<p><em>kluge, how come your post count never goes up?</em></p>
<p>Posts in the cafe do not go toward post counts for members.</p>
<p>Jyber…am glad to hear how things are progressing in a fair manner at school no matter how it turns out in the end. The school is considering the matter and your son has learned to make a fair inquiry, to advocate, and to handle himself in a calm way which the school seems to appreciate. I know it is just a matter of understanding who needs to pay and that there is no “fight” going on between your family and the school. Seems win win to me, no matter who pays. Meanwhile, some attention was given to this issue and perhaps some signs will be erected or some other changes made to help prevent future incidents which actually could be worse than this fairly minor one is (though it is a hassle and costs money).</p>
<p>^^ Thanks soozie and others who have responded.</p>
<p>Son just informed me that this matter was discussed in his AP Economics class today! Apparently a kid from the baseball team is with him in the class and there was some good-natured teasing about it, so it ended up being fodder for a class discussion.
So perhaps the kids are learning something from this in more ways than one! :)</p>
<p>Kluge; you keep twisting the “responsibility” factor. Of course I promote being responsible. This however has NOTHING to do with being responsible. Responsibility implies a certain level of risk that the person involved is willing to take. When your son is hitting wiffle balls, golf balls, footballs, or anything else in the street, he is assuming a level of responsibility. Why? Because that is not the proper place to do such things. Yes, you can do those things there, but it’s not a “Playground”. As such, you assume a certain amount of responsibility.</p>
<p>When there is an established venue such as a tennis court, football field, baseball field, etc… there is also a level of responsibility on the side of the spectator and/or bystander. Now, this would be totally different if your RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD was being pummeled by golf balls from the local driving range. Your house has been zoned residential and you have no way of taking precautions. Please understand the definition of “Responsible” and “Responsibility”. Yes, your son was responsible if he broke a window. Whether or not the owner of the window wanted it repaired or not, is irrelevant. That’s a separate issue. The fact is; your son was hitting balls in an area no considered the NORM for such an activity. Therefor, he assumes responsibility if something happens. A baseball field is the proper place to play baseball. Unless that school district is wealthy, there’s a good chance that it isn’t an inside dome. Therefor, foul balls, home runs, etc… are part of the game and expectation. The owner of the car has the responsibility and risk to move the car.</p>
<p>Now; if the school makes it IMPOSSIBLE for the student to move the car, then the school SHOULD ASSUME the responsibility. In the case of the OP, this isn’t mentioned. Therefor, this is one of those “Feces Happens” moments. Learn from it. Mom and dad pays for a new windshield; tells junior not to park there when they are playing baseball; everyone learns. Most definitely; address it to the school so WARNING signs can be posted or flyers put up in the school informing the kids. The point is; no one is at fault here. There is a difference between fault and responsibility. Fault implies negligence to a degree. There was no negligence. Not unless this has been an ongoing event; numerous cars busted up; the school knows it; they don’t put up signs and such for the casual parker who doesn’t know the situation; etc… If that’s the case, then the school is negligent and is at fault. If not, then it falls under the category of “Feces happens”. As will ALL posts, we never get the full story. Maybe it was mentioned by the OP; but how many other windshields have gotten busted in the parking lot. Does the school forbid the student from moving their car. If this is a recurring event, has the school posted warnings??? If you don’t know the answer to any of these questions, then all other opinions trying to determine FAULT is pure speculation. What if by chance, not saying it is, the school has informed the students of this parking hazard. What if the son knew about this. What if the son figured he could take the risk? Again, all speculation. We don’t know, so we can’t provide accurate opinions.</p>
<p>I’m still in shock that parking only costs $10 at OP son’s high school. The last I checked, our public high school charged $200 per year. And there is a lottery to see if you get a space in the first place.</p>
<p>My S wound up paying $250 a year to the church across the street for a permanent spot.</p>
<p>“Just to throw another twist into the scenario - what if the ball were hit into the parking lot because the coach decided to move batting practice into the outfield so the infielders could practice their fielding, and he underestimated how far a batter might pull an inside pitch foul? In other words, a decision was made to use the field in a different manner than it was designed for, creating an elevated risk of damage? Anyone’s thinking change if that’s the reason for the errant ball?”</p>
<p>My only thinking at this point is that people are WAY over-thinking this!!</p>
<p>OP, thank you for the update.</p>
<p>This is OT, but about the height of fencing and how it relates to safety (either the people inside or outside)…</p>
<p>You do “increase” the footage of the outfield by increasing the height of the fence, in terms of the trajectory of the ball. So a field that is only 325’ can make itself slightly more ‘challenging’ in terms of homeruns, by building a really high fence.</p>
<p>As far as the side fences, I’ve seen third and first basemen flip themselves over a low fence trying to catch a ball. I’ve also seen players tearing their skin trying to catch flyballs over a taller chain link fence. The reason why, as the mom of a centerfielder, I lobbied for years for a warning track.</p>
<p>And I’m just trying to imagine the situation that kluge brings up- a bunch of infielders practicing while people BEHIND them are doing batting practice. :eek: That’s just {shudder} something so unbelievable- any coach who does that deserves to be fired and put in a “no-coaching-ever” registry. Don’t tell me that people do that!</p>
<p>Actually doubleplay, it’s not as far fetched as you’d think, depending on the layout of the field. I’ve seen a portable cage (like the ones the pros use, only smaller) set up about 30 feet behind third base, with the same orientation as home plate, so the balls are hit away from the infield. If there’s open space behind left field you can work two groups by doing that. Of course, it only works with the right amount of open space.</p>
<p>I’ve had the same concern with fences as you have. Little Leagues frequently use 3’ fences, which pose a tremendous flipping hazard for an athletic fielder. Warning tracks are good; so is putting that corrugated plastic pipe along the top of the chain link fence.</p>
<p>Christcorp, as long as you’re willing to acknowledge that if someone is negligent they should reimburse the other guy for losses occurring due to that negligence, we’re good. We’ll continue to disagree about the possibility of negligence on the part of the school (or one of it’s employees) but since we don’t know all the facts it is, as you note, speculation.</p>
<p>
that’s one expensive candy bar</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>kluge, your lawyer background has given you what I call “lawyer goggles”. Have you been to Disneyland recently? They slowed down the spinning teacups out of fear people would spin out and get hurt…the attraction operated for over 50 years without the need for a speed restriction.</p>
<p>Personally I think the school should offer to pay at least part of the bill. However, legally I imagine the situation is a bit sticky all around and the school may have no responsibility because the car was parked on ‘private’ property. If the car was on a public street and someone breaks your window then it’s a clear case that the person who broke the window has to pay for the damage. However, if the car is in a private lot then it may well be a case of ‘park at your own risk’ especially if the person who broke the window was connected with the owner of the property (in this case the school sports team). Then there’s the whole issue of is it the school or the person who hit the ball that’s responsible and if the person who hit the ball is a minor then once again there’s a whole additional set of issues there too. </p>
<p>In short, ideally the school would offer to pay at least part of the bill but if they don’t then you should probably just bite the bullet and pay the bill. Legally you might have a case against someone (although who is a bit unclear) although it’s really not worth it to go through the trouble of forcing payment over a, relatively, small matter.</p>
<p>FWIW, here’s what I think:</p>
<ol>
<li>Everyone should have “full glass” coverage (0 deductible) on their insurance. Then you don’t have to cringe every time a stone hits your windshield or you notice a crack.</li>
<li>The new windshield will probably cost less than the OP’s insurance deductible ($500) so the repair is all out of pocket.</li>
<li>I suspect the school also has a deductible on their insurance, and this is under it–so not covered by their insurance either.</li>
