RWS User Agreement

[skybytch 273]

Quote

who is liable if the rig or parts are damaged in shipment

Depends on if the shipment was insured or not; just like it does on any item, skydiving related or not, damaged in shipment. If it's insured, then the carrier's insurance pays. If it's not, then either the shipper or the recipient would be responsible - imho, whoever decided that the package not be insured should be paying up in that case...

Quote

I certainly would not buy a rig nor parts sight-unseen, with no possible recourse if I received damaged goods.

If you've purchased a new harness/container, reserve or main canopy... you did buy it sight unseen, with no possible legal recourse if you received damaged goods. Did you read the owner's manuals?

Quoted verbatim from page 4 of the PD reserve owners manual -
"III. DISCLAIMER NO WARRANTY
Because of the unavoidable danger associated with the use of this parachute, the manufacturer makes no warranty, either expressed or implied.

It is sold with all faults and without any warranty of fitness for any purpose. The manufacturer also disclaims any liability in tort for damages, direct or consequential, including personal injuries resulting from a defect in design, material, workmanship or manufacturing whether caused by negligence on the part of the manufacturer or otherwise. By using this parachute assembly, or allowing it to be used by others, the user waives any liability of the manufacturer for personal injuries or other damages arising from such use.

If the buyer declines to waive liability on the part of the manufacturer, buyer may obtain a full refund of the purchase price by returning the parachute before it is used to the manufacturer within 15 days from the date of the original purchase with a letter stating why it was returned."
---
This is a pretty standard disclaimer throughout the US skydiving industry. Don't believe me? Thumb through the owner's manual for ANY harness/container system or main or reserve canopy built or sold in the US. I guarantee you'll find the same basic disclaimer in every one.

Now, all of the above doesn't mean they won't replace a container/canopy that slips past QC with a manufacturing defect; it means that they can't be held legally responsible should you use that "defective" equipment and be injured or killed. Manufacturing defects are rare, but they do happen - and that's why you pay a rigger to inspect your brand new gear before he/she assembles it.

Skydiving is a small sport/industry. Manufacturers who don't stand behind their products don't last long.

If you really don't like the fact that no manufacturer is going to offer any form of warranty in print, you have two options. Make your own equipment. Or don't skydive.

[PhreeZone 20]

>Would you?

I do every time I get a new piece of gear. The factories like to have you pay before they make/ship the items....

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[christoofar 0]

Quote

If the buyer declines to waive liability on the part of the manufacturer, buyer may obtain a full refund of the purchase price by returning the parachute before it is used to the manufacturer within 15 days from the date of the original purchase with a letter stating why it was returned."

If this clause is in every single waiver a PIA company ever sends you, then there is nothing to worry about. Even so, if I buy a rig then have it inspected, that doesn't guarantee that I will be free from defects from the manufacturer. Recalls and updates are issued fairly regularly.

____________________________________________________________
I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle.

[christoofar 0]

Quote

>Would you?

I do every time I get a new piece of gear. The factories like to have you pay before they make/ship the items....

So you've never demoed a canopy/rig before?

____________________________________________________________
I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle.

[jlmiracle 7]

Lisa said" If you really don't like the fact that no manufacturer is going to offer any form of warranty in print, you have two options. Make your own equipment. Or don't skydive."

I would rather have nothing in writting signed then something signed putting ALL liability on me.

SELLER MAKES NO WARRANTY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. - but it has been stated earlier in this tread that its implied they will make it all better but RWS won't put that in writing. What if Bill Booth sells RWS and the new people are a bunch of a-holes. Granted they wouldn't be around long after that but in the mean time a bunch of people are going to get screwed and with the current agreement there wouldn't be a thing anyone could do about it.

judy

Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.

[christoofar 0]

Quote

Lisa said" If you really don't like the fact that no manufacturer is going to offer any form of warranty in print, you have two options. Make your own equipment. Or don't skydive."

I would rather have nothing in writting signed then something signed putting ALL liability on me.

SELLER MAKES NO WARRANTY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. - but it has been stated earlier in this tread that its implied they will make it all better but RWS won't put that in writing. What if Bill Booth sells RWS and the new people are a bunch of a-holes. Granted they wouldn't be around long after that but in the mean time a bunch of people are going to get screwed and with the current agreement there wouldn't be a thing anyone could do about it.

judy

Hmm... that's just one of those things that sucks about our sport, I guess. Ordering a parachute isn't like buying a Dell. Particularly disturbing are the rare cases when a serious design problem rears its ugly head and the nasty business of recalling ensues, especially when it's accompanied with a string of incidents involving the design flaw.

If no one was around to manufacture the equipment, there would be no sport like it is now. I'd rather take the risk that I would get stuck with equipment that I'd have to burn or bury it because it was unsafe and the mfg won't buy it back than try to pawn it off or try to sue the mfg out of business. I'll let the FAA figure that one out.

____________________________________________________________
I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle.

[fasterfaller 0]

I will say this in defense of manufacturers that use a disclaimer like that . I have NEVER had any of them refuse to fix a defect I found during inspection of a new rig or parts .

[skybytch 273]

Quote

Even so, if I buy a rig then have it inspected, that doesn't guarantee that I will be free from defects from the
manufacturer.

There are no guarantees in this sport. People who can't accept that shouldn't skydive.

There are very good reasons for the legal language used in owner's manuals and RWS' tandem user agreement - those reasons are spelled l-a-w-y-e-r-s. If someone chooses to use any skydiving equipment, they do so of their own free will and it is assumed that they know they are accepting ALL risks involved - even the risks of their equipment failing because of a manufacturing defect.

