SAFETY
The Risks of Even “Apparent” Lack of Expertise by Al Hornsby , owner, Al Hornsby Productions, Singapore
D IVING… especially to non-divers… can appear to be even more complex and technical than it already is. And, this fact can create a lot of respect for our industry’s expertise, but can also lead to over-sized concerns when something appears to be (or actually is) improper or lacking. It just means that when operating a dive business, dive pro- fessionals need to be adequately knowledgeable and credentialed for what they do, especially since problems may arise that can be difficult to defend. In a litigation some years ago, a diver had a cylinder filled at a fairly-large local store, one that served not only the general diving public, but also local tec divers. It had a robust com- pressed-gas facility and a good reputation. On one occasion, however, the perception of a serious, related problem led to a difficult, lengthy, costly litigation. In this case, a fairly new diver had a cylinder filled with air at the store and went for a local dive. In the water, she felt strange, and later reported feeling nausea and dizziness. She began to believe that the cause must be bad air, as she had no
existing illness and had experienced no symptoms before her dive. Coming back to the store, she happened to notice that the compressor system’s air intake was located outside the compressor room, fairly low to the ground, at the edge of the parking lot. That a good-sized truck happened to be parked just there, idling, when she arrived, created a strong impres- sion. Her resultant discomfort, nausea and dizziness, which remained in place (reportedly) for a number of weeks, and her resultant medical bills, were claimed to have been caused by an improper placement of the air intake, which was obviously being fouled by vehicle exhaust. That the store had such a complex system added to the sense of error and fault, and the claimed cause of her illness, which reportedly lasted for a fairly-lengthy period of time. The litigation was difficult, especially because it involved likely not only the actual technicalities of diving and compressed (and mixed) air, but a lay-person’s strong perception – and claim - that this was so obviously the cause of her illness, medical expenses, etc. The same perception was also fairly easy to communicate to others (such as the court and non-diver attorneys, and likely to a judge and jury, had it gone that far before settle- ment). Unfortunately, the store ownership and staff, while certainly experienced with filling cylinders with air and mixed gases, and the general use of the equipment involved, did not hold professional credentials that could help them to effectively dispute the claims that the placement of the intake system was flawed and thus the cause of the lady’s illness, medical bills, etc. And, as a result, the litigation lasted-long, and set- tled-high. The lesson from this litigation seems straight-forward – when involved in setting up complex, specialized systems, such as mixed-gas, compressor equipment – either have the credentials and expertise to accomplish and to effectively defend your work, or hire someone to do the work who
does. Perhaps it’s not really all rocket-science, but to a jury that may be determining fault in a related accident – it may very well seem as though it is.
email Al
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker