and get a few grand, do you think the course will open in the future if its frosty, risking futher claims against them.

this is probably the biggest single reason that the case has to go to court, and possibly to appeal as well!

if the existence of ice on a course is deemed to represent an unacceptable risk ie you have to close the course if it exists (or may exist because you can't check whether it actually does at every point)

personally I find this a strange assumption - I frequently play golf when the ball bounces on the water hazards! Strangely I also go for walks in such conditions, as do many others.

as I said earlier, if there was an artificial surface installed that had become dangerous in the conditions, it would be appropriate to place a warning (and in an extreme situation it may even be appropriate to re-route and close off an area), equally if there was any area where the club had been made aware of a specific danger (normally through the unfortunate experience of others) it will probably be appropriate to place a warning there.

if a course has to close if there is a risk of ice then clearly this has a huge financial implication for the businesses in the UK - and that's before you take into account the implications for those who primarily play golf in the winter months for exercise and do other things in the warmer months!

there are of course a couple of other unfortunate aspects (beyond the obvious injury to Colin) - the communication situation which is a real catch 22; it had to happen the way it did because the developing claims culture (which includes claims that have only been pursued and won on the basis of what has been said after an event) and the seeming wish to seperate the claim between the insurer and the club! It doesn't work that way. Insurance premiums = claims+administration costs. It's a simple equation! Basically any claim is met by those participating in the activity or benefitting from it. As those participating remunerate those benefitting in this activity the total cost of any claim, including all the legal fees, will be met by golfers.

 

[bluetoon]

this is probably the biggest single reason that the case has to go to court, and possibly to appeal as well!.

What!

Golf has been played in this country for over 400years in rain, snow, hail and gales, do we really want to be seen as the generation that panders to the compensation culture and entertains frivolous lawsuits.

 

[williamalex1]

what!

Golf has been played in this country for over 400years in rain, snow, hail and gales, do we really want to be seen as the generation that panders to the compensation culture and entertains frivolous lawsuits.

blame colin

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Yup, when all the golf courses close, thousands of golf staff laid off, kids hanging round street corners and the UK becomes the new Switzerland of golf we can all blame 'Colin's Law'.

 

[chrisd]

this is probably the biggest single reason that the case has to go to court, and possibly to appeal as well!

if the existence of ice on a course is deemed to represent an unacceptable risk ie you have to close the course if it exists (or may exist because you can't check whether it actually does at every point)

personally I find this a strange assumption - I frequently play golf when the ball bounces on the water hazards! Strangely I also go for walks in such conditions, as do many others.

as I said earlier, if there was an artificial surface installed that had become dangerous in the conditions, it would be appropriate to place a warning (and in an extreme situation it may even be appropriate to re-route and close off an area), equally if there was any area where the club had been made aware of a specific danger (normally through the unfortunate experience of others) it will probably be appropriate to place a warning there.

if a course has to close if there is a risk of ice then clearly this has a huge financial implication for the businesses in the UK - and that's before you take into account the implications for those who primarily play golf in the winter months for exercise and do other things in the warmer months!

there are of course a couple of other unfortunate aspects (beyond the obvious injury to Colin) - the communication situation which is a real catch 22; it had to happen the way it did because the developing claims culture (which includes claims that have only been pursued and won on the basis of what has been said after an event) and the seeming wish to seperate the claim between the insurer and the club! It doesn't work that way. Insurance premiums = claims+administration costs. It's a simple equation! Basically any claim is met by those participating in the activity or benefitting from it. As those participating remunerate those benefitting in this activity the total cost of any claim, including all the legal fees, will be met by golfers.

It's potentially even more difficult than you say, the conditions in the winter change by the minute. the course can be fine one minute then, as the sun goes down, turn really cold and icy the next. It can be dry then a rain storm sees it under water. It is impracticable to have a up to the minute, ongoing, safety assessments and that is why golfers have to take some personal responsibility. He said it was frosty and a grown up would have to assume that if its cold enough for frost then its going to be very likely there will be ice about. I can't see for the life of me why he thinks that someone else is responsible for advising him of something that would be patently obvious, it is, after all, a hazard of winter golf - he knows that and if he wasn't willing to accept the risk then he shouldn't have played!

There are clearly risks attached to everything that you do in life and I readily accept that if someone is negligent and it causes injury then compensation is rightly awarded but in this case Colin, who I dont thinks has responded to answer the foot wear question as yet, seems to ignore the fact that the conditions were clearly poor and that he should have been more vigilant and maybe sue the two members who he was with for taking him out in such conditions!