Sail Mama

The fact that the effects of this storm were not reasonably foreseeable at the time that you purchased your cruise would seem to work in your favor. This is assuming that you didn't purchase it after the potential impact of the storm was announced. Does you insurance policy have a inclement weather clause? I would check it out. After seeing what the region is going through I really don't blame your for wanting to cancel.

. It seems like they are being sued based on a person not understanding that they didn't mean to do stand-up on a boogie board. Which is why they need as ignorant a jury as possible. Unfortunately, that is very possible.:evilsmile:JC

Which is why the waiver should not be enforced and a jury left to decide.

1. Is the perfect size about the rider or the size of the wave? I took JC's comment to mean the size of the flowrider. :confused:

I also took JC's comment to be in reference to the Flowrider. The point that I am trying to make is there are other physical factors involved that need to be considered in liability.

Yeah, all that has already been discussed.

 

1.... as if something like a flowrider has a perfect size or shape? Before the first flowrider, there was only no flowrider. After it was built there was the perfect flowrider? Evolution is not just for fish or monkeys.

 

2.... Other than being pop culture what the heck does anyone really care about the hot coffee case?

 

3.... have you ever seen a waiver where the people asking you to sign it... state. This is dangerous, when you get hurt we will pay you boat loads of money even if we did nothing wrong?

 

4.... Well if you can prove negligence then my guess is that most courts will ignore that portion of the waiver and pay you boat loads of money.

 

Thanks for playing... now how about you have it?

 

JC

1. You do realize that Royal has minimum height requirements to ride the FR, don't you? If having the "perfect" size and shape is irrelevant, then where did they get this minimum height requirement from? It's called physics. Yes, evolution in which lessons in safety are learned can be a good thing. For example, having the enough lifeboats onboard to accommodate everyone onboard is a very valuable lesson in safety that we learned from the Titanic.

2. To show that what something appears to be is not always what it is.

3. No.

4. It's already been determined that liability for negligence cannot be waived.

No one blamed McDonalds for the spilling. That was clearly accidental on the plaintiffs part. But it is a reasonable expectation that if one does spill coffee the burns would not be so severe because the normal serving temperature is lower.

 

So yes, we can put some "blame" for the accidental spill on the plaintiff, but the actual damage caused was outside of normal expectations and that is because the vendor supplied a product hotter than normal. These are really two separate and mutual points. One does not negate the other. It's really fascinating that in a 25 year old case so many people miss the actual point and just kind of stick to the "stupid people sue because coffee is hot" line. Is it the dumbing down of society the people don't want to find or don't care about relevant details?

 

So back to the Flowrider in question; did injuries result from a normally operating machine, in which case plaintiff does not have much of a case, or was the machine being operated outside of normal design parameters, in which case plaintiff has a case. The machine operating as designed doesn't release a user from having to be careful, but a machine operating outside of normal design parameters has a higher potential to cause injury to a user no matter their skill or care level.

 

I am not a Flowrider operator and I don't know the inner workings of the machine, but let's say, just for discussion sake, the machine has 5 pumps and is designed to move water at 25 mph; if one pump was broken, does the manufacturer state to stop using the machine? Or is it accepted practice with the design of the machine to increase power of the 4 remaining pumps? If it is determined that 25 MPH is the optimal flow of water for "normal" use of the machine, what does increasing the flow to 30, 35, or 40 MPH do? Does the risk increase in a linear way? Does the operator have any requirement to disclose that the flow of water is above normal recommended limits? Does RCI's lawyers apply a different limit than the manufacturer would (more conservative?). These are the sort of questions that would be asked at trial to determine if something is accidental of negligent.

Thank you for your insight.

Again another bull---- post! The being operated outside of normal parameters argument is pure hogwash and speculation. The flowrider has the same water pressure each and every day that you happen to be using it. It is another frivolous lawsuit by another ignorant moron.:rolleyes:

Then it is certainly speculation on your part to assume that the machine was being operated the same way each day and on the day in question. Consider that other factors could have been present (such as weather conditions) that could have warranted that the machine be operated in a different way (if not shut down altogether during such weather).

I am still trying to figure out why so many have an issue with fact finding and the search for the truth.

I know this is ancient...

