[Barefoot]

Originally Posted by TheVillageChicken

As to responsibility for damages, the golfer is legally responsible only if there were reckless or intentional misconduct.

Since the golfer is intentionally and recklessly hitting the ball as hard as he can in the direction of someone's home, obviously the damage isn't resulting from an accident, but from a deliberate act.

[chuckinca]

Barefoot, Esq?

(also my laymen opinion)

.

[784caroline]

Originally Posted by Barefoot

Since the golfer is intentionally and recklessly hitting the ball as hard as he can in the direction of someone's home, obviously the damage isn't resulting from an accident, but from a deliberate act.

Barefoot.....do you golf.....I guess you have never hit a hook, or wayward shot..and the direction of that shot is not aimed at any house...intentionally. If my aim was that good I would be a low handicap golfer and I would be focused on the flag.

[DonH57]

Sometimes a golf ball doesn't go where it was told. If I could hit off the tee without an ocasionall hook or slice I'd be a happy camper, or well, golfer.

[George Bieniaszek]

Unless you have very good video surveillance on your property which clearly identifies the golfer tee up his ball and aim directly at your house and cause damage, that would be the golfer's responsibility for damage caused to your home.

Golfers do not do that. They are focused on that flag in the middle of the green. YES, they do on occasion hit an errant shot and it lands somewhere unintended. The actions they take defines them as a good citizen or a spineless knucklehead as a previous poster described two golfers running away after hitting a ball and breaking a window.

As stated numerous times in this post, morally and/or ethically, you should go over, apologize and offer to pay at least the deductible for any damage you do. Legally, you can just walk away, go to a country club, buy some beers and laugh and joke about what you did with your golf buddies, if it makes you sleep better at night.

I have never had a problem with property owners when I approached them and politely asked if I can retrieve my ball off their property if it was in plain view and nor buried in their flower/shrub beds.

[Chellybean]

Originally Posted by TheVillageChicken

You are presenting opinions as facts. Here are some facts presented as facts.

Under Florida Statute, it is only trespassing if the property is fenced or posted, or the person entering the property is verbally told to leave by the owner or the owners authorized agent and refuses to do so. As to responsibility for damages, the golfer is legally responsible only if there were reckless or intentional misconduct. As for negligence, the courts have almost always ruled for the golfer under the doctrine of "assumption of risk."

I do agree with your last sentence.

number one there are alot of posted property's and the golf don't care and i have seen it first hand. FACT
2nd the golf course is clearly marked on where the boundary's are and Golfers ignore the boundary and signs and come onto peoples property without so much as asking and feel that they are entitled to since they play the course; FACT
FACT There in no laws allowing people to trespass and if you come on to peoples property knowingly where the boundary's are clearly Marked you are trespassing, we can argue this all day long, it is the disrespect of a golfers when he trespasses onto someones property to retrieve a 2 dollar ball, if you can't give up your ball due to 2 dollars than get out of the golf game.
3Rd where in gods name do you see case law that the Golfer isn't responsible if he isn't reckless, for property damage.
I would love to argue this point in front of the Judge with you:
FACT You are responsible for damage from you golf ball and people know this, this is why people run away and do not fess up.
This is a gentleman sport and more times then not people don't fess up.
People are way to confused on the Law.
Example; if you are in range of getting hit by a ball being adjacent to a course it is a accident and not malicious, however it doesn't exempt the person from being sued for damages and winning.
the real issue is here we are all adults and when you put a golf club in peoples hands they act as children, if all Golfers where honorable we even wouldn't be have multiply discussions over this

[Chellybean]

Originally Posted by George Bieniaszek

Unless you have very good video surveillance on your property which clearly identifies the golfer tee up his ball and aim directly at your house and cause damage, that would be the golfer's responsibility for damage caused to your home.

Golfers do not do that. They are focused on that flag in the middle of the green. YES, they do on occasion hit an errant shot and it lands somewhere unintended. The actions they take defines them as a good citizen or a spineless knucklehead as a previous poster described two golfers running away after hitting a ball and breaking a window.

As stated numerous times in this post, morally and/or ethically, you should go over, apologize and offer to pay at least the deductible for any damage you do. Legally, you can just walk away, go to a country club, buy some beers and laugh and joke about what you did with your golf buddies, if it makes you sleep better at night.

I have never had a problem with property owners when I approached them and politely asked if I can retrieve my ball off their property if it was in plain view and nor buried in their flower/shrub beds.

FACT: you can not legally walk away
FACT read the law, God people are ignorant where do you folks get you info?

[kittygilchrist]

If you've been reading this thread and are interested in trespass law, I started a separate thread. Doing my best not to post anything without careful research.

[TheVillageChicken]

Originally Posted by Chellybean

number one there are alot of posted property's and the golf don't care and i have seen it first hand. FACT
2nd the golf course is clearly marked on where the boundary's are and Golfers ignore the boundary and signs and come onto peoples property without so much as asking and feel that they are entitled to since they play the course; FACT
FACT There in no laws allowing people to trespass and if you come on to peoples property knowingly where the boundary's are clearly Marked you are trespassing, we can argue this all day long, it is the disrespect of a golfers when he trespasses onto someones property to retrieve a 2 dollar ball, if you can't give up your ball due to 2 dollars than get out of the golf game.
3Rd where in gods name do you see case law that the Golfer isn't responsible if he isn't reckless, for property damage.
I would love to argue this point in front of the Judge with you:
FACT You are responsible for damage from you golf ball and people know this, this is why people run away and do not fess up.
This is a gentleman sport and more times then not people don't fess up.
People are way to confused on the Law.
Example; if you are in range of getting hit by a ball being adjacent to a course it is a accident and not malicious, however it doesn't exempt the person from being sued for damages and winning.
the real issue is here we are all adults and when you put a golf club in peoples hands they act as children, if all Golfers where honorable we even wouldn't be have multiply discussions over this

I got my information from a former Florida judge.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by Chellybean

FACT: you can not legally walk away
FACT read the law, God people are ignorant where do you folks get you info?

I googled this;



Living on a golf course means understanding insurance - GOLF.com

[Mikeod]

Originally Posted by Chellybean

FACT: you can not legally walk away
FACT read the law, God people are ignorant where do you folks get you info?

That's not what it says in California law. From lawguru.com:

"The general law on the subject is that the homeowner assumes the risk of damage by living adjacent to the course. Additionally, the golfer is not negligent merely because a shot goes out of bounds. If that were true, then every baseball player to ever play the game would be negligent for hitting a foul ball into the stands. Certainly Tiger Woods hits them out of bounds too every now and then, but he acts as an ordinary reasonable golfer would to play it in bounds. There is clear california case law on these points of law. On the other hand, if the golfer intentionally or recklessly hits a ball at a home, then the golfer may be responsible."

It also depends on what was there first. If a golf course is constructed next to an existing home, damage is treated differently from when the home is constructed adjacent to an existing golf course. There was a case in FL where a golf course had to redesign a golf hole because of damage occurring to a home that was there before the course was constructed.

The standard for "reckless" is not that any wayward shot is "reckless" just because it causes damage. Reckless could be a case where a golfer decides to cut the corner of a dogleg hole by hitting a shot over the homes at the corner.

Regardless of the above, there is a difference between what is legally right and what is morally right. No matter what the law requires, I would feel a responsibility to the homeowner.

[Chellybean]

Originally Posted by mikeod

That's not what it says in California law. From lawguru.com:
this is not California it is Florida and the laws aren't the same

"The general law on the subject is that the homeowner assumes the risk of damage by living adjacent to the course.
COMPLETELY incorrect there is nothing in the statue that says General Law, where do you folks get your laws, obviously not from the statues or case law.
Additionally, the golfer is not negligent merely because a shot goes out of bounds. If that were true, then every baseball player to ever play the game would be negligent for hitting a foul ball into the stands.
This is completely not the same analogy, you take a risk at a base ball game and the balls are going away from you and there are nets to protect the stands behind home plate.
Certainly Tiger Woods hits them out of bounds too every now and then, but he acts as an ordinary reasonable golfer would to play it in bounds. There is clear california case law on these points of law. On the other hand, if the golfer intentionally or recklessly hits a ball at a home, then the golfer may be responsible."
We are in Florida not California?

It also depends on what was there first. If a golf course is constructed next to an existing home, damage is treated differently from when the home is constructed adjacent to an existing golf course. There was a case in FL where a golf course had to redesign a golf hole because of damage occurring to a home that was there before the course was constructed.
There is also case law that holds the Golf course responsible in building a safe course and is responsible for balls going out for bounds if there isn't enough trees along the boundary's of the course, and also research privacy Nuisances laws.

The standard for "reckless" is not that any wayward shot is "reckless" just because it causes damage. Reckless could be a case where a golfer decides to cut the corner of a dogleg hole by hitting a shot over the homes at the corner.
OMG are you kidding me that is Reckless, the course wasn't designed for that, the golfer takes the risk of hitting a house!

Regardless of the above, there is a difference between what is legally right and what is morally right. No matter what the law requires, I would feel a responsibility to the homeowner.

Thank you are you a gentleman Golfer that is my whole point, the Laws can be swade either way, find a judge thats a golfer your chances are lower with the support of further case law, find a judge that lives on a golf course that doesn't play golf you chance go up with case law, now try to find a judge that doesn't believe in moral fiber, that a person should be responsible for damage may be harder, wait a minute am i in new york we have corrupt
judges there, l.o.l.

[Chellybean]

Originally Posted by TheVillageChicken

I got my information from a former Florida judge.

MUST be a Golfer l.o.l.

[TheVillageChicken]

Originally Posted by Chellybean

MUST be a Golfer l.o.l.

Nope, but not because I didn't want her to be. Her sister won every tournament she played in her senior year of high school, but young "S" was more interested in raising hell. She has come a long way since then.

[kittygilchrist]

As a golf course homeowner, I understood and accepted the risk of balls hitting the house without needing to figure out who would be liable for damage.

What has surprised me has been this community where private property rights have been so poorly respected. IMO, TOTV and these discussions have been instrumental in helping us better understand each other's points of view and a shift away from cavalier attitudes toward another's turf (literal turf).

Discussions are beneficial, if tiring.