Warning on tag-a-long tour operators

Submitted: Monday, May 02, 2005 at 15:52
ThreadID: 22572 Views:4100 Replies:14 FollowUps:28
This Thread has been Archived
I was chatting with a mate who is "in the industry" this morning and he related a story about a tag-a-long tour which is going to conclude in a court of law. Apparently, some months back a couple with children were undertaking their ultimate outback holiday with a reputable tour operator and were half way through the proposed trip when after dinner one evening, in the middle of nowhere there was a medical emergency with one of the children. Allegedly the guide had imbibed a quantity of alcohol prior to and during the meal and when confronted with the emergency, was unable, in the eyes of the parents to offer appropriate procedures or directions to deal with either the medical situation or transfer to an environment with care facilities. The child in question apparently has a permanent disability which may have been avoided if the correct course of action had been undertaken.
The parents are arguing that the tour guide had a duty of care to be 100% sober as part of the implied responsibility he had assumed by providing the tag-a-long and that their child had suffered due to his perceived inability to fulfil his obligations.
Reading between the lines I don't think the tour operator was anywhere near rolling drunk, but the proposition is that he should have maintained 100% sobriety in order to perform his duties accountably. I have never been on a tag-a-long tour but this scenario raises a number of questions which I hope operators and participants may be able to help me with;
What is acceptable with regard to the sobriety of a tour operator?
Is there any mention of conditional responsibilities in the tour operators' contracts?
Do the operators have a moral obligation to maintain zero alcohol impairment?
"Drinks around the campfire" is something which the majority of Australians enjoy, but is the tour leader unable to participate?
And finally, are these parents being unreasonable in their expectations of the tour company?
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Trev88 - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 16:24

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 16:24
My first thought was did the tour operator know the child had a medical issue before he left or did it devlope on route. If the parents know and did not inform the opperator then I would argue they are at fault as well. Having said that the tour opperator should have a back up who refrains from consuming any alcohol or the opperator him slef should not participate. Given the parents have paid for a service they can have a reasonable expectation of that service. However if the information given to the parents indicated that the service as a guide only and that they were to be selfsuffient and went on to outline the expectations then they may get off. But I dout it.

Unfortunatly we live in a latigious (wheres the spell check) society where saying sorry costs you money. it does however highlight the need to band the tour opperators together and offer some training on their obligations (not legislation) and as the opperators are small businesses i would recomend they seek assitance from the govenment small bussiness associations or create their own.

From my expeience when people pay you for somthing and you do not expressly exclude it then the assumtion under law is it is included. The exclusion to this is if it is reasonable to expect that a person should know better. If they are taging along then I would suggest it will be difficult to prove they could have known better and have now shown reliance on the tour opperator.

My advise to anyone considering starting or who is opperating a tag along is talk to your insurance agent and go through the small print while on video camera it's amazing how indirect they become when you keep arecord of the conversation (no wild promises to get you to sign up). I would expect that in his insurance he is not covered in the same way transport workers are expected to have zero alcohol. As a work place invesigation that is his work place???.

At the end of the day the only people who will make money out of this is the lawyers.

My sympathys to both parties

Trevor
AnswerID: 109239

Reply By: Member - Jeff M (WA) - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 17:33

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 17:33
Mmmmmmmm, tricky, tricky hey...
If I were a tour operater I would have a few drinks around the camp fire and or with dinner. It would be a sad day in Australia when having a beer with your dinner was not sociably acceptable, but then he is working? Isn't he?
Would him having a few beers (this is the assumption) have made THAT MUCH of a difference to the situation?

Couldn't the parents have dirven and they guide been a passenger offering directions?

Didn't the operater have a Sat phone or HF that someone could have used?
Epirb?

To me it sounds like the parents are potentially clutching at straws here. Now no one would be happy with it happening to their kids, but would it have made a difference? It's hard to tell without more information.
I think as long as the tour operater was not rolling arond drunk and still had his witts about him then it's a non-issue. It's amazing how a little bit of being tipsy can dissapear (seemingly) in an emergency. I have been in many a situation where we were drinking away and somthing happens, someone cuts themselves, burns them selves etc etc. All of a sudden your sitting up straight, grabbing the first aid kid and seriously solving the problem with a minmum amount of hassels.
Of course this is different if he's laying flat on his back singing "baa baa black sheep" and giggling at the stars... Some how I doubt this.