 

 

 

 

1992. Coffee was in styrofoam. You couldn't tell the heat of it with your fingers. The coffee meant to be drunk caused 3rd degree burns. She had to have skin grafts. She was an elderly woman having skin grafts on her groin area because mcd kept their coffee ridiculously hot.

 

The lawsuit made it through all the checks and balances in the court system..

 

 

Starbucks has sleeves partially because of this! And because styrofoam isn't used anymore.

 

I won't use the sleeves. If the paper cup of coffee is too hot for me to hold, it's too hot for me to drink yet. I won't be denied one if my "is this dangerous?" senses.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mcd kept it 180-190 back then. That's a lot hotter than yours.

Thank you for pointing this all out. The problem here is that many think that all risks are obvious, when they are in fact all not. It has always been my contention that if the coffee could cause 3rd degree burns to someone's thigh or groin, it can also cause 3rd degree burns to someone's mouth and digestive track where the coffee is intended to be. I wonder how many skeptics would have seen this differently if the woman had in fact sustained 3rd degree burns to her throat or if the victim was a child who sustained 3rd degree burns as the clerk was handing the coffee over to the patron. The fact that she sustained 3rd degree burns to her groin area instead of her throat does not mean that she didn't suffer less. Safety should always be a concern and priority. This is why instead of touting itself to have the hottest coffee, it should have been touting as having the best coffee- you know, the kind of coffee that tastes good and doesn't cause you to get 3rd degree burns.

Please please let Andrew's dream be true.

 

JC<----- praying

It's true.

2.8 seconds. It is common sense that a machine that shoots 35mph waves at you could cause injury.

You're an amazing speed reader. It took me 2.8 seconds just to read your post. Do you know how I can get a copy of this waiver?

They are. They sign the waiver. They have signs. They have safely demos.

How long did I take you to read the waiver?

I know the risks. I still ride.

 

 

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Well as long as you have been properly informed and you are making an informed decision, then the choice is yours. But folks have to be properly notified of what those risks are.

Really, could you give us some examples of what the staff should do to make sure people are riding safe? JC

How about asking prospective riders before getting on the ride are they sure that they want to take the risk of being seriously injured? How many prospective riders do you think would change their minds if they were clear that they could be seriously injured?

Can you please back that claim up with irrefutable evidence? How do you know that they aren't trained?

 

Are you a graduate of Flowrider university?

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

I would be curious too.

People like their coffee HOT! Easier to cool it down then warm it up after you leave the store... When I was Rest MGR 20-35 yrs ago all places I worked for kept coffee around 160-168 degrees. Always Hot...

Not to the point that it's so hot that it can cause 3rd degree burns and death. Many get caught up on the notion that because she spilled it on her lap she and she alone was responsible for her injuries. Consider that someone could have attained 3rd degree burns in her mouth if she had merely sipped the coffee. What then- should she have waited 2 hours before sipping it to make sure that it was safe? If McDs had received multiple complaints that the coffee was too hot, the it should have remedied the problem before getting sued.

I thought it was common knowledge the FlowRiders were modified. They are smaller than the land based ones, however the manufacturer made them smaller not RCCL. Actually I'm surprised both parties weren't sued.

 

It's not sad that he is suing, it's sad that he will probably win.

 

Look at recent lawsuits and their verdicts.

 

One of the big box hardware stores, believe it was Lowes, was sued because a 2x4 wasn't 2" by 4". Lowes lost, 2x4's have NEVER been sold to an end user at 2" x 4" they used to be wet cut to that size and would dry down to 1 3/4" x 3 3/4". In the modern age they are just made 1 1/2" by 3 1/2".

 

Red Bull lost because it didn't give someone wings. Now their logo says wiings.

 

Some guy falls and gets hurt on a FlowRider, easy money.

I suppose that you might have a point if someone using a Flowrider had been to land based ones frequently to make the comparison. However, if he had not he would not have had a reference for comparison.

And it is really easy to be dismissive about a case without knowing the facts of a case. Do you know the facts of the case? If you don't know, then it would be premature to say that it would be sad if he actually won.

Yes I researched that story eons ago, unfortunately it changes nothing. The woman was irresponsible not McDonalds. I'm on their side. I guess you would want them to serve iced coffee to be sure no one else puts a scalding cup of coffee between their legs. Duh. We've all burned our mouths on hot drinks at some point haven't we? In fact I do it pretty often.:o If this had happened at home, who would she have sued? O yeah, the coffeemaker or the mircro wave seller...