What I find laughable (or scary, depending on my attitude at the moment) about this whole thread is that no one seems to mind signing a waiver (or, in the case of the person who started the thread, requiring customers and students to sign waivers) that effectively means you or your heirs can't sue the dz if the dz's airplane crashes (i.e. covering the dzo's ass). It's okay for the dz to cover their ass, but apparently it's not okay for an equipment manufacturer to do the same thing...

[christoofar 0]

Quote

Quote

Even so, if I buy a rig then have it inspected, that doesn't guarantee that I will be free from defects from the
manufacturer.

There are no guarantees in this sport. People who can't accept that shouldn't skydive.

There are very good reasons for the legal language used in owner's manuals and RWS' tandem user agreement - those reasons are spelled l-a-w-y-e-r-s. If someone chooses to use any skydiving equipment, they do so of their own free will and it is assumed that they know they are accepting ALL risks involved - even the risks of their equipment failing because of a manufacturing defect.

What I find laughable (or scary, depending on my attitude at the moment) about this whole thread is that no one seems to mind signing a waiver (or, in the case of the person who started the thread, requiring customers and students to sign waivers) that effectively means you or your heirs can't sue the dz if the dz's airplane crashes (i.e. covering the dzo's ass). It's okay for the dz to cover their ass, but apparently it's not okay for an equipment manufacturer to do the same thing...

I think what Judy's intent is Lisa is the possibility of a manufacturer that is purposely and knowingly manufacturing crap. I have the expectation when I drive a car that I might crash, or someone might crash into me. I also have a reasonable expectation that a plane could crash if I board it.

A manufacturer that won't return a drogue that explodes the first time you use it because of stressed fabric/what-not... that's a different ball game. Again, the waiver is for resulting death and injury from shoddy workmanship, doesn't say anything about returns unless you refuse to jump it after your rigger takes it out of the box and looks at it on initial inspection.

In the very, very, VERY unlikely event you are stuck with equipment that you wouldn't use because it's malfunctioning and the manufacturer won't do anything about it, cut your losses and destroy it; then don't buy anything from them ever again. Problem solved.

This stuff really is a non-issue, and I'm sure after careful study Judy will happily reach an amicable conclusion.

____________________________________________________________
I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle.

[jlmiracle 7]

__________________________________________________
What I find laughable (or scary, depending on my attitude at the moment) about this whole thread is that no one seems to mind signing a waiver (or, in the case of the person who started the thread, requiring customers and students to sign waivers) that effectively means you or your heirs can't sue the dz if the dz's airplane crashes (i.e. covering the dzo's ass). It's okay for the dz to cover their ass, but apparently it's not okay for an equipment manufacturer to do the same thing...

[PhreeZone 20]

Judy... call RWS and talk to Bill or one of the other fine folks there. I think that if you just talk to the company... you will be able to have your mind put to ease. They stand behind their products but do to lawsuit happy people that have to say that there is no warrenty.

>The manufacturers are covered in the waiver that we sign at the dz.

Right... the same waiver thats cost RWS hundreds of thousands in lawyer fees and settlements defending them selfs in lawsuits in the recent past? Talk to a recent RWS/Jumpshack/who ever Tandem Examiner about the things that they can pull a rating for ever since the tandem program was changed from expermintal to governed by the USPA...

If you want to thank anyone for this type of situation... the USPA ws the driving force in changing the tandem program in the FAA's eyes.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[skybytch 273]

Quote

If they want to control who, how, why, where, and when these rigs are used, why bother selling them and just lease them.

They've always wanted to control who, how, why, where and when the rigs are used. I was told that in a previous version of the user agreement it was stated that RWS could take the gear back if an end user was found to have violated one of the many factory-imposed regulations on usage of the gear.

They aren't going to lease them, because leasing would put them in the list of defendants twice - once as the manufacturer and again as the gear owner.

Quote

Paragraph 3 states NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED but Paragraph 4 addressed the WARRANTIES listed in #3 but there are no warranties.

The statement in paragraph 3 is pretty much word for word the same statement that is made in every US built container/canopy owner's manual (btw, if anyone is interested, you can find the user agreement in full on RWS' website - http://www.relativeworkshop.com). By using any sport rig sold in the US you are agreeing to the same terms. For tandem equipment, since the liklihood of a lawsuit in a case of injury or death is higher per tandem rig than per sport rig, I can totally understand why RWS would want those terms to be explicitly agreed with - i.e. by the end user's signature.

The user agreement is just legal stuff. As long as you exercise "due diligence" (by having a rigger inspect the parts before installing them according to the manufacturer's instructions, etc.), you won't have a problem. What happens in the real world is they take care of their end users. If you did receive a defective part, all it would take to get a replacement would be a phone call.

I'm so not a lawyer, but paragraph 4 sounds to me like a way of reiterating that the gear is sold with no warranty of any kind - even those normally assumed ("Including without limitation any warranty of merchantability... blah blah blah")

[billvon 2,991]

>What if Bill Booth sells RWS and the new people are a bunch of a-
>holes.

This is a very valid concern. Know the people you're dealing with. The skydiving industry is small enough that you can call George Galloway if you have questions about a Raven-MZ, or John Leblanc if you have questions about a sabre II. If you call a manufacturer and get the runaround, chances are you'll get the same runaround if you have a problem

In fact, I'd place a lot more importance on who I was dealing with at a company than what I had to sign. In this industry, at least, the big names (with a few exceptions) seem to have a lot of integrity, and I'd rely on that far sooner than I'd try to rely on any perceived legal protection I got from refusing to sign something,

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

They aren't going to lease them, because leasing would put them in the list of defendants twice - once as the manufacturer and again as the gear owner.

Didn't RWS do exactly this at one time - lease the tandem rigs to the DZ/instructor?

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.