AnswerID: 109253

Follow Up By: Member - Roachie (SA) - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 18:59

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 18:59
Quote: "but then he is working? Isn't he?"

G'day Jeff, Yes mate it's a curly one alright, but how many hours a day is a bloke in this position supposed to be accountable? This is what I'd be asking if I was the tour operator's lawyer. For example, after everyone has gone to sleep and it's 2am, if one of the tour participants vomits and chokes to death, is that the bloke's fault too, cos he should have been sitting up in a chair all night waiting for some unknown catastrophe to occur....Of course not......and I'm being silly on purpose, just to demonstrate my point. The bloke was probably the first one up every day to get his own gear packed up and get the morning camp fire underway etc. Is he then expected to be the group's guide, mechanic, cook, doctor/nurse etc etc.

People need to be aware that there is a certain amount of risk associated with doing outback travel. Even if you have HF, satphone and epirb; there are certain events which can occur which nobody can do anything about, .....sober or pyssshed!!! My thoughts go back a few months when a bloke collapsed in a nearby village. His defacto was a medical doctor and she had 3 of her medico friends at the house at the exact time he collapsed. None of them could do anything!!!! This apparently fit 40 something year old bloke was dead before he hit the floor; some sort of annurism (where's that bloody spell check when a bloke needs it).

Anyway.....enuff of my rambling.

Roachie
0
FollowupID: 365943

Reply By: dedalus - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 17:56

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 17:56
Hi all,
as a "guide" in Kangaroo Island I have to said this: when I'm working/driving, by law I cant drink anything.... my driving license will immediate burned if a policeman stop me with a glass of wine in my blood .... but if the "guide" is not driving a vehicle whit passengers on board ... ????
I personally think NO drinks when working but I know it is very difficult to say in front a campfire .....

AnswerID: 109257

Reply By: Wayne (NSW) - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 18:13

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 18:13
Wombat,

The information that you have given it is really hard to make a informed comment.

Being a tour leader is not always fun. Having to tell kids not to run around the campsite after dark several times while the parents sit back. A kid falls a scream is heard and all of a sudden the parents are asking what has happened?

No matter where you go the parents are responsible for there own kids...

The way that Great Divide Tours run is that after the camp has been set, the fire lit, the BBQ set up and the billy on the fire, then the tour leaders (male or female) can enjoy a quiet ale, but under no circumstance is the leader be over the limit.

We always carry a Sat Phone on all trips and I always make sure that someone else knows how to use it. It is not much good having the phone and I am the only one who knows how to use it and I am the one who is unconscious.

Duty of care, How drunk was the leader, was there a back up tour leader, did the parents do all they could to prevent the situation from accruing in the first place, could medical help be obtained in time to prevent the disability regardless of the state the tour leader was in at the time.
A lot of question to be answered, but this could also happen on a club trip or a group of mates getting together. Someone must be in charge or organized the trip, shouldn't they take responsibility for everyone on the trip???

Wayne
AnswerID: 109263

Follow Up By: Member - Jeff M (WA) - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 19:07

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 19:07
"A lot of question to be answered, but this could also happen on a club trip or a group of mates getting together. Someone must be in charge or organized the trip, shouldn't they take responsibility for everyone on the trip??? "

What ever happened to taking responsibility for yourself. All this litigation crap gives me thebleepes. Sure if it's someone elses fault plain and simple (ie they drive into the side of your parked car) and they don't pay, takem to court, but fair crack of the whip!
0
FollowupID: 365944

Follow Up By: conman - Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 22:28

Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 22:28
exactly,

Is the tour guide responsible for wiping their asses as well?
0
FollowupID: 366149

Reply By: Mike Harding - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 18:37

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 18:37
I'll be interested to hear the final outcome, will you keep us informed? Although it will probably take 5 years and be settled out of court.

Who's liable? God alone knows! Once you get the courts involved you have _no idea_ where it's all going to end - stay out of them is my strong advice.

First of all can they prove he was inebriated? As he won't have had a blood or breath test it must be opinion? Do they have witnesses who agree? Does he have witnesses who disagree?

