Sliced a ball into an expensive window. Did I do the right thing?

[MSchott]

Remember that the next time someone hits into you on the golf course. It's your fault. You shouldn't have been there in the first place.

Ok, I'm done with this thread. It simply saddens me too much.

Bye, but making incorrect parallels is one reason this thread has gone over the top.

[Pretzel]

I was on the practice green the other day and got drilled in the arm by someone (who turned out to be a teammate) who skulled a half-wedge shot into me. My first thought wasn't, "Man, I hope he comes up and offers to help" but instead "That was stupid of me to be standing here, but I'm glad I flinched or it would've hit me in the elbow and fractured the bone". If I'm on the golf course and am hit on accident, I have never blamed the person who hit me. The only time I did blame the person who hit me was because he went for the green on a par 5 (twice) while I was putting out on that green. If it's not intentional, I'm not going to make their day worse by getting upset over a shot that they clearly did not intend to hit.

[Fourputt]

Remember that the next time someone hits into you on the golf course. It's your fault. You shouldn't have been there in the first place.

Ok, I'm done with this thread. It simply saddens me too much.

Of course I will.  I accept that when I'm on a golf course that there are some small risks inherent with being there.  I'm not going to sue another golfer for playing an errant shot.  To me that would be ludicrous.  So I will extend that same philosophy to a home adjacent to a golf course.  If you want the "cool" that goes with living on a golf course, then you had better accept the risks along with it.

[mdl]

Remember that the next time someone hits into you on the golf course. It's your fault. You shouldn't have been there in the first place.

Ok, I'm done with this thread. It simply saddens me too much.

You mean the sanctimony and willful ignorance are saddening?  I agree.

[Big C]

Good points raised by many in this thread.

I hope it's not off topic, but this got me to thinking about tweaking the scenario slightly. What if instead of a hole lined with high dollar value homes (and owners who presumably accepted the associated risk), you have a hole right next to a busy street? Anyone who has played enough SoCal Muni golf has probably encounter this scenario fairly frequently. Think Skylinks Hole #11, Recreation Park Hole #4, Mile Square Classic Hole #9 or Mesa Linda holes #9 & #10, where the boundary fence is close enough to a heavily trafficked street that putting one through some poor sucker's windshield is a very realistic possibility.

To date, I have been lucky, but I've definitely had my fair share of "oh shit" moments, where a wayward hook sends my ball screaming over the fence and into oncoming traffic.

To those that belief that a broken window is a homeowners responsibility (and for the record, I don't disagree with that position), who would you hold liable for auto damage in the scenario above? Does a driver assume responsibility for his own damage and deductible, simply because he or she drives adjacent to a golf course?

Just my two cents, but I think that the golfer is responsible for their errant shot in that case, even if there was no negligence.

[mdl]

I hope it's not off topic, but this got me to thinking about tweaking the scenario slightly. What if instead of a hole lined with high dollar value homes (and owners who presumably accepted the associated risk), you have a hole right next to a busy street?

Yeah.  When one of us hits a nice drive on 18 at Rancho Park, our joke is, "Don't hit a Patricia".  As in, don't snap hook a longish club going for it in two onto Patricia Ave.

I agree with you.  If you hit a car driving on the street that's your responsibility.  You walk over as they stop and offer to pay for the damage (hopefully their insurance covers it and you're just out a deductible).  Seems obvious how this is different than hitting a house lining a fairway.

[jlh1508]

Yeah.  When one of us hits a nice drive on 18 at Rancho Park, our joke is, "Don't hit a Patricia".  As in, don't snap hook a longish club going for it in two onto Patricia Ave.

I agree with you.  If you hit a car driving on the street that's your responsibility.  You walk over as they stop and offer to pay for the damage (hopefully their insurance covers it and you're just out a deductible).  Seems obvious how this is different than hitting a house lining a fairway.

No it doesn't.  Both are a case of a wayward golf ball, hit off golf course property. Not sure how its any different at all

[mdl]

No it doesn't.  Both are a case of a wayward golf ball, hit off golf course property. Not sure how its any different at all

Okay.  If it's so hard,  I'll spell it out for you.

