UKC

Just read this thread.

http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=446948&v=1#x6266422

During my recent weekend on the Ben discussed 'responsibility' & 'liability' when out on the hill in winter with people who have less experience, are beginners or newly acquired friends (a term I apply loosely on here)

Wanted to broaden the debate on here, after reading abovementioned interesting debate that skirted it a little.

In reply to Blizzard:

Is there a question in there somewhere?

In reply to Blizzard: to build a belay good enough to hold the second, and not put the second in any danger whilst following surely?

In reply to Duncan Campbell:

To that I would add, not to embark on a route which is obviously way beyond the capability of the second?

In reply to Blizzard: there was some talk long ago among instructors about the risk of climbing with non-instructors. It went along the lines of 2 friends go climbing (1 happens to be qualified), tragic accident / unforeseen incident etc.. unqualified dies... family of deceased attempt to sue other as they should have known better etc..

I think most folk poo poo'ed the concept and just kept on climbing with who they wanted to.

In reply to summo:

We all owe a duty of care to each other, but I would suggest that that duty increases where someone puts themself up as an "expert" in the field ie climbing instructor/guide. However the degree to which the other person relies on that "expert" will vary depending on their own experience and competence. For example an instructor will take on a far greater responsibility if taking a beginner out than if climbing with an experienced mate.

In reply to Trangia:

Yes all is true, but the point was at what point do two experienced friends become equal. On the hill they might share all decisions, as clearly a piece of paper is not everything in terms of experience or ability, but should the worst happen the laws view on the shared responsibility may be different.

An instructor taking out a friend who is a complete novice is really in a sense just a days unpaid work and I'm sure to most it often feels that way. So the responsibilities are clearly higher.

In reply to summo:
>>
>

I know from my own field when I used to practice as a surveyor that the courts have established that whether you are paid or not is irrelevent. If someone else relies on the expertise you have or purport to have then you take on a higher degree of responsibility. I suspect this principle applies to instructors and guides and any other profession.

In reply to Trangia:

Exactly, negligent acts, carelessness etc. is the same world over.

In reply to Blizzard: I don't think there is such a thing as a "lead" climbers responsibility. The lead climber and second have equal responsibility for each other. That fact the one may have more experience makes no difference. If the second (belaying) is inexperienced, they should make this clear and perhaps the goals of the day readjusted to take this into consideration.

In reply to EeeByGum:

I don't think it's as clear cut as that. In most scenarios the more experienced person generally takes the initiative and that in itself carries a responsibility. I agree the inexperienced person owes a duty to let the other know they are inexperienced, but the very fact that they are inexperienced limits how much knowlege they have on the subject and thus how much they can tell the leader. Again it pushes the responsibility onto the leader to find out, assess the situation and decide accordingly - see my original post above on this subject.

In reply to Blizzard:

Interesting. I definitely feel an increased sense of duty if I'm climbing with someone who I know will find seconding the route difficult. I'd never go out of the way to give my second a hard time, but there have been occasions when my second wants to push their grade a bit.

If I'm with my regular partner who climbs about the same grade as me, I would build a belay that I know I would be comfortable seconding on. Equally, when seconding, I accept that some routes don't have fantastic belays and would expect my partner to tell me that the belay's not very good and I would make a judgement.

If I'm with someone who's pushing their grade when seconding me, I would try and build a totally bomber belay with a redundant piece in it and If I couldn't I would tell my second what I've made the belay from and what the moves are like and let them decide, I'd also let them know if I think it's a bad idea for them to attempt the second.

Obviously the above applies to single pitch cragging only.

In reply to Blizzard:

I do feel that it is the leader's responsibility to provide transport and a fine lunch, the second provides post-climbage beer.

In reply to Trangia:

not always that easy to assess, as sometimes people have an unrealistic idea of their own ability. Some exaggerate their experience, others count the grade they could do 10 years ago before they put on 5 stone, and some are just plain self deluding! Once stung, you know for the future, but the first time they turn up to climb can be an "interesting" experience

In reply to Trangia:

Don't see the problem with that, if it's a reasonably non-traversy single pitch route, and the second fancies a crack at something hard on the blunt end (so to speak).

In reply to Blizzard: there is a duty of care to each other regardless of their experience though if you are 'guiding' someone on a route and they are significantly less experienced e.g. both of you have climbed in summer on rock to a similar standard but you (as the 'guide') has agreed to take your mate winter climbing, I would expect him to take the fact that winter climbing is more dangerous and you cannot guarantee his safety completely.

there are too many different factors involved with a subject like this and to speculate about what might or might not happen to the 'guide' or 'instructor' should an accident occur is foolish.

bear in mind that an accident, by definition is something that is unforseeable and unpreventable and for there to be anyone at fault there needs to be an element negligence.

In reply to higherclimbingwales:
"bear in mind that an accident, by definition is something that is unforseeable and unpreventable and for there to be anyone at fault there needs to be an element negligence. "

what is an event that results in injury that was forseeable and preventable then?

In reply to higherclimbingwales:

Which, for a fatal accident in the Scottish mountains, for example, will be decided by a Procurator Fiscal.

In reply to CurlyStevo:

An act of negligence.

In reply to Tom Knowles: My point exactly. If someone is to blame it will generally be found by the offical channels, not the UKC Judge, jury and executioner

In reply to higherclimbingwales:


I can't help but smile at what a UKC Judge, jury and executioner would look like - a motley crew if ever there was one

In reply to higherclimbingwales:


Is there a specifically legal definition of "accident" that you're referring to? In common usage accidents which arise from negligence are still called accidents.

In reply to Tom Knowles:
Can you commit an act of negligence on your self?

In reply to summo:
>

I think this. If I'm out with a novice, paid or not, I hold a lot of the responsibility.

In reply to CurlyStevo:


You can "self-neglect" as a consequence of a behavioural condition. When most people talk of an "act of negligence" however, they're referring to it as a legal concept, which relates to what a reasonable person would do to protect another individual from foreseeable risks of harm.

In reply to Blizzard:

I'd never make assumptions about a lead climber's ability or a second's ability. I'd lead/second something well within MY capability (at the moment that means probably leading a mod ) and see how they fare before trying anything more testing. I take responsibility for myself.

In reply to bpmclimb: in the sense of road traffic incidents, they are referred to as Road Traffic Collisions not accidents as 'accident' implies no one is to blame

In reply to IainRUK:

I think the second comes climbing voluntarily and should be made aware of the risks - otherwise don't take them. Then, so long as you keep to good practice, the responsibility for the second being in an accident is the second's.

Even if paid I would say the leader only has a responsibility to keep to good practice, there is no such thing as absolutely safe climbing

What if they ended up in a wheelchair ten years later - would you feel responsible for introducing them to the sport?

In reply to higherclimbingwales:
I think that principle is complete b0llocks. Sometimes circumstances conspire and stuff goes wrong even though people have behaved sensibly and made reasonable decisionsons. The idea that there is always blame is great for injury lawyers, but sometimes you just have to accept that life isnt always fair or predictable and shit sometimes happens