Campground Waiver/Indemnification agreements incl. Gross Negligence

[Psneeld]

Much like the indemnity clauses I have signed at marinas...isn't it more of a "hold harmless" clause that you and your guests can not sue the campground for accidents that cause bodily harm or damage?

Like a tree very close to a parking spot that you hit....or a guest trips over a tree root......sure it seems crazy that they bear no responsibility...but this is pretty common. Now that they are protected from gross negligence...that probably wouldn't fly even with signing an indemnity clause according to my business law professor.

I would not think that it includes you as a party to an injury that happened to a third party. Even poorly worded.... I don't think it could include you in third party issues unless it was brought into the worst court of the land.

[Hpozzuoli]

Your best course of action would be posting reviews on yelp, google, and wherever else the masses go to check reviews these days. You are not bashing the CG, but rather calling out a deceptive introduction of a contract that wasn’t known about, or presented to you prior to making your reservation. In other words you made a reservation under one set of pretenses, when you showed up a whole new set of criteria were introduced. The credit card company might help, but I am not sure if you can leagally circumvent it.

[doc]

It has come to this kind of stuff/ Not only has rv/camping gotten very technical and more complicated with all the electronics, we are now having to bring lawyers and contracts and more legalese into the picture. Next thing there will be a full time TV station with the same format as the "water at Camp Lejeune we can get you a big settlement"

[NXR]

Indemnity agreement: This essentially says you will protect the owner of the campground legally in the event of an incident even if caused by gross negligence (specifically mentioned).

Gross negligence caused by WHO? Caused by you or caused by the campground?

If you have the exact wording please post it because what you wrote makes no sense to me. An indemnifcation agreement would not say "even if caused by gross negligence".

If the damages or injury were caused by me I would sign the agreement. There's a difference between negligence and gross negligence and if I caused an incident I would contest the finding if I did not believe it met the definition of "gross". There also is the whole aspect of who makes that determination and usually it's a court of law, not a campground or their insurance carrier.

Indemnifying against gross negligence caused by the campground would be unenforceable because they are subject to legal requirements imposed by business law and their permits to safely operate a campground.

https://www.mcminnlaw.com/difference...ss-negligence/

Ray

[Isaac-1]

Ray you are leaving out actions of a 3rd party, that you may be legally taking responsible for, say an Uber driver you had called.

[Bobby F]

It's probably easier to think of it this way: if you promise to indemnify someone, you're not absolving them of their liability for negligence (or gross negligence, or whatever) - you're promising to insure them against it.

You're not purporting to remove them as a liable party if the injured person sues them. They can still do that, and win. You're just promising to the indemnitee that you will then pay them back for whatever they have to pay the injured person. But, if you don't pay them back, the injured party still gets to collect from your indemnitee.

So, no public policy violation. It doesn't purport to affect third party rights.

[Toby Dog]

Originally Posted by TandW

You are right to leave and avoid having that widow-maker come down on your wife's head.

That would make it a widower maker.
I would have stayed and enjoyed the time spent. That statement they wanted you to sign doesn't exclude them from damages for negligence.

[NXR]

Originally Posted by Isaac-1

Ray you are leaving out actions of a 3rd party, that you may be legally taking responsible for, say an Uber driver you had called.

I think that particular example falls into the "possible" but not "probable" realm yet it is thought-provoking. If an independent driver for Amazon drops off one package that day, yours, and runs someone over it's not your problem.

But if you invite your felon gun-nut alcoholic buddy over to party and give him the gate code and he causes mayhem then I'd be worried. But he caused the damages, not you, and it still takes a court to assign liability. Or if you come back late at night drunk and drive through propane tank and destroy the campground and kill a bunch of people your estate may have a problem. But you're going to have that problem even if you did not sign an indemnification agreement.

I wonder just how much indemnity clauses are used as a reminder to people that they are in fact responsible for their own behavior versus an actual concern. In other words, how often and for what event have they even been tried to be used against an individual? Yes, lawyers warn against signing them but lawyers warn against a lot of things. It's all about understanding YOUR actual risk.

This is an interesting thought exercise but I still think the actual risk is extremely low. If you have a mountain of assets you'll likely already have moved them into a trust to shield them. Indemnification is a civil matter, not a criminal matter, even though the behavior may be criminal in nature.

As a civil rights attorney once told me "People that don't know their rights have no rights." Same with any written contract. They can say anything the author wants but it doesn't mean you are bound to those terms.

Ray

[Bobby F]

Originally Posted by NXR

In other words, how often and for what event have they even been tried to be used against an individual? Yes, lawyers warn against signing them but lawyers warn against a lot of things. It's all about understanding YOUR actual risk.

Yes, I'm one of those crazy paranoid (ex) lawyers. Indemnification agreements are enforced quite often, successfully. Take them seriously. If you sign one, you're more like Allstate than just another non-negligent camper. Whoever you're promising to indemnify can look to you for repayment of whatever they had to pay to someone on account of a liability finding.

Go read this if you have doubts: https://www.businesscredentialingser...nce-difference

[n2zon]

Originally Posted by Bobby F

Yes, I'm one of those crazy paranoid (ex) lawyers. Indemnification agreements are enforced quite often, successfully. Take them seriously. If you sign one, you're more like Allstate than just another non-negligent camper. Whoever you're promising to indemnify can look to you for repayment of whatever they had to pay to someone on account of a liability finding.

Go read this if you have doubts: https://www.businesscredentialingser...nce-difference

I'd go find another place to camp rather than sign an agreement with an indemnity clause*, but I am curious whether you happen to know whether common insurance liability policies would shield people who choose to sign one.

* The company I retired from indemnified many clients against some specific eventualities, and our lawyers took this very seriously.

[Bobby F]

Originally Posted by n2zon

I'd go find another place to camp rather than sign an agreement with an indemnity clause*, but I am curious whether you happen to know whether common insurance liability policies would shield people who choose to sign one.

Probably not. They might, but it will be in specific wording granting coverage for such contractual promises - which is not in your normal auto/RV policies. (EDIT - or, they might be in a separate policy amendment form removing the "contractual liability" exclusion of coverage from the main policy form.) Remember, indemnification agreements don't operate off of fault, but of a promise to insure someone for something that has been specifically defined.

So, in cases where people have an expectation that they will need to sign an indemnification agreement - construction work, for example - they will already be knowledgeable about this and will have negotiated with their insurance agents for such coverage. You can make anyone an Additional Insured, but you pay to do it, and you have to do it in advance.

But most RV'ers have not encountered this, and have no such additional insurance beyond vehicle and a weird RV/homeowners' coverage and so they will not have purchased the right coverage for indemnification issues.

So, no, 99% of the people reading this can expect their normal insurers to deny claims associated with liability accruing against the insured's indemnitee (the campground?) because of having agreed (in writing!) to indemnify them for something. It's not "liability due to negligence", which is what your typical insurance covers. It's "liability incurred contractually." Not covered.


(As an edit: I should add that, you know that I said "ex" lawyer, plus I drink heavily, so don't base any actions on my ramblings!)

[TXiceman]

What you really have to watch for is ...that you will indemnify the campground for any and all claims. If they are at fault, they need to take care of the issues. If you are at fault, you need to take care of the issue.

While still working, some of the customers' legal terms in their purchase order was cause for major heartburn for our legal experts. Such working as "any and all claims" and a perpetual warranty.

If the campground had this kind of legal manure, I'd take my money and rig elsewhere.

Ken

[NXR]

Originally Posted by Bobby F

Yes, I'm one of those crazy paranoid (ex) lawyers. Indemnification agreements are enforced quite often, successfully. Take them seriously.

Agreed, but for businesses. Do you have any examples where they are often enforced against individuals and for what?

I suppose if I registered my motorhome as an LLC my exposure could be higher simply because businesses are presupposed to have adequate insurance.

I'll concede that an indemnification agreement could be enforced to recover an insurance deductible for a loss I caused if simply because a business usually has very, very high deductibles, often in the tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Ray

[Teamfoxy]

According to classes I took on event management, to indemnify or hold harmless means covering all costs related to an incedent. The example used was allowing your children to go on a feild trip at school. If you waived liability, you agree not to sue the school for injuries to your child that occured, say if the bus turned over. If you agree to indemnify and hold the school harmless, you agree to reimburse the school for any legal fees that they incur for the crash and other costs such as damage to someones property and perhaps the bus itself. In the case of camping, you could wind up paying to defend the campground if one of you guests gets injured and sues.