 

When will people in this country take responsibility for their own mistakes??.....I guess never, as long as lawyers rule the courts. Geez, I wonder why the other million +++ people who got the same coffee managed to use their grey matter and not get burned at all, in fact actually put that hot coffee in their mouths and swallowed?? I'd rather believe that 700 people were not cautious but careless. Why do you think Starbucks provides sleeves for their coffee? But now, you have to put them on the cup yourself, because some Barista didn't put one on right and someone tripped and burned themselves.:rolleyes:

 

The moral of this story is what my Gram always taught us as kids:

You can believe fire will burn you, but when you get burned, you KNOW it will burn you! So....you better make sure it doesn't happen.

 

Yes, sometimes companies knowingly do the wrong things and must be held accountable, IMHO this wasn't one of them. And if anyone reads the waiver before they sign it, which I am convinced hardly ever happens, then enough said. You ride at your own peril.:cool:

So what do you say about the 700 or so people who complained about the coffee being too hot before this woman got burned? Why did McD's decide to make coffee that hot in the first place?

In addition to regular travel insurance, the best insurance to avoid missing flight connections or costly delays is to fly in to the port city at least the day before. For me it has been a great stress reducer too.

Hi. I know exactly what you mean. Although I really did enjoy my first cruise, I have come to realize that one's cruise experiences will vary according to many factors. The key is to do research and your homework, and understand the factors that could impact your enjoyment:

1. Your traveling companion(s). You have already stated that you and your daughter have different tastes for entertainment. I find it very helpful to travel with companions with whom I am compatible with and share similar tastes. Consider if age differences will impact your activities and compatibilities.

2. The ship. Your ship is your vacation. I have learned that bigger is not always better, but too small can be boring. After taking so many cruises, my cozy range is between 70,000- 110,000 tons. Be sure to check out the ship profile to see if is the best size for your tastes.

3. The cabin. Cabins are at different rates for a good reason. The cabin itself could affect your experience because being in your cabin is part of the whole cruising experience. Some are fine with inside cabins because of the price and they don't spend much time in them. However, if claustrophobia is an issue for you and/or you plan to go on a long cruise, you may wish to consider an oceanview or balcony cabin. Also where the cabin is located on the ship can impact your ride. Look at the ship's deck plan. If you prefer less noise, consider booking a cabin that is not adjacent to or near noisy places such as elevators, the anchor room or dance clubs. If you are prone to motion or sea sickness, consider a lower cabin that is midship or in the aft.

4. The cruise itinerary, destination, length and cruise line. Are you a fun in the sun beach person or would you enjoy seeing ice glaciers? Once again, this is why it is important to also know what your traveling companion(s) prefer. This will help you determine if you would prefer booking something like a Caribbean or Alaskan cruise. For example, I went on an Alaskan cruise and enjoyed it. However, I have cruised with others in the past who I don't think would have enjoyed it the way I did. Look for a cruise line that specializes in catering to your preferences. Be sure to study the ports of call and what excursions and attractions are available at each. Determine if having at least one sea day is important to you. At the same time, having too many sea days can present special challenges as you can become bored or become tired of looking at water and no land. For first time and cruisers with less experience, I recommend starting on shorter cruises and working their way up. This way they can establish a cruise rhythm that works best for them.

I hope that this helps!

Has anyone ever taken the glass bottom boat tour at Coco Cay? How was it and did it seem t be worth it?

Once I start having dreams like these, I know that it's time for a vacation!

Thanks. Please keep me posted. I would greatly appreciate it!

My idea of a great beach would be clean sand, clear & calm waters, restrooms, a pub and grille, umbrellas & chairs, not too crowded, and not more than an hour away from the ship. Anyone know of one that meets these criteria? Or am I just fantasizing?

Good question. I also would like to know what would be the best beach to go to. I understand that Maho is where the airplanes take off and land very low. I am not sure if the loud idea would be my idea of a pleasant beach stay.

Does anyone know the total acreage of CoCo Cay? Are there motor vehicles, e.g. golf carts on the island? I'm just trying to get an idea of how much walking may be involved to get from the tender pier to Barefoot Beach.

My understanding is that each passenger may purchase his or her own separate beverage package.