We were at my son's high school baseball game yesterday and one of the players hit a foul ball into the parking lot. It hit my car windshield and smashed it. I do not have coverage to replace it under my auto insurance. The school will not reimburse us either. Someone told us that the homeowners insurance of the player who hit the ball should cover it (we know the player). Is this correct?

N0help4u

I have never seen anybody win a case where they parked at a lot with a "park at your own risk" sign.

ballengerb1

No disrespect to you but that sign is not worth the material it is made from once you find yourself in court. To post such a sign admits that you recognize a problem and you did not fix the problem, just warned people to stay away. It is like digging a big hole near a play ground and then putting up a sign that says stay back 10', if a child falls into the hole your sign will not help you in court. You create and attractive nusiance by playing ball in that field and the school and the batter both have liability. The school could have bought insurance to cover this but likely made a choice not to, that does not mean they aren't responsibile though. When a golfer hits a ball out of the course and damages a car or house window he is responsibile to pay for the damages.

tickle

We have new residential building going up round us by an independent builder. He had to pave his own roadway through part of it. The town wont assume risk for it yet, and there is nothing wring with that, its the way its done here, but before you use the road it says USE AT OWN RISK. My point is, if you read the sign before proceeding, you know, if you are not stupid, that if something happens to your car or you while doing so, you will have a problem finding the right person to sue.

Sorry, bellanger, I dont agree with your reasoning, but thats just me.

ballengerb1

It is totally OK to not agree. I have a lot of experience with schools and insurance and know how the system works. Seeing a sign is not like signing a document to waive your rights. Also, just because a sign is posted there is not guarantee that you saw the sign. I would have to admit that I do not know if the liability laws differ between Canada and the USA.

tickle

I dont know if the laws are the same or not, what I mean is, if I see USE AT YOUR OWN RISK I will pay attention and make a mental note that it is there as a warning and in this case, the town told them to use that warning because the road is not assumed yet by the township.

By the way, bellanger, I really do pay attention to your advice and find it quite good. I have learned a lot from you over the last few months.

ballengerb1

Thanks Tickle, I aprreciate the compliment. My major point in my posts is that posting a sign is not a legally binding release of liability or responsiblity but companies and school do post them in hopes that you will not file a claim againist them. If your coat ever disappears from a restaurant coat room, and they have a sign that says they aren't responsible, tell them that you know they are responsible and want a replacement coat. Thanks,
Bob

nikosmom

Unfortunately, the way insurance works is that it's sold with lots of different options. It's always just the matter of if you are willing to pay more money up front on the "possibility" of something happening. You did the right thing in just sucking it up. May be worth looking into adding that comprehensive coverage though. Comp coverage protects you from things that are beyond your control- ie. theft, vandalism, deer, rocks flying off construction vehicles, and in this case, foul balls. And making claims on this coverage won't affect your rates since it's no fault of your own. Just be careful, making too many claims could cause your company to drop this coverage. But it's for those occasional mishaps.

JudyKayTee

Not correct - you cannot waive your legal rights, including your right to reimbursement if your property is damaged or if you are injured.

Can the Court reduce a verdict if it goes to suit because a person was warned and parked there anyway? Certainly.

tickle

JudyKayTee, why is the use of this 'PARK AT YOUR OWN RISK/USE AT YOUR OWN RISK' sign so widely used in parks, on skating rinks, on walkways if it doesnt mean anything. Certainly, to my way of thinking, it has to carry some impact or it wouldnt be used. I am not talking about waiving legal rights, I mean reducing laibility for the use of by using this sign.

I am not disputing your opinion, or your legal expertise, I respect your opinion. There just has to be a reason why this sign is used in cases like this. Why use it at all if it is of no value whatsoever?

JudyKayTee

Sure - because people read it, believe it and don't even attempt to sue for damages/injuries.

Simple as that.

I didn't say it is of no value - it is IF there is a legitimate risk. Read back over my post about reduced awards - if you do go forward it DOES reduce liability on the part of the property owner - within reason, of course. For example, you couldn't post the notice on your own front door just in case someone trips and falls. You would have to believe there was some danger.

The new thing in my area is a "Beware of Dog, Enter at Your Own Risk" sign. Makes no difference and now you've admitted there could be a problem with your dog and visitors.

And very possibly other States are different - I believe you're in Canada and it could very well be a very different situation there although I still believe you cannot waive your right to sue.