One of my friend pull his shot into someone backyard and broke a window. The golf course owner claimed that they don't have insurance for broken window. The house owner also claimed that she is not allowed/not willling to claim her house insurance. Both the golf course and the house owner said it is the responsibility of the golfer.
Both the golf course and the house owner said it is the responsibility of the golfer. Does this sound right? Does anyone has any experience to share? Thanks in advance for the help. Tags:None
You break a window, you pay for it. The flip side of that coin is that homeowners should bear responsibility for golf ball damage since they assumed obvious risk by deciding to purchase a home near a golf course. Additionally, homeowner’s insurance may handle the damage. In some cases it can be a combination of the two.
Plain and simple it is the responsibility of the golfer for either personal injury or property damage. Unless there is a blatant design flaw in the design of the hole, the golf course is not responsible for any damages. The home owner assumes a certain percentage of risk/consent when choosing to live on the golf course (probably for value reasons).
In most cases if you ask the golfer, he will say it is the homeowner and should be covered on their homeowners insurance. In other cases if you ask the homeowner he will say the golfer is responsible. You also have to catch the golfer! There is clear California case law on these points of law.
Am I Responsible for Covering Any Damage Caused by the Golf Ball? Technically it would be your homeowners insurance company that's responsible for covering the damage. According to insurance expert Paul Martin, it would only be your responsibility to cover the cost of your policy's deductible out of your own pocket.
You break a window, you pay for it. The flip side of that coin is that homeowners should bear responsibility for golf ball damage since they assumed obvious risk by deciding to purchase a home near a golf course. Additionally, homeowner's insurance may handle the damage.
After researching the topic, I came to a fairly clear legal conclusion: A golfer is generally not liable for injuries or damages due to an errant shot by the golfer, except in situations in which the golfer is negligent, reckless, or acting with intent.
While the golfer who broke your window should own up and take responsibility, she is not legally responsible for the damage if she was otherwise playing normally. Golfers need to take ordinary care when playing, but sometimes even the best golfers will hit a wild shot.
Comprehensive coverage includes replacement or repairs to your vehicle if it's stolen or damaged in an incident that's not a collision. It also covers broken windows in the event of a break-in. The following are covered by comprehensive coverage: Vandalism.
You may also have a claim against the driver of the errant golf ball. The courts have generally held that the driver of a golf ball is charged with the duty to exercise ordinary care for the safety of property and persons reasonably within the “range of danger.”
Most likely, you will need to file a claim on your car insurance policy under comprehensive coverage if your vehicle is damaged at a baseball stadium or golf course. You probably will not know who caused the damage, and the stadium or course will not accept liability.
Golf Moose is a website and mobile app that helps golfers save on golf.
The big question is who's liable to pay for those damages: the homeowner, the golf course or neither. It's called “errant golf ball liability” when a stray golf ball hits someone's window or causes other damages unintentionally, WMBF reported.
Golfers or Golf Balls Trespassing on Florida Property Trespass is one of the oldest civil law claims. In order to claim a trespass, you must have warned the trespasser and asked them to stop, and there cannot be a valid reason for the trespasser's presence.
“Since damage from golf balls is incredibly common, you have a few options, including coverage through your Progressive policy. If you were parked on the golf course's property, they may cover the damage. Some golf courses have liability insurance in place to help protect patron's property from damage.
If one of those errant shots breaks your window, the golfer has no liability. But, you don't assume that a golfer will take extraordinary risks that place your property in jeopardy. For example, if a golfer tries to cut across a corner by hitting the ball over your house, a shot not usually part of the game of golf, ...
When you buy a house on a golf course you agree to assume certain risks associated with the property, such as the possibility that a golf ball may break one of your windows. For the golfer to be responsible, you will have to show that he has done something that you would not ordinarily expect from a reasonable golfer.
Alderman is the Dwight Olds Chair in Law at the University of Houston Law Center.
A: As a general rule, a person is not responsible for damage caused when a tree falls onto another's property. This is because liability is based on negligence and, in most cases, when a tree falls it was an act of God and not the fault of the property owner.
Most instances it's the homeowners responsibility. You didn't deliberately hit the window.
The club sold the house and the new owners remodelled the house. After having several ball hit into the house the new owners took the club to civil court. The court said the club had to prevent players from hitting into the house. The owners were entitled to have their property golf ball free even though they bought the property knowing the golf course was there.
The most popular is actually called the "baseball rule," which insulates the baseball teams and stadiums from liability when people take liners to the face, specifically down right field line.
I wasn’t disagreeing with him; I was simply expanding on what he said. House built on existing course = no liability to course or golfer. Course built after house = no liability to golfer, possible liability to course.
