Posts: 2,019
Threads: 201
Joined: Jan 2008
Jay was talking about a home owner's liability if someone climbs the fence,jumps in your pool and hurt himself.
So 2 questions for our lawyers and those who are familiar with the subject:
1.-True or false?
2.-Does a regular home owners insurance cover this?
___________________________
Whatever you assume,please
just ask a question first.
Posts: 2,485
Threads: 10
Joined: Feb 2008
Wouldn't it be the same as for a swimming pool? Legally I think the two cases would be identical.
Posts: 4,531
Threads: 241
Joined: Jan 2006
In the Building forum:
http://www.punaweb.org/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6575
Catherine Dumond
Blue Water Project Management
808 965-9261
"We help make building your dream home a reality"
Posts: 2,019
Threads: 201
Joined: Jan 2008
Cat,I didn't find legal part,just specifications for the building of the pool.
Mark,yes ,buy "pools" I meant "swimming pools" .
___________________________
Whatever you assume,please
just ask a question first.
Posts: 1,839
Threads: 48
Joined: May 2007
Consult your insurance agent. Also look up "attractive nuisance"
Posts: 2,019
Threads: 201
Joined: Jan 2008
Thank you,Dainel.
This is a unbelievable!
Some 15-16 year old "youth" climbs the fence to steal something by the pool and the owner is responsible for his injury because the pool was attractive to the "youth"????
Nice!
___________________________
Whatever you assume,please
just ask a question first.
Posts: 1,581
Threads: 26
Joined: Jun 2007
quote:
Originally posted by StillHope
Thank you,Dainel.
This is a unbelievable!
Some 15-16 year old "youth" climbs the fence to steal something by the pool and the owner is responsible for his injury because the pool was attractive to the "youth"????
Nice!
That's
NOT what it says.
Here's the part you didn't read:
(1) whether the landowner knew or had reason to know that children could trespass near the hazard;
(2) the type of hazard on the property and whether the hazard poses an unreasonable risk of death or serious bodily harm to children;
(3) whether the children, due to their youth, could appreciate the risk involved;
(4) the importance to the landowner of maintaining the hazardous condition;
(5) how the burden of eliminating the hazard compares to the risk of harm involved;
(6) whether the landowner
took reasonable precautions or exercised reasonable care to eliminate the hazard or to protect the children from harm.
Posts: 2,019
Threads: 201
Joined: Jan 2008
Thank you,Bob.
But it also says that if the owner put a sign about the possible danger and the "youth" can not read....
___________________________
Whatever you assume,please
just ask a question first.
Posts: 3,035
Threads: 201
Joined: Aug 2006
How does the law in Hawaii differentiate between an above ground pool for the keiki and an object almost exactly the same size and shape object which is used for catchment?
Carol
Carol
Every time you feel yourself getting pulled into other people's nonsense, repeat these words: Not my circus, not my monkeys.
Polish Proverb
Posts: 1,581
Threads: 26
Joined: Jun 2007
Youth and children are not the same. If it say's children they mean children. If they say because of their youth, they are not saying a youth.