Questions and Answers with SI Admin (s) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

SI - Site Forums : Questions and Answers with SI Admin (s)

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Bear Down who wrote (3908)	10/20/2013 10:05:28 PM
From: pcstel	Read Replies (1) of 4890

>Your lawyer robbed you,< Not likely, they are in the family... >unless you consider your piece of mind for thinking that relieves your liability when in fact it doesn't.< Peace of mind works for me.... It simply explains the dangers of swimming pools and surrounding areas. Explains that the parents are completely welcome to attend and to directly oversee their child's activities. Explains there will be no formal "lifeguards" and that the ultimate liability and responsibility for their child's safety is... the parents themselves... If they chose not to personally attend to supervise their child, then they are advised that they WILL BE putting their child's safety and well being at risk due to their personal choice not to attendance. Where you get in trouble is a liability suit is not providing written warnings as to the dangers/consequences of the parent not personally supervising their responsibility. It's not going to stop you from getting sued, but it shifts the responsibility to some degree to the parent. Commercial properties where someone PAYS a fee for use of a complex is a completely different animal.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next