Apropos to golf, there might be specific bylaws in the building restrictions, homeowners association, etc that definitively attach golf ball damage to the homeowner, specifically in golf communities, which accounts for the above perspective that if the house pre-existed the course the golfer pays, but if the course pre-existed the house or were built together, then the homeowner pays.
However, the golf course could be liable as it assumed the risk of issues like that happening by building a course next to house.
The only other caveat here is that if you told the guy you would pay for the window and he relies on that and goes out and gets a new window, and you then refuse to pay, you could be held liable if he were to sue you because you represented to him you would pay and he relied on that. Outside of that, though, I would guess that you don't legally owe him a dime.
If the golfer just had a bad hit and did not intentionally try to hit your house, then he/she is not responsible. The homeowner would have to contact the golf course.
So go out and enjoy your round of golf with your friends and if you break a window, just go along your merry way and press the bet on the next hole. Because odds are you lost that one.
Sometimes the golf course will have signs that say, “You are responsible for damages done to houses on the course”. In reality, it’s kind of a “judgment call”. It’s not usually expensive enough to be an insurance claim so if you feel responsible, then you should pay. You could also say, “you shouldn’t have built your house so close to the course so I’m not paying”.
Just as when you go to a sporting event the spectator assumes the responsibility of being struck by an errant shot.
But those driving or walking on a road or street that borders a golf coarse do not assume responsibility. If a motorist while driving by has their car damaged by a golf ball it's the golf course that is held responsible for not putting up sufficient barriers to stop errant shots, not the golfer.
Yes, people who live on golf courses should know there is risk. No, most golf clubs do NOT have a policy on broken windows. If someone breaks your window, you may ask them to pay for it, but know that this is as much an ethical/moral thing as it is a matter of principle. They may look at you and tell you you shouldn’t have bought a house on a course, and that your insurance should cover it, and
I live on a golf course and have had several windows broken over the years so I do know how this works. The golfer owes you nothing, though an apology would be nice. But it typically happens when I'm not there so that's all irrelevant.
It is important to note that, while the applicable law is based on where you are playing, one common approach to liability on the golf course is that golfers are liable if they are negligent or do not use reasonable care when taking their shots. Essentially what this means is that if the player is not making sensible choices, such as teeing off in the wrong direction, purposefully aiming at a house or car, deciding to cut across a dogleg that puts personal property in jeopardy, then they should be liable for damages caused by their unreasonable actions. In some instances, the decision to take a mulligan (do over) shot has been held to be an unreasonable decision if the result is property damage.
So regardless of what jurisdiction you are golfing in, one way to make everybody happy, the homeowner, golf course and especially and most importantly you the golfer seeking to better that score is to be sure that you “Hit ‘Em Straight.”
Essentially what this means is that if the player is not making sensible choices, such as teeing off in the wrong direction, purposefully aiming at a house or car, deciding to cut across a dogleg that puts personal property in jeopardy, then they should be liable for damages caused by their unreasonable actions.
While golfers might be liable for the damage, proving that an individual golfer was the cause of such damage can be very tricky. When the sound of breaking glass is heard, many players pick up their bag and hustle away to the next hole instead of knocking on the door and taking responsibility for their poor aim.
There is a third possibility; the golf course itself could be at fault. In some cases, homeowners have brought suit against golf courses and won. The grounds of these lawsuits usually either pertain to a golf course being constructed too near to houses that already exist, or more commonly, they are based on poorly designed holes and tee boxes that place houses in obvious danger that could have been avoided. In these cases, both the golfer and the homeowner may escape liability, even if the courses posted rules stating they are not liable for damages.
The trend in Washington seems to be favoring homeowners, making golfers responsible for property damage their unlucky slices might cause. To those that argue the homeowner’s insurance should cover the damage, the response is that homeowners pay a high premium on insurance to cover their property, not because they are responsible for the damage, but because getting a golfer to pay for the damage they cause is not always possible. While golfers might be liable for the damage, proving that an individual golfer was the cause of such damage can be very tricky. When the sound of breaking glass is heard, many players pick up their bag and hustle away to the next hole instead of knocking on the door and taking responsibility for their poor aim. In these situations, homeowners are left with little option other than to pay the deductible and have their insurance pay for the costs of repairs.
A: Living on a golf course means living with golf balls. While the golfer who broke your window should own up and take responsibility, she is not legally responsible for the damage if she was otherwise playing normally.
Typically these documents will also relieve the reasonable golfer from liability for accidental damage and allow a golfer to retrieve their lost ball.
Golfers need to take ordinary care when playing, but sometimes even the best golfers will hit a wild shot. If she was acting negligently when it happened, perhaps taking a running start like in the movies, then she would have been on the hook.