1 reply to this topic

[WBSKI]

I noticed in the Vancouver Sun that someone who fell off the Mystery Peak Chair 4 years ago got comped $500000CAD... Seems a bit much for such a thing.. Seymour must really be hurting from this.

NORTH VANCOUVER - A man who was injured when he fell off a moving chairlift at Mount Seymour four years ago has been awarded more than $500,000 after winning a lawsuit against the North Vancouver ski resort.

Peter Kralik, 50, was awarded damages and lost wages after B.C. Supreme Court Justice Elizabeth Bennett determined Kralik's accident was caused by the negligence of a Mount Seymour ski lift operator.

After hearing evidence in a civil trial, the judge concluded the operator wasn't paying close enough attention as Kralik tried to load on to the Mystery Chair on the day of the accident, then failed to stop the chairlift after Kralik fell off.

Kralik's accident happened on a foggy, drizzly day during spring break on March 16, 2003, when Kralik and his son Tomas went to Mount Seymour to ski.

The experienced skiers had made several runs that day and were making a last run on the Mystery Chair when the accident happened.

Kralik had been brushing snow and ice off the chairlift seat when he realized he wasn't going to have time to sit down. He grabbed the seat and chair and was left dangling below the chairlift as it moved up the mountain.

He broke his right shoulder when he let go and fell three metres to the ground.


This chair is a Murray Latta double. It doesnt seem to be very good at keeping people on the chairs because someone else fell off this lift this new year.

[Whistler]

Hopefully this incident doesn't put a dent in the "easy going" Mt. Seymour work environment. Everyone I know who works there just loves it because it's so slack. But on topic, that does seem like alot of $ for a fall off a chairlift. At the mountain I work at, people (mainly kids who don't sit all the way back on the chair) fall from the chair at least 3 or 4 times a season. But this case is a little different I guess because it involves negligence on the part of the lift operator.