<li>Just because it’s an accident doesn’t mean the school (baseball team) isn’t legally liable. Circumstances: no posted warning, no waiver signed by the student, and parking spot assigned by the school.</li>
<li>Because it’s a “relatively” small amount, you certainly wouldn’t sue the school or involve lawyers. On the other hand, there is small claims court. This seems like a viable option if the school doesn’t make it right. This should not be done in a vindictive way, and could be a learning experience for your S (and I think the judge just may see it his way).</li>
<li>I think this is different than parking at a normal ball park, where risk is normally assumed by the parkee. The OP’s S parked there that day to attend school, not to watch a baseball game.</li>
</ol>
<p>I’m not for shirking responsibility or not facing the music, but I think the school bears more responsibility for this than the OP’s S–their baseball team directly caused the damage, whether an accident or not. They should pay for it (my opinion).</p>
<p>Reminds me of an incident when I was in college. A bunch of us were having a snowball fight. I threw a snowball that broke a dorm window (lounge). I had to pay for it. It was an accident, not intentional, but I was liable since I threw the snowball. Should the college have paid for it since students at colleges are known to throw a lot of snowballs? I wish.</p>
<p>Re Disneyland rides: I think Disney isn’t worried not only about people falling out of the teacups but also fatal brain hemorrhages. Disney settled a lawsuit a little over a year ago brought in connection with a young woman who died on her honeymoon in 2000 of a brain hemorrhage after riding the Indiana Jones ride.</p>
<p>Something a little closer to the tea cup ride:</p>
<p>On September 22, 2000, 4-year-old Brandon Zucker fell out of the ride vehicle in Roger Rabbit’s Cartoon Spin and suffered severe brain damage.</p>
<p>Illinoismom, don’t give my school any ideas! Parking is still free; but riding the bus costs $225/year and will go to $325/year next year. I wonder when they’ll start charing $10/year to park… they could make about $4000/year that way… hmmmm.</p>
<p>UCBCEG, if by “lawyer goggles” you mean that when I see a recreational facility which is designed in such a way as to increase the likelihood that people will get injured when it is used in the exact manner in which it is intended to be used I’m inclined to suggest that simple changes to the design to increase safety are a good idea, I plead guilty. Little League fences should be at least 4 feet tall, not lower. There’s no reason not to do that. The yellow plastic corrugated fence cap product should be installed on top of cyclone fences with jagged tops. There should be warning tracks for fields played on by teenagers or older players. I honestly don’t see the argument against doing those things, unless you see a positive virtue in kids getting injured while playing sports in ways that are easily prevented. Admittedly, my years as a baseball coach probably have more to do with this than my profession (I don’t practice injury law) but I’ll cop to having the mindset anyway.</p>
<p>Exactly what is the world view you are in favor of, as opposed to viewing the world through “lawyer goggles?”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My problem is being overly cautious…trying to mitigate all risk regardless of cost.</p>
<p>I’ll agree that a 4’ fence is likely better…but a 3’ fence is likely adequate considering the Little League players aren’t much over 5’.</p>
<p>but a 3’ fence is likely adequate considering the Little League players aren’t much over 5’.</p>
<p>um Im thinking when was the last time you visited a third grade classroom?
Also don’t chem majors have to take physics anymore?
Ever heard of foul balls? Not everything is a line drive.</p>
<p>I think its one of the those DUH moments, you park in a lot next to a baseball field, your car could get hit by a baseball</p>
<p>you park in a lot with shopping carts, your car could get hit by a shopping cart</p>
<p>some personal common sense is needed sometimes, and this isn’t toward the OP</p>
<p>as for increasing the fence height, egad people…a solution that would cost at least a hundred times the potential damags</p>
<p>as for injury, you KNOW you are next to a baseball field</p>
<p>cheaper solution is to put up one of those net things- erect some posts, put up the net, done-cause moving a fence a few up does little</p>
<p>increase the fee for the parking lot, even tripling the fee to gasp 30dollars, may cover the cost of the net thing</p>
<p>now THAT would be fair- let the people using the lot decide if the cost of “protecting” their cars is reasonable</p>