• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Liability and Chess

Meadmaker

Unregistered
Meadmaker
Joined
Apr 27, 2004
Messages
29,033
A "pet issue" of mine is tort reform and the related issues of insurance reform and liability. A lot of people don't realize just how deeply our messed up system of insurance, liability, and lawsuits affects our culture. I want to give a personal demonstration of one more way in which these issues affect us.

You might think that Chess would be something that isn't very much affected by tort reform, but you would be wrong. Here's my story.

My eight year old son has been playing chess for a couple of years and, after doing well, wanted to try some tournaments other than ones run by his school's chess club. Off I went to the internet to find some.

I was extremely disappointed, because I only found a few, and they were poorly attended. I suspected I knew why. The entry fee was at least 20 bucks, and usually more. That seemed like a ridiculous amount to pay in order to play Chess for an afternoon. After trying to find some better values, I decided that if I had to, I would run the tournament myself. Off I went to find a place for it.

I have had some experience running small events for non-commercial organizations (i.e. club meetings and such). However, it had been a decade or two. Usually, churches, libraries, and community centers were great places, and I didn't need fancy facilities, like for sports, or even kitchens. I found, this time, that it was much more difficult to find a place at a reasonable cost. A typical example occurred at my local public library.

"I'm looking for a place to hold a chess tournament. I see you have rooms downstairs. Are they available to community groups?"

"Yes. That room rents for four hundred dollars."

"That's a bit steep. Why is it so expensive?"

"Usually, there are no tables set up in that room. We have to pay one of our staff to come in and set up and take down for you."

"Hmmm... Of course, we could do that ourselves, but something tells me you won't allow that."

"That's right. Insurance regulations won't let us do that."


Variations on the same story occur all over. The fees are higher than they used to be. Fewer places will let community groups use the facilities. Public schools, especially, are either totally off limits, or are priced completely out of the market. And why? Because in case someone injures himself while playing chess (or moving a table to set up a chess tournament), the school, or the school's insurance company, will end up paying the bill. So, to prevent that, the school simply doesn't allow it the use.

We have perfectly good public buildings, payed for at taxpayer expense, which could be used by community groups. The real costs of such use are small enough that the communities could even make money by charging reasonable fees. Indeed, within my lifetime, they used to do it a lot more. However, because of the ridiculous system we have with insurance, liability, and lawsuits, they don't. I'll find a place for my chess tournament, but the minimum I'll be able to charge will be ten bucks.

The hidden cost of all this insurance wrangling over who pays the bills when an injury happens is that certain facilities and activities end up being off limits to the public. Those bishops are sharp and pointy. Someone could put out an eye.
 
wait till you see what its like holding a small, local freestyle bmx event

We've given to doing them ALL illegally and viraly, with no central power. Its limited the ability to offset costs with sponsors (though the smarter ones still find a way) and relies on word of mouth, though you only have a few days to get the word out.

PITA
 
I've also organized martial arts tournaments. I can understand why someone might be nervous allowing that sort of thing. Injuries happen. I don't see why the participant can't be responsible for his own injuries, without getting the school from whom we rented the gym involved, but at least there's a certain degree of reason involved.

I wanted to discuss the chess tournament, though, to emphasize how ridiculous it has become. Due to concerns about liability, I'm having a hard time finding sites for a chess tournament.
 
A couple years back I was working for a gun store when a woman collapsed on the street outside. Being an EMT and having medical kit in my trunk, I went out to render aid and take vitals while the ambulance was enroute.

When I got back in the store I got my ass chewed because by helping her I had opened the store to liability. Note that I had not done anything more than straighten her out and check vital signs.

I quit the next week.
 
Why not let the kids sit on the floor to play, and tell them where to stick their outrageous "table set-up and take-down" fee? That's how I always used to play when I was a kid. Or bring in TV trays and folding lawn chairs along with the chess boards. Go to the local park, and play in the great outdoors.

Yes, the tort situation is ridiculous, but I still wouldn't let it get in the way of holding a reasonably priced tournament.
 
There are a number of reasons why the current situation cannot change
- An accident happens and the victim wants to sue somebody.
- Juries want that person to receive some money
- Insurance companies seem a soft target.
Result huge stupid payouts
 
Normal Dude said:
A couple years back I was working for a gun store when a woman collapsed on the street outside. Being an EMT and having medical kit in my trunk, I went out to render aid and take vitals while the ambulance was enroute.