Second; he was not their babysitter - they are adults and should assume some (all?) responsibility for their own situation. Having said that people usually choose these types of tour because they know they're out of their depth so I guess he has an implied duty of care and it will be up to the court to decide if he breached it.

Booze wise? An accepted norm for driving a car is 0.05 so I guess it could be argued that was a baseline - then again some tasks require the driver to be at zero.

Who knows what the courts will do? But I can almost guarantee that after the stress and expense of the whole thing both parties will wish they had just let things be.

Mike Harding
AnswerID: 109269

Follow Up By: Peter - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 22:12

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 22:12
I think ANY Driving job requyires alcohol level to be zero.
Cheers Peter
0
FollowupID: 365973

Reply By: Steve - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 19:49

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 19:49
Are the Tag along tour operators Casualty Doctors ..or simply First Aid qualified ? Unreasonable...well thats obvious !!
AnswerID: 109283

Follow Up By: Footloose - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 20:01

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 20:01
You pay me money to take you and your child on a remote trip. You know it's remote, I know it's remote.
You are relying on my knowledge, expertise and professionalism. I have a duty of care, and in this case I would suggest it remains 24/7 until you are offloaded.
If I am unable to fulfill that duty of care through my negligence, and something happens, then depending upon circumstances, I may have a problem.
0
FollowupID: 365949

Follow Up By: Wombat - Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 13:53

Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 13:53
I couldn't have said it any better, Footloose! I personally think the tour operator MAY have a problem.
0
FollowupID: 366059

Reply By: Steve - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 20:17

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 20:17
Footloose : Are you involved in a tag along tour operator..??
AnswerID: 109288

Follow Up By: Footloose - Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 13:59

Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 13:59
Steve, never have been and never will be. And the current thread is one reason why. However I have been responsible for the safety and welfare of others in the past. Different situation I know but similar in terms of duty of care.
What makes the case a little different IMHO is the inclusion of children.
Why do you ask ?
0
FollowupID: 366061

Reply By: Member - John (Vic) - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 20:42

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 20:42
There are a number of typical contract statements by an experienced tag along operator on the web.
These would be supplemented by a Acknowledgment / Assumption of risk (Waiver) form, No doubt drafted by experienced tort lawyers to cover today's legal situation.

After all we have no facts other than the second hand conversation described by the originator of this post as a "Related story" 'Which is going to conclude in court" so may be nothing more than a case of one operator attempting to bag the competition, further speculation could invoke further legal issues such as "Slander" for the person who continues to propagate "The Story" in a public forum.

These issues are never very clear and it would be unhelpful to speculate in any respect about the circumstances of what may or may not have occurred and indeed could be regarded as mischievous and a further propagation of the original slander.
VKS737 - Mobile 6352 (Selcall 6352)

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Position  Send Message
Classifieds: Water Tank 55 Litre

AnswerID: 109296

Follow Up By: Mad Dog (Australia) - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 22:27

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 22:27
hehe..onya John....didn't think you looked old enough to be that wise, you must be like me...a young looking old fart!
0
FollowupID: 365980

Follow Up By: Mike Harding - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 22:38

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 22:38
>These issues are never very clear and it would be unhelpful
>to speculate in any respect about the circumstances of what
>may or may not have occurred and indeed could be regarded
>as mischievous and a further propagation of the original slander.

The “original slander” was a libel – except it wasn’t.

Do try and keep up with things John: Slander is spoken, libel is
written except I think both have long since been replaced by
“Defamation” in Australia?

And it wasn’t defamation because that requires, at least, that the
defamed be identified and he/she wasn’t – unless you know better?

Mike Harding
0
FollowupID: 365986

Follow Up By: Member - John (Vic) - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 23:02

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 23:02
The slander may have occurred when it was told to Mr Wombat, he then propagates the slander on this medium.
Libel normally applies to the written in the initial.
You could argue that now that it has been written and propagated it could be cause for Libel against Mr Wombat.

Incidentally Defamation is a term applied to the attack or damage of a good name and can be applied to either. (Most people can't remember the difference between Slander and Libel so Defamation has become the easiest term to apply by the lay person)

You don't necessarily have to name the person (Real or otherwise) if the slander can be determined to apply to a person well known in the arena that that person may operate or be know to operate within.

