 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeArticlesDiving DestinationsLearning Scuba DivingMarine LifeMiscellaneousDiscussion GroupsGeneralScuba EquipmentScuba LocationsAustralian ScubaUK ScubaDirectoryScuba Clubs |
Scuba Forum / UK Scuba / August 2005Check your policy
I came across this story on the BBC website a few days ago (but this is the first chance I've had to post) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/4144366.stm A 68 year old diver got bent in Marsa Alam having dived to 49.5m, but his insurance only covered him to 30m, and he is now facing a bill of £40,000 His family say he is an experienced diver, did not realise that his policy was depth restricted, and anyway - it wasn't the depth that caused the bend, but the fact that he was dehydrated, so the insurance company should pay up! To quote: "We are hoping Lloyds TSB have a sense of fairness and compassion." Lloyds TSB insurance said in a statement: "The tour company which Mr Allen was diving with has confirmed that he reached a depth of 49.5 metres immediately prior to seeking medical assistance. "We also have confirmation from doctors treating him that his illness is directly related to him participating in a dive to that depth. "Therefore we are unable to accept this claim. "Should any additional medical evidence come to light we would of course reassess that situation." ======= Chris Q Oops - just noticed someone has already posted details Sorry Chris Q > Oops - just noticed someone has already posted details > > Sorry > > Chris Q you could always apply for a reporters job with the Sun ;p >>Oops - just noticed someone has already posted details >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > you could always apply for a reporters job with the Sun ;p Hmm, by the time this story reaches the pages of The Sun it will probably have morphed into one about a diver whose breasts exploded at depth. > >>Oops - just noticed someone has already posted details > >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > probably have morphed into one about a diver whose breasts exploded at > depth. In the Daily Star, they'd have been diving on the moon... >> >>Oops - just noticed someone has already posted details >> >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> > In the Daily Star, they'd have been diving on the moon... Really? Wow! :)) Ken Has anyone viz reports for the sea of tranquility?  Signaturepat rick at vir gin dot net www.tigershark.org.uk > >> >>Oops - just noticed someone has already posted details > >> >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Ken > Has anyone viz reports for the sea of tranquility? http://moon.google.com/ zoom in as far as you can..... >>>Oops - just noticed someone has already posted details >>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Hmm, by the time this story reaches the pages of The Sun it will probably > have morphed into one about a diver whose breasts exploded at depth. Yes I read this can happen :)) Ken >>>>Oops - just noticed someone has already posted details >>>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Yes I read this can happen :)) Who cares if it can happen - it's an excuse to show some pictures of breasts :-) >>>>>Oops - just noticed someone has already posted details >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Who cares if it can happen - it's an excuse to show some pictures of > breasts :-) Never let the truth get in the way of a good exposure, eh? Ken >I came across this story on the BBC website a few days ago (but this is the > first chance I've had to post) [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > ======= > Chris Q The quote seems to contradict your thesis. Adam >>I came across this story on the BBC website a few days ago (but this >>is the [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > The quote seems to contradict your thesis. > Adam I expounded no thesis - just pasted what the family and insurance companies had stated. Chris Q > I expounded no thesis - just pasted what the family and insurance companies > had stated. so it was all hearsay.... or Chinese whispers... or a load of bull... (depending on your point of view) tut tut >> I expounded no thesis - just pasted what the family and insurance >> companies had stated. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > tut tut No - just honest reporting (is that an oxymoron?) Chris Q >>>I came across this story on the BBC website a few days ago (but this >>>is the [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > I expounded no thesis - just pasted what the family and insurance companies > had stated. You said the depth did not cause his illness, that is your thesis. The doctors treating his illness said his illness was related to the depth of his dive. I'm going with the doctors' view, because we all know DCS is related to depth. Had he dived to the 30 m depth he may not have been bent, which is sufficient possibility for the insurance company to deny his claim. His dive to 50m is 164 ft, very deep by recreational standards, and beyond the 130ft limit. Nevertheless the limitations of the insurance policy should be made clear and not be in "fine print" Adam > You said the depth did not cause his illness, that is your thesis. The > doctors treating his illness said his illness was related to the depth [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Adam I did not say that - his family did - I just cut & pasted the report Chris Q >His dive to 50m is 164 ft, very deep by recreational standards, and beyond the 130ft >limit. I make 30m to be 99 feet not 130. SignatureIan "Democracy, what we need - Kakistocracy what we've got" >>His dive to 50m is 164 ft, very deep by recreational standards, and beyond the 130ft >>limit. > > I make 30m to be 99 feet not 130. PADI Advanced Open Water is 30m - 98.4 feet, with deep dive speciality certed to 40m - 131.2 feet. Dunno about BSAC , but 130 fits in with PADI depth max. >>>His dive to 50m is 164 ft, very deep by recreational standards, and beyond the 130ft >>>limit. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Dunno about BSAC , but 130 fits in with PADI depth max. But has no relevance to this guys limit set by his insurance not his qualifying agency. IIRC the Red Sea has a general depth limit of 30m, certainly that's been the rule when I've been on day boats - consistently bust your depth and your off the boat[1]. [1] Threatened but no one pushed it so would it have happened in reality? SignatureIan "Democracy, what we need - Kakistocracy what we've got" >But has no relevance to this guys limit set by his insurance not his >qualifying agency. IIRC the Red Sea has a general depth limit of 30m, Nope - certain boats/dive companies may have a depth limit but it is not a general limit, you can dive trimix there if you want -- Pete diving 'at' melbourne 'dot' me 'dot' uk |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.