When I got back in the store I got my ass chewed because by helping her I had opened the store to liability. Note that I had not done anything more than straighten her out and check vital signs.

I quit the next week.
Click to expand...
This is not restricted to the US. There was a famous case not too many years ago in Australia where somebody went to the aid of a junkie in distress, put a blanket around him and left (I'm sure I can get the details if it's important). The junkie died and the person was charged with manslaughter as he did not call for medical assistance or provide proper assistance!
 
The irrational fear of being sued stems from the urban legends surrounding frivolous lawsuits.

"Did you hear about that guy who tried to hang himself, failed, and then sued the rope company?"

The vast majority of cases like that are laughed out of court before the summons has a chance to cool off. You might even get lawyer's fees back. It isn't that the courts don't work, it is that they force you to "lawyer up".
 
Meadmaker said:
I've also organized martial arts tournaments. I can understand why someone might be nervous allowing that sort of thing. Injuries happen. I don't see why the participant can't be responsible for his own injuries, without getting the school from whom we rented the gym involved, but at least there's a certain degree of reason involved.

I wanted to discuss the chess tournament, though, to emphasize how ridiculous it has become. Due to concerns about liability, I'm having a hard time finding sites for a chess tournament.
Click to expand...


See if you have a local bridge club - they often have their own building or facilities and may let you use it for free.
 
I 'was' sponsoring a weekly "Chess Club" at my local Library meeting room, but after several months worth of meetings, we were informed that we were in violation of the policy which states, that groups are only allowed to use the room once a month, without prior approval.

We have since had 4 applications denied, for various reasons, and finally were told that we'd have to have 'several' PARENTS attend each meeting or we couldn't hold any club meeting.

I am 32, and we had 2 other +18 players, along with a half a dozen other minors who'd show up to play.

We lost approval for weekly meetings, after months, for no reason, and where told to search other facilities. However, given we were a non-profit group, we simply couldn't afford any such facility.

And given the requirement of having to have 'several' parents attend, we simply could not meet the conditions they demanded. Our meetings were saturdays 8:00-12:00 AM. Most of our players' parents were sleeping or working at that time, or were single parents taking care of their other kids. In any case, getting several parents to attend meetings was impossible.

Who 'gets' to use such facilities, legally? I mean, 'I' paid for the public library & its meeting room, though taxes and my donations to the Library. Is there any legal protection to access such facilities or can the Board simply say, we don't want that kind of activity occuring in our meeting room?

Don't these public institutions have a duty to offer these services in a fair and equitable manner?
 
Last edited:
King of the Americas said:
Who 'gets' to use such facilities, legally? I mean, 'I' paid for the public library & its meeting room, though taxes and my donations to the Library. Is there any legal protection to access such facilities or can the Board simply say, we don't want that kind of activity occuring in our meeting room?
Click to expand...

To sue, you have to have legal standing. Unfortunately for you, paying your taxes isn't enough.

Don't these public institutions have a duty to offer these services in a fair and equitable manner?
Click to expand...

Unless they are applying the rules in an illegal way (discriminating based on race or gender) probably not. If I were you, I would complain to somebody higher up on the library ladder.
 
"higher up on the library ladder"...?

I have spoken with the Library Board President, who informed me that several parents would need to attend, who'd be higher?

I'd also add that the library's policy mentions NONE of the conditions we/the Chess Club have been required to fulfill.
 
Where would one file such a suit (which court), and who would I name in it, IF I do indeed have grounds for such action?
 
Last edited:
I don't want to get myself into my own legal hole here so I just want to say that I am only about 60% of my way through law school and you should take my advice for what it is worth.

I'll be back...gotta go to class.
 
I find it ironic that a thread that began with a library reacting out of fear of lawsuits has now led to a discussion of suing a library.

The library's funding must come from somewhere, the city or county. I suspect you'd have much better luck going over the Library Board president's head to a city councillor or county commissioner or whoever rather than going to court. Not to mention it would be much cheaper, and if your group can't afford another meeting place, I doubt it can afford a lawsuit.
 
Dunstan said:
I find it ironic that a thread that began with a library reacting out of fear of lawsuits has now led to a discussion of suing a library.

The library's funding must come from somewhere, the city or county. I suspect you'd have much better luck going over the Library Board president's head to a city councillor or county commissioner or whoever rather than going to court. Not to mention it would be much cheaper, and if your group can't afford another meeting place, I doubt it can afford a lawsuit.
Click to expand...