Case 1) A person is going about their business, driving wherever they're going.  For all I know they may not even know they're driving by a golf course.  Regardless, they've chosen this road because it's the best way to get where they're going.  I have no right to unilaterally declare using a particular a public road incurs further risk from my golf ball. I'm choosing to play a game that has absolutely nothing to do with them.  I damage their car.  I am responsible for damaging their property.

Case 2) I go to a sporting facility for a sport played with hard balls hit at high speeds that can cause serious damage.  At that facility, someone has chosen to build a house almost directly in the line of play.*  That person chose to build their house in this location knowing full well the damage possible from golf balls.  This is their decision and their problem.  I am not responsible for damaging their property.

* Last time I almost hit a house it started maybe 8 paces from the OB line, which was maybe 8 paces from the fairway.  Even for pro golfers that's not even almost.  16 yards from the fairway just is in fact in the line of play.

[Golfingdad]

Good points raised by many in this thread.

I hope it's not off topic, but this got me to thinking about tweaking the scenario slightly. What if instead of a hole lined with high dollar value homes (and owners who presumably accepted the associated risk), you have a hole right next to a busy street? Anyone who has played enough SoCal Muni golf has probably encounter this scenario fairly frequently. Think Skylinks Hole #11, Recreation Park Hole #4, Mile Square Classic Hole #9 or Mesa Linda holes #9 & #10, where the boundary fence is close enough to a heavily trafficked street that putting one through some poor sucker's windshield is a very realistic possibility.

To date, I have been lucky, but I've definitely had my fair share of "oh shit" moments, where a wayward hook sends my ball screaming over the fence and into oncoming traffic.

To those that belief that a broken window is a homeowners responsibility (and for the record, I don't disagree with that position), who would you hold liable for auto damage in the scenario above? Does a driver assume responsibility for his own damage and deductible, simply because he or she drives adjacent to a golf course?

Just my two cents, but I think that the golfer is responsible for their errant shot in that case, even if there was no negligence.

Yeah.  When one of us hits a nice drive on 18 at Rancho Park, our joke is, "Don't hit a Patricia".  As in, don't snap hook a longish club going for it in two onto Patricia Ave.

I agree with you.  If you hit a car driving on the street that's your responsibility.  You walk over as they stop and offer to pay for the damage (hopefully their insurance covers it and you're just out a deductible).  Seems obvious how this is different than hitting a house lining a fairway.

Okay.  If it's so hard,  I'll spell it out for you.

Case 1) A person is going about their business, driving wherever they're going.  For all I know they may not even know they're driving by a golf course.  Regardless, they've chosen this road because it's the best way to get where they're going.  I have no right to unilaterally declare using a particular a public road incurs further risk from my golf ball. I'm choosing to play a game that has absolutely nothing to do with them.  I damage their car.  I am responsible for damaging their property.

Case 2) I go to a sporting facility for a sport played with hard balls hit at high speeds that can cause serious damage.  At that facility, someone has chosen to build a house almost directly in the line of play.*  That person chose to build their house in this location knowing full well the damage possible from golf balls.  This is their decision and their problem.  I am not responsible for damaging their property.

* Last time I almost hit a house it started maybe 8 paces from the OB line, which was maybe 8 paces from the fairway.  Even for pro golfers that's not even almost.  16 yards from the fairway just is in fact in the line of play.

Maybe we just have different morals here in Socal?? This all seems like common sense to me.

[jlh1508]

Okay.  If it's so hard,  I'll spell it out for you.

Case 1) A person is going about their business, driving wherever they're going.  For all I know they may not even know they're driving by a golf course.  Regardless, they've chosen this road because it's the best way to get where they're going.  I have no right to unilaterally declare using a particular a public road incurs further risk from my golf ball. I'm choosing to play a game that has absolutely nothing to do with them.  I damage their car.  I am responsible for damaging their property.

Case 2) I go to a sporting facility for a sport played with hard balls hit at high speeds that can cause serious damage.  At that facility, someone has chosen to build a house almost directly in the line of play.*  That person chose to build their house in this location knowing full well the damage possible from golf balls.  This is their decision and their problem.  I am not responsible for damaging their property.

* Last time I almost hit a house it started maybe 8 paces from the OB line, which was maybe 8 paces from the fairway.  Even for pro golfers that's not even almost.  16 yards from the fairway just is in fact in the line of play.

