Yeah I know. I just didn't want to depress people further.
If you have "considerable assets", of any kind -- being a club leader
is inherently a very risky position to put yourself in, financially --
now that corporate rules regarding liability of organizations have
been eviscerated.
Thank Enron and Qwest leadership for the motivation to change the law
the next time you see them.
ARRL says little about this. They have a whole organization dedicated
to clubs that never says a word in any publication about how to
properly set up Amateur organizations from a liability standpoint.
At least my AOPA membership means they lobby for product liability
changes in aviation. If ARRL ever starts fighting for liability limits
for volunteer organizations in The Beltway instead of the never-ending
BPL fight, I'll be pretty impressed.
--
Nate Duehr
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 26, 2009, at 17:49, Butch Kanvick <hot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Usually when some one signs a waiver letter, it is not worth the ink
that it is written with.
You cannot assign your rights away before something happens, it
usually means you have just admitted liability with them signing the
letter.
It might slow down litigation by about 5 minutes, but does not mean
anything. It is feel good measure, but good luck when it is used
against you.
Butch, KE7FEL/r
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
From: n...@natetech.com
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 17:12:39 -0700
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Site Insurance Vendors
Check to see if they can later subrogate in cases of negligence or
gross
negligence in your state. In California, I think it's gross
negligence, but
I'd have to check.
Sure they have to defend you, but if they lose... then they can
usually turn
around and sue you.
And... this becomes a conflict of interest, because in States where
they can
subrogate only in cases of GROSS negligence (you have to get the
difference
between negligence and gross negligence here...), they're motivated to
provide you with a really shoddy defense.
Basically the old adage comes true again -- any lawyer you're not
paying out
of your pocket, isn't looking out for your best interests, they're
looking
to the best interests of their CLIENT. In this case, the insurance
company.
Let's use a real-world example: Someone falls off a tower and is hurt.
It'd be REALLY easy for any lawyer involved to prove GROSS
negligence today
if everyone climbing didn' t have FORMAL OSHA-Approved climbing
training.
Send one guy up the tower who VOLUNTEERS to do so without modern
training,
and he falls, and you don't have a signed waiver from him -- if
you're an
officer of the organization, be prepared to lose your house to his
widow.
This is the kind of stuff that keeps club Presidents and officers
awake at
night when it's time to replace antennas.
Nate
-----Original Message-----
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dave Gomberg
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 3:06 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Site Insurance Vendors
At 13:34 1/26/2009, Nate Duehr wrote:
>Also consider that most of your Bo ard and Officers will be
bankrupt from
>paying for the lawyers to defend themselves (let alone the
organization)
>long before the insurance kicks in... Nate
You picked a bad state, Nate. In California, an insurance company
has a duty to defend, even if they think the suit is baseless or not
covered by your policy (they must defend to ensure that they get that
ruling). And they pay for the defense.
FWIW, I am not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV, this is NOT legal
advice.
>
--
Dave Gomberg, San Francisco NE5EE gomberg1 at wcf dot com
All addresses, phones, etc. at http://www.wcf.com/ham/info.html
----------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