EG: Tag along Tours is well known within the 4wd community and this is a well known 4wd forum frequented by persons known within the same industry.
You don't know who is reading this and what information they may know about that situation and how these speculative and non confirmed fact's listed by Mr Wombat may harm that situation.

Hence my last statement
"These issues are never very clear and it would be unhelpful to speculate in any respect about the circumstances of what may or may not have occurred and indeed could be regarded as mischievous and a further propagation of the original slander"

Take it as you will, I'm not the one who may end up in court over this type of issue.
VKS737 - Mobile 6352 (Selcall 6352)

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Position  Send Message
Classifieds: Water Tank 55 Litre

0
FollowupID: 365990

Follow Up By: Wombat - Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 14:27

Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 14:27
"There are a number of typical contract statements by an experienced tag along operator on the web." John, would you be so kind as to point me in the direction of these contract statements to further my limited knowledge of the subject?

With regard to your comments about whether this post is a libellous statement methinks that you are undertaking an exercise in scaremongering. As I have explained in a number of Member Messages I chose not to be advised of the relevant tour operator to avoid any accusations of slanderous behaviour on my behalf. If you take the time to re-read the original post you will see that my first four questions are not soliciting opinions about this particular case (which could even be a hypothetical situation), but I have asked for opinions about the responsibilities of these type of tour operators, generally. Thank you to those who answered me personally with Member Messages. If it pleases John, I could amend my last question to read - "Do parents, in general have unreasonable expectations of the tour companies?".
0
FollowupID: 366069

Follow Up By: Mike Harding - Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 20:56

Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 20:56
>Libel normally applies to the written in the initial.

What?

No John - libel is _always_ written.

>You could argue that now that it has been written and
>propagated it could be cause for Libel against Mr Wombat.

One could argue black is white but unless one has a sound basis it would be a load of crap.

>Most people can't remember the difference between Slander and Libel

It certainly seems you cannot.

>You don't necessarily have to name the person

I didn't say "name" John, I said "identify" and I don't believe Wombat did identify anyone - however I think you may well have "named" a entity - best of luck to you, you may need it.

>Take it as you will, I'm not the one who may end up in court over
>this type of issue.

I'm not so sure about that. As far as I can see you're the only one who has identified anyone so far in this thread?

Mike Harding
0
FollowupID: 366117

Follow Up By: Member - John (Vic) - Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 21:39

Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 21:39
I'm pleased to see that you did not disappoint Mike.
Good to see your self centered, condescending attitude has not let us down, Although I did expect you to be somewhat quicker of the mark.

I'm just so happy that you have all the answer's, it really gives me a warm feeling to know that when we are in doubt we have you to help and guide us.
VKS737 - Mobile 6352 (Selcall 6352)

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Position  Send Message
Classifieds: Water Tank 55 Litre

0
FollowupID: 366133

Follow Up By: Mike Harding - Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 22:01

Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 22:01
Hey John!

Don't blame me because you choose to make, less than comprehensible, posts to this forum late in the evening.

Mike Harding
0
FollowupID: 366142

Follow Up By: Wombat - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 12:20

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 12:20
a href="http://www.nerdtests.com/ft_loser.php?im">Hmmmmm!</a

http://www.nerdtests.com/ft_loser.php?im
0
FollowupID: 366198

Follow Up By: Wombat - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 12:22

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 12:22
Hmmmmm!
0
FollowupID: 366199

Reply By: Member - Jimbo (VIC) - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 21:09

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 21:09
What was in the contract that was signed up to by both parties?

Who guaranteed what?

Did the tour leader guarantee to provide absolute medical safety?

Did he have an exclusion clause?

Was there something in the contract absolving the tour leader from providing medical assistance?

Did the participants in the tour agree to taking their own risk?

Are any of the above legitimate legal guarantees?

I'm no lawyer so wouldn't know.

Anyway, just questions I would ask if I was on either side of the argument. And I guess there would be many others.

Cheers,

Jim
AnswerID: 109303

Follow Up By: Mad Dog (Australia) - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 22:23

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 22:23
Apart from being the Law in my house I'm no lawyer either jimbo but contract aside the courts like to battle this " reasonable duty of care" business. I don't think you can get out of that with an exclusion clause.
0
FollowupID: 365978

Follow Up By: Trev88 - Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 10:00

Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 10:00
It's funny you can contract anything you like but if it is outside of the law it does not hold up any where.

