 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
My kids (5 & 7) are joining an after school club that does group exercise/fitness/Zumba type stuff. They are really fit and healthy and totally into this sort of thing, especially if their friends are there.
I was just looking at the consent form which is all the usual stuff like allergies, contact details etc. it also includes a section on liability basically saying they accept no liability for any injury, however it is caused, even if it as a result of an error or omission by their instructors. It is not a risky activity so I am pragmatic about the risk, but is it reasonable for organisers of an activity to absolve themselves of all liability? They should have insurance.
Ai making too big a deal out of this?
Those disclaimers are pretty much meaningless from a legal perspective IIRC.
[quote=grum ]Those disclaimers are pretty much meaningless from a legal perspective IIRC.
+1 Sign what you want but they are still responsible.
Not so much worried about whether or not I can sue them, just seems odd they they would even state that.
You can't sign yourself out of your legal rights. If they have been negligent, they are still responsible.
They can put what they want on the form - doesn't mean that it actually holds any legal force whatsoever.
Came across some similar wording before my kid took part in supervised indoor surfing at Xscape in Castleford. Fine, it carries an element of risk, but it doesn't exactly inspire confidence in any set-up that thinks that catch-all rejection of liability is appropriate.
I don't think they can have a liability waiver,can they?
Okey dokey, that is the form signed an another cheque written.
I think I was a actually just looking for a reason not to spend more money on another kid activity. Add that to rugby, ballet, tap, jazz, gymnastics and swimming and it costs a fortune.
Came across some similar wording before my kid took part in supervised indoor surfing at Xscape in Castleford. Fine, it carries an element of risk, but it doesn't exactly inspire confidence in any set-up that thinks that catch-all rejection of liability is appropriate]
Exactly.
Zumba is the devil's work. It's not too late.
Exact wording is
[i]by my signature hereto, I undertake not to hold the proprietor of ****** liable for any injury, loss or damage which I or my child might sustain whilst participating in the class arising irrespective of whether such loss, injury or damage can be attributed to any act or omission of an instructor of ***[/i]
Zumba is the devil's work. It's not too late.
I know a girl who broke her back doing Zumba. Seriously.
Thanks Ben, just what I needed to hear.....
I suspect she was doing it wrong.
as said above meaningless in law but the wording is a bit OTP - how abvout asking them for a copy of their risk assessment for the activity?
You can't disclaim negligence
Sorry 😉
Actually, she was a gymnast at a very high level, and a theory was that she pulled a muscle doing the Zumba, and then when she was doing the gymnastics training something popped and cracked a vertebrae. After several operations she's pretty much back to normal.
They can't exclude duty of care, or liability to negligence in this manner.
The point i'd be more concerned about is that they think its a reasonable approach to try to exclude this, and/or are ignorant of their duties.
Insurance is another matter, they should have it. Its more how its structured, what type of org. they are, affiliated with a sport NGB etc.
You may want to point out *gently* that wording/approach is as useful as a chocolate fireguard.