So if I knowingly drive my car by it knowing a ball could hit it is my fault?  Either a golfer is responsible for where there golf ball goes or they are not.  It really is that simple

[mdl]

Case 1) A person is going about their business, driving wherever they're going.  For all I know they may not even know they're driving by a golf course.  Regardless, they've chosen this road because it's the best way to get where they're going.  I have no right to unilaterally declare using a particular a public road incurs further risk from my golf ball. I'm choosing to play a game that has absolutely nothing to do with them.  I damage their car.  I am responsible for damaging their property.

So if I knowingly drive my car by it knowing a ball could hit it is my fault?  Either a golfer is responsible for where there golf ball goes or they are not.  It really is that simple

God this is maddening.  You're blinded by the brilliant light of your sanctimonious self-regard.  You can't respond to the distinction I made, so you just ignore what I actually wrote and pile on the self-important sanctimony.

[jlh1508]

God this is maddening.  You're blinded by the brilliant light of your sanctimonious self-regard.  You can't respond to the distinction I made, so you just ignore what I actually wrote and pile on the self-important sanctimony.

No your distinction just makes no sense.  The reality is that it doesn't matter what is off of golf course property or how far off golf course property it is. As a golfer you have a responsibility to keep your ball on the course. if you do not do so you are responsible. IT IS YOUR BALL, THAT YOU HIT. THEREFORE YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE

It is a simple concept

[Aflighter]

I think its pretty simple to most of us on here that if you build house along a golf course that runs risk of being hit by a ball then its clearly on you.I understand the morally correct thing to do about telling the owner but id imagine its not first time house has been hit or last.You gotta be pretty stupid or not too worried about it to have windows facing course that is in range from tee shots not protected.

[mdl]

So is there no case where a person who puts themselves or their property at risk ever has to take responsibility?  What if I convinced a course owner that it would make their course novel and distinctive if their signature hole had a house directly in the middle of the fairway at 220 yards.  I bought the land around my on fairway house from the course, so it's off course property.  I don't put up any screens or special glass.  Golfers are responsible for breaking windows on my house?

[jlh1508]

So is there no case where a person who puts themselves or their property at risk ever has to take responsibility?  What if I convinced a course owner that it would make their course novel and distinctive if their signature hole had a house directly in the middle of the fairway at 220 yards.  I bought the land around my on fairway house from the course, so it's off course property.  I don't put up any screens or special glass.  Golfers are responsible for breaking windows on my house?

Yes.

If i came to a hole like that, I would simply skip the hole as to avoid the potential problem.

The argument has nothing to do with whether a home owner should take precautions to protect their property.  The question is simply is a golfer responsible for where they hit there ball.  The answer to me is simple

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big C

I hope it's not off topic, but this got me to thinking about tweaking the scenario slightly. What if instead of a hole lined with high dollar value homes (and owners who presumably accepted the associated risk), you have a hole right next to a busy street?

Yeah.  When one of us hits a nice drive on 18 at Rancho Park, our joke is, "Don't hit a Patricia".  As in, don't snap hook a longish club going for it in two onto Patricia Ave.

I agree with you.  If you hit a car driving on the street that's your responsibility.  You walk over as they stop and offer to pay for the damage (hopefully their insurance covers it and you're just out a deductible).  Seems obvious how this is different than hitting a house lining a fairway.

In this case the course should take the brunt of the responsibility.  Since it should only be one or two holes (unlike 15 or 16 holes on a course through a residential development), they should take whatever precautions are needed to minimize the chance of an errant ball leaving the property in such a way as to be a traffic hazard.  That could mean a screen, or a line of tall and mostly impenetrable trees, or similar to block the ball before it becomes dangerous.

[MS256]

So is there no case where a person who puts themselves or their property at risk ever has to take responsibility?  What if I convinced a course owner that it would make their course novel and distinctive if their signature hole had a house directly in the middle of the fairway at 220 yards.  I bought the land around my on fairway house from the course, so it's off course property.  I don't put up any screens or special glass.  Golfers are responsible for breaking windows on my house?

I thought this thread was about whether somebody was wrong to "run like a 10 year old".

If I am running to stay out of potential trouble I am wrong. Period. If I don't feel I did anything wrong and I am not responsible why would I run?

Don't run away and if you are in the right you don't have a problem. If you are in the wrong you pay for it. Pretty simple.

Hard for me to grasp