Trevor
0
FollowupID: 366024

Reply By: Truckster (Vic) - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 22:19

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 22:19
So, what could he have done

I suppose it all depends on what the nature of the disability is.. Did he choke on a pea, now he cant sneeze? or he was bitten by a snake, and is now a veggie...

Could it REALLY 100% have been avoided? If not, then all he could do is call flyin Dr on the HF, and wait...

and is it another case of "lets blame someone else"....
AnswerID: 109328

Reply By: emmetguy - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 23:03

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 23:03
I used to be a tour operator where I was in charge of a bus-load of clients, and our company policy was no alcohol consumption 12 hours prior to driving (more than the requirements of pilots I believe), and it was a fair enough rule considering our responsibility to safety of the passengers. But I was driving the vehicle with everyone on board, not just myself, so as for the tour operator, I believe he is entitled to a beer of a night time, as he has charge over his vehicle only. But what annoys me about these parents is the fact that it seems that they refuse to take any responsibility for their own desicions. What makes them think that the tour operator knows how to deal with the childs illness better than them? They are the parents after all and are familiar with any problems the child has, and it was their decision to put that child at risk by taking he/she away from its environment close to medical care. Im sick of hearing of other parties being blamed for child related injuries due to lack of proper care and supervision by the parents. 2 fairly recent similar incidences spring to mind. 1: Child gets fatally attacked by dingo on Fraser Island whilst playing on the beach. Beach is a highway. Beach is an airstrip. Beach is full of rips. Dingoes frequent the beach. Where is the supervision??? Result? Cull the last remaining pure dingoes in the land..
And I also hear that 4wds will soon be banned from car parks and probably altogether because we cant see in front or behind us and might run over a child. Believe me when I say no child of mine would be playing unsupervised on ANY beach, let alone on Fraser Island, nor would they be walking through a carpark without holding my hand, and they certainly would not be coming into the outback if I knew they had an ailment that may require medical attention, without inviting along someone trained to deal with it. My chilren certainly do not miss out on the things we all enjoy, but I am always wary of safety issues, and it doest take a lot to keep em safe and happy. But my point is: Be responsible for your own siblings and dont look for someone else to foot the responsibility when things go belly up... JMTBW..
AnswerID: 109345

Follow Up By: Diamond (Vic) - Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 12:32

Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 12:32
thats it
0
FollowupID: 366051

Follow Up By: Footloose - Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 14:03

Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 14:03
Totally agree up to a point. Parents are responsible for their own children. But the tour guide is responsible for what in an emergency ? Surely in any remote location he is responsible for trying to contact the necessary authorities ? No ??
0
FollowupID: 366062

Follow Up By: Member - Davoe (WA) - Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 15:03

Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 15:03
good points. The parents as ultamite gardians have the last responsability´. However I feel the toutr giude would be aware of other factors and could remove them by not not drinking or speeding or engaging in recklous behavior. While he might bre ablre to absolve himself of medical respossability he should be 24 7 able to get anybody into the quickest position for the best help as per his ability-knowledge. Does he deserve to have his pants sued off - probably not but I dont know the full details
0
FollowupID: 366076

Follow Up By: Member - Jeff M (WA) - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 16:29

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 16:29
Footloose are you insinuating that after two or three beers a tour operater wouldn't have been able to operate is HF or sat phone to ask for help?
0
FollowupID: 366230

Follow Up By: Member - Jeff M (WA) - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 16:30

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 16:30
And Davoe, we don't know how much he had to drink, would having a beer with dinner classify as "recklous behavior" in your mind? I'm not saying that's all he had to drink, but it's pretty unfair to call having a few drinks "recklous" without knowing more about it...
0
FollowupID: 366231

Follow Up By: Footloose - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 16:39

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 16:39
Jeff, are you insinuating that I was insinuating that he wasn't drunk ? I have only the knowledge contained in the original post
" Allegedly the guide had imbibed a quantity of alcohol prior to and during the meal and when confronted with the emergency, was unable, in the eyes of the parents to offer appropriate procedures or directions to deal with either the medical situation or transfer to an environment with care facilities."
Whether he was drunk or not is pertinent only to this particular incident. The question is what duty of care exists by tour operators under similar conditions.
0
FollowupID: 366232

Follow Up By: Footloose - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 16:50

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 16:50
Jeff, you are a tour operator with a group of adults with their children in a remote location. Being an experienced and professional operator (and you are, aren't you ?) you are aware that emergencies can arise at any time. By taking their money you are putting yourself under certain legal and moral obligations.
Given that situation, how much should you allow yourself to drink ?

a) As much as you like
b) Enough to be "sociable"
c) Very little as you're working 24/7 for the duration.