Better idea for King of A: go public, and get the story reported in the local paper, by the local muckraking reporter.

Why sue? Use a bit of leverage, and a bit of information warfare. ;)

DR
 
Meadmaker said:
Variations on the same story occur all over. The fees are higher than they used to be. Fewer places will let community groups use the facilities. Public schools, especially, are either totally off limits, or are priced completely out of the market. And why? Because in case someone injures himself while playing chess (or moving a table to set up a chess tournament), the school, or the school's insurance company, will end up paying the bill. So, to prevent that, the school simply doesn't allow it the use..
Click to expand...



Often, I think the reluctance to allow groups to use such facilities stems more from incompetence and laziness than any solidly-grounded fear of liability. A personal injury claim against them would only ever ‘stick’ if the injury is proven to be the result of their negligence or breach of statutory duty. By refusing to allow a perfectly reasonable activity like a chess tournament to take place on their premises, what these people are essentially saying is, “We can’t be bothered to take the necessary precautions to avoid negligence, and we can’t guarantee we will fulfil our statutory duties towards you.”

But of course they’d never come right out and say that, because it would be an admission of their own incompetence. It’s so much easier to wrap it up in excuses about liability and insurance regulations and thus avoid doing the work involved in guaranteeing a safe venue.
 
Fengirl said:
By refusing to allow a perfectly reasonable activity like a chess tournament to take place on their premises, what these people are essentially saying is, “We can’t be bothered to take the necessary precautions to avoid negligence, and we can’t guarantee we will fulfil our statutory duties towards you.”
Click to expand...

But there are no necessary precautions. There is absolutely nothing that a reasonable person could say that was the fault of the library if someone managed to injure himself in the course of playing chess, preparing to play chess, or cleaning up after playing chess. I would challenge anyone to come up with any plausible scenario in which a person was injured in the course of a chess club meeting, and a reasonable person would determine that the facility was negligient. Maybe, just maybe, you could come up with some sort of a scenario involving an injury that happened in the bathroom.



But that's not the point, really. The library was perfectly willing to let us meet there. It was the library's insurance company that had imposed the requirement on them. Their insurance policy required that only library employees move furniture.


The heart of the problem isn't lawsuits as such. At least, that's not the direct problem. There isn't a real possibility that we would have one of those mostly apocryphal million dollar lawsuits as somebody tripped on the stairs.

On the other hand, people do sometimes trip on the stairs. Sometimes, when they trip on the stairs, they fall and injure themselves. Maybe they break a leg. In any sane country, if someone breaks his leg, he would pay for the costs of treating that leg in whatever the customary manner was that such things be paid. Presumably, there would be health insurance, or there would be government provided universal coverage. One way or another, it would be his injury and he would pay for it, probably indirectly via his insurance. The fact that it occurred in a library wouldn't be an issue.

Last year, in the course of a martial arts practice, I broke my finger. (Bo stick) Ouch. Blood. Yuck. I went to the emergency room. They took X-rays, confirmed it was broken, stitched it up, sent me a bill. I sent the bill to insurance. Simple, eh? What a country! (Of course, there were copays and fees and all that. It still cost me a few hundred bucks which, while inconvenient, I consider a small price to pay for having medical facilities that stitch me up when I don't properly take care of my equipment.)

Then I got the questionnaire. The point of the questionnaire was to find out if maybe somebody else ought to be paying. Was I at work? Was a motor vehicle involved? Was I at a business? Was I on government owned property?

There is the heart of the problem. When there is a bill to be paid, naturally everyone wants someone else to pay it. However, that creates an issue where my health bills become someone else's problem.

And it was the last question in the paragraph before last that is the reason I have difficulty finding a place to play chess. My insurance company knows very well that if my injury occurred on goverment property, they might manage to make a case that it was the city's fault that me an some other dude were swinging sticks at each other, and the city knows it, too, and the insurance company that insures the city knows that, too. As a result, the insurance company who insures the city cuts a deal with the city that makes the city say that they won't allow anyone to use their property except under certain conditions that might minimize the risk of injury.

And since people can and do injure their backs while moving furniture, one of those stipulations is that the city won't allow non-employees to move furniture.

And since someone has to move the furniture in order to play chess, that means we either have to pay that person, or we have to find somewhere else to play chess.
 
Meadmaker:

How can you be sure it was the insurance company's fault and not just the library fobbing you off?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom