Ice Shack.....Legal Question

[THUMPER]

We had terrible winter weather this past weekend, very poor visibility and blizzard coditions. Now the Question.....Buddy ran into a shack coming off the lake at night, no one was hurt but serious damage to the snowmachine and damage to the shack. The shack was painted white/grey and had no reflectors or any markings to help in seeing it at night. Whose fault is it.... and who should pay. Buddy has agreed to pay for the snowmachine if the shack owner looks after the shack but the shack owner feels that buddy should pay all. Any opinions or experiences are greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance for any replies.

[Skeeter]

I would say if there is a law stating you have to have reflectors on a shanty for that reason, and your buddy doesn't he is a fault. If no law, the snowmobiler is at fault and should have to pay for damages.

[The Great Guide]

I work as a risk safety manager for a transportation company. I'm not an attorney and offer no legal advice, but I have experience in claims. Generally speaking the rider of the snowmobile should be liable for all damage resulting from this accident if the hazard (ice fishing shack) could be reasonably expected to exist. Being that the rider was on a lake it would not be far reaching to prove that the shack could be anticipated. Also, the rider is expected to operate the snomobile in a manner that takes into account the conditions that it is being operated. If there was poor visibility, snow and ice, then the speed should be such that the rider could see a hazard and maneuver or stop to avoid it.

This is much the same if you lost control of your car on an icy road in a blinding snowstorm and ran into parked vehicle. You are still required to compensate the owner for damage.

If I were the owner of the shack I would demand full payment.

Maybe a lesson could be learned about snowmobile safety here before your pal finds a real solid object in the next storm.

Minnesota has a law the requires refectors on all ice shacks left out over night. I don't know what the enforcement clauses to this law are. So if you are in MN you may have some sort of argument.

[Jimmy Mac]

Just for additional discussion, I thought houses in Minnesota had to be off the lakes by February 28th (or couldn't be left overnight). In that case, should the rider have the expectation he would hit an ice house?

Interesting question.

Jimmy Mac

[Backwater Eddy]

RELEASE DATE: 2001-12-11

A new provision enacted during the last Minnesota legislative session requires that owners of fish houses or dark houses display 2 square inches of reflector-type material on each side when the structures are left on the ice overnight.

"There is no penalty for noncompliance," said Col. Bill Bernhjelm, Department of Natural Resources Enforcement Division chief. "However, I am sure this new provision is intended as a safety measure and as the Legislature's response to snowmobile near misses with shelters,"

"Conservation officers can't use noncompliance as the basis of any inspection, stop or detention," Bernhjelm noted. "Nor can they confiscate the shelter for the violation."

RELEASE DATE: 2002-02-20

The deadline for removing fish houses, dark houses and portable shelters from state waterways is no later than midnight, Feb. 28, if they are south of Minnesota Highway 200 and U.S. Highway 2. Shelters located north of Minnesota Highway 200 and U.S. Highway 2 must be removed no later than midnight, March 15. Exceptions are Minnesota-Canada border waters (March 31), Minnesota-Iowa border waters (Feb. 20), Minnesota-South Dakota and North Dakota border waters (March 5), and Minnesota-Wisconsin border waters (March 1).

Backwater Eddy ~ ~><sUMo> ~ ><>

http://home.talkcity.com/ResortRd/backwtr1/index.html

[REW]

I have to agree with the other posts.
The person driving the snowmobile - should be responsible for ALL damages to what ever property is damaged.

After all - he is the one driving the machine - the house can't move. He needs to always be aware of what is in front of him.

If you didn't have the drive pay for the damage to the shanty - it would be very much like the driver of the machine that gets his machine wiped out hitting a tree - asking the state - in whos park the tree is located to pay for fixing his machine, because the tree shouldn't have been where his machine was.

The machine can move -- the house can't -- pretty simple.

A driver always needs to be aware of what might be in his or her path, and always be on guard to avoid such obstacles.

Take care
REW

[Ranschau1]

I happen to be an insurance adjuster and judging by what I've read so far I'd agree that the snowmobiler is liable. However, if there are statutory provisions for the removal of the ice shacks after a certain date, the driver may have a case. It all depends on how the statute reads.

My advise would be to simply turn a claim into your insurance company and let them sort it out. That is why you bought insurance.

Mike