The fact that children were included in the group alters everything.
I'd suggest that the general public might expect a bit more than the tour operator in question was prepared to deliver.
0
FollowupID: 366233

Follow Up By: Member - Jeff M (WA) - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 16:57

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 16:57
If it were me, I would have taken as many steps before the trip to let the "adults" know what they were getting them selves in for. And this would be done in writing so that it could be proven that they knew what they were getting into.

If I wanted to have a drink or two, my oath I would. I would not put myself in a situation where I was'nt in control of myself. Some people that's 1 beer, some people (like an uncle of mine) he can have a civilised conversation after 12 beers and you'd never know. The point is that we don't know what this guy had to drink or how he was behaving. I just can't see (with the info I have) how it could have made much difference at all unless he was passed out in a ditch somewhere. Obviously he still would have been able to use the radio and or phone, I just get the impression (and it is an impression only) that there is some kind of blame game going on with this one and that the tour operater it the potential unfortunate player in it all....
0
FollowupID: 366235

Reply By: Bob of KAOS - Monday, May 02, 2005 at 23:12

Monday, May 02, 2005 at 23:12
This is half way through the trip. I wonder if the parents had a duty of care to recognise before this point that the tour operator may not be 100% sober at some future time, and should have taken steps to prevent it.

To my mind, however, the operator does have a duty of care to provide first aid, contact RFDS, and to make an emergency evacuation to an airstrip or town if necessary. From the available facts we don't know if the operator was capable or not of exercising that duty of care.

I am very cynical about lawyers, courts, judges etc They are for the most part players in an elaborate industry whose main purpose is to provide them with a very good living from the insurance premiums that you and I pay.

Perhaps there should be a lawyer present on every tagalong tour.
AnswerID: 109347

Follow Up By: Truckster (Vic) - Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 12:05

Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 12:05
"Perhaps there should be a lawyer present on every tagalong tour."

... sadly its gettin that way. Mate and me looked into doing these sorts of things a few yrs ago.. Who wouldnt wanna get paid to do tours!

Probably having to VIDEO the complete tour (after you get their signed permission and had it validated in the high court that it was acceptable) and everything that happens once people sign up for the tour, inc, getting in and out of the car (you never know didums may trip up - the tour operator is responsable for that tufft of grass being in that EXACT spot) and it goes on from there until they are safely home and have downloaded the photos from the camera to computer (They may drop the camera on their foot, and its the tour operators fault they had photos to download)...

Sad aint it.
0
FollowupID: 366046

Reply By: muzzgit (WA) - Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 01:43

Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 01:43
There is a big difference between driving a vehicle which people have boarded and paid a fare to be transported from point A to point B with several informative stops along the way, and a tag-a-long where you drive your own vehicle, following someone who can fix a puncture, light a fire and cook up a storm in the bush.

In the tag-a-long tour, I beleive you are in control of, and are responsible for your own vehicle, its passengers, and all others in the visinity.

HOWEVER.... If the tag-a-long operator takes you to a remote location with a degree of difficulty you wouldn't normally attempt, then he MUST take all steps possible to ensure he is in a position to get you out, day or night.
AnswerID: 109369

Reply By: tessa_51 - Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 07:49

Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 07:49
Sounds to me as though we have struck the ever increasing situation of "something has happened - who can we blame", "how can we get some money out of this". It was a tragedy that the child suffered, but, why were'nt the parents able to take the appropriate steps, if they were available. Were they "rolling drunk" and now trying to pass off their responsibilities?
tessa
AnswerID: 109384

Follow Up By: Footloose - Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 14:08

Tuesday, May 03, 2005 at 14:08
Its an interesting situation which underscores the question of how much duty of care does an operator actually have ? I would suggest that it should be "all reasonable assistance taking the situation into consideration."
0
FollowupID: 366063

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (14)