Whistler Village Bike Park lawsuit

July 25, 2013, 10:05 a.m.

Posts: 72

Joined: April 27, 2013

http://www.whistlerquestion.com/article/20130724/WHISTLER01/307249969/-1/WHISTLER/ontario-woman-suing-rmow-over-2011-biking-accident

Older "incident" but recent filing….

"The notice, filed July 4, states that negligence on the part of the RMOW led to or contributed to the accident, saying municipal staff failed to warn users of the dangers associated with the use of the teeter-totter, provide instructions on how to use the feature and ensure that riders used the structure in a reasonably safe manner. It also states that the municipality failed to remove the teeter-totter when the Defendant knew or ought to have known its use by bike riders was liable to cause injury.":|

July 25, 2013, 10:40 a.m.

hypa

Posts: 4794

Joined: Aug. 4, 2004

Great, another one…..

I give it a month before she comes here and starts posting about her awesome Bali vacations, and how the lawyers are making her do this.

:ohthedrama:

July 25, 2013, 10:43 a.m.

IFO

Posts: 14115

Joined: Nov. 19, 2002

welcome to the generation of

"its not my fault"…

July 25, 2013, 10:54 a.m.

Kevin_m31

Posts: 0

Joined: Oct. 9, 2009

It would be interesting to see how much of your pass cost goes to insurance and lawsuits.

July 25, 2013, 10:58 a.m.

big-ted

Posts: 10

Joined: Jan. 12, 2006

I thought we'd been through this already, and concluded that, often in these cases, it's not the person who got injured filing the suit, but their medical insurance company filing the suit "on their client's behalf" so as to recoup their expenses?

July 25, 2013, 11:03 a.m.

metroneck

Posts: 335

Joined: Nov. 20, 2010

Having kids, I spend a lot of time at playgrounds…

There are ZERO instructions for use, or warning signs. Activities include high exposure and height elements with no restraint or other safety devices. How many kids hurt themselves in playgrounds?

Interesting that even the most anal parents understand the concept of assumed and reasonable risk.

Hopefully the legal system views MTB trails the same way.

July 25, 2013, 11:05 a.m.

patrolskid

Posts: 4841

Joined: May 19, 2003

there was nothing wrong with that teeter .

and besides that , it was pretty much a stand alone feature that you would have to make a clear conscious decision to ride over , as opposed to a no other option trail feature on a piece of simgletrack where you might not perceive any other available route .

hope the judge applies some common sense to this one .

i see it took her two years to file . i'd like to think it took her two years to find a lawyer who would take the case .

July 25, 2013, 12:09 p.m.

sAFETY

Posts: 5717

Joined: Nov. 19, 2002

In my opinion, she's suing the wrong people. The real guilt lies with all the 4 and 5 year old kids in that park all day riding over that teeter totter. They didn't fully explain to her that possible ramifications and dangers, and gave her a false sense of security.

iforonewelcome.com

July 25, 2013, 4:44 p.m.

hypa

Posts: 4794

Joined: Aug. 4, 2004

My wife took a spill attempting to ride the triple teetor at the LEC park.
She winged her noggin' and bruised up her shoulder, but the thought of suing anyone never crossed anyone's mind.

Shit happens, especially when you're biking.

July 25, 2013, 5:49 p.m.

ReductiMat

Posts: 11969

Joined: June 4, 2008

I think this needs to be said a few more times.

I thought we'd been through this already, and concluded that, often in these cases, it's not the person who got injured filing the suit, but their medical insurance company filing the suit "on their client's behalf" so as to recoup their expenses?

often in these cases, it's not the person who got injured filing the suit, but their medical insurance company filing the suit "on their client's behalf" so as to recoup their expenses?

July 25, 2013, 6:33 p.m.

DaveM

Posts: 14610

Joined: Dec. 16, 2003

I think this needs to be said a few more times.

often in these cases, it's not the person who got injured filing the suit, but their medical insurance company filing the suit "on their client's behalf" so as to recoup their expenses?

often in these cases, it's not the person who got injured filing the suit, but their medical insurance company filing the suit "on their client's behalf" so as to recoup their expenses?

often in these cases, it's not the person who got injured filing the suit, but their medical insurance company filing the suit "on their client's behalf" so as to recoup their expenses?

often in these cases, it's not the person who got injured filing the suit, but their medical insurance company filing the suit "on their client's behalf" so as to recoup their expenses?

I sense that you're trying to say something…

July 25, 2013, 7:26 p.m.

ReductiMat

Posts: 11969

Joined: June 4, 2008

I sense that you're trying to say something…

Especially now that one can trade in rep points for beer, I'm sorry to inform you that I cannot give you some at this time.

July 25, 2013, 7:29 p.m.

Bryan

Posts: 7306

Joined: Nov. 20, 2002

I sense that you're trying to say something…

I was coming into this thread to warn you from posting in it. Please keep your opinions on this to yourself. Lol

July 25, 2013, 9:58 p.m.

semaj

Posts: 2615

Joined: March 29, 2009

"Corpe suffered a split depression fracture of the left tibial plateau that required surgery, a meniscal tear in the left knee, patellofemoral pain syndrome, weakened left quadriceps muscles and soft tissue injuries as a result of the accident…"

As a further result of the said injuries, the Plaintiff has suffered impairment and interference with her earning capacity and has incurred a loss of income, both past and prospective,

There's a joke in there about the ability to stand on a corner. But I won't go there. ;)

July 26, 2013, 10:21 a.m.

Oldfart

Posts: 5731

Joined: June 24, 2003

I thought we'd been through this already, and concluded that, often in these cases, it's not the person who got injured filing the suit, but their medical insurance company filing the suit "on their client's behalf" so as to recoup their expenses?

I have never experienced a medical subrogation claim in 25 years of claims adjusting. I have seen OHIP and BC Med seek recovery of costs through the Healthcare Recovery Act but in BC The plaintiff hires the lawyer who is obligated to seek those medical costs. I have not seen yet where BC medical start a claim themselves. The woman may have private medical insurance for services that are not covered by her her provincial scheme but those usually aren't worth enough to sue for. Wage loss is different. But the claim is seeking damages beyond what a medical care provider would pay. That tells me that she is the douchebag behind the claim.An insurer once they pay out is subrogated to their insured's claim and can sue in that insured's name to recover what they paid out. They can't sue for uninsured losses.

You do see this in the US but that's a whole new ballgame. Even folks with healthcare get dinged for some costs.

This person it would seem is a snot. Snot fair, snot my fault, snot sposed to happen. I've heard all these before handling sports claims. No it's not fair. Life isn't fair. If life was fair, We would all be as smart as Stephen Hawking, rich as Bill Gates and look as good as Brad Pitt/Angelina Jolie.(I have the Brad looks but lack the other two attributes). Yes it was your fault douchebag. and arguing snot sposed to happen is a logical nullity. Things happen honey bunch. Get over yourself.

Unless we are missing something of course. I don't think we are though.

Debate? Bikes are made for riding not pushing.