Posted by MHK on February 27, 2001 at 17:33:16:
In Reply to: PADI's comments re legal liability & Nitrox posted by Pat Fousek, PADI on February 27, 2001 at 16:52:40:
Pat,
Thanks for joining in, had I known you were interested I would have extended the invitation and perhaps avoided some of the confusion.
Just so I [we] are all operating under the same theory, as I understand your advise is that while we can never eliminate the possibility of litigation [ we wouldn't want you out of a job ;-)], the potential for a resulting liability for a non-Nitrox trained DM supervising a certified Nitrox diver diving Nitrox is no more or less than a non-wreck { substitute any specialty here} certified DM supervising a certified wreck { substitue specialty here) diver???????
What I'm trying to clear up, and what is so confusing to me about Ken's position, is that while anyone can sue anybody for anything, there isn't any added risk incurred with respect to not being certified in Nitrox and being the DM when you have Nitrox diver's on the boat...
It seems to me that allowing diver's to dive solo ( absent solo diving waiver's) while using a different waiver than the standard industry waiver is riskier than worrying about a non-Nitrox trained DM supervising nitrox trained and certified diver's....
As for the insurance policy I cited the exclusions directly from my policy and will provide copies to anyone that provides a fax number... So I agree with Pat that you should review your policy and understand what is excluded and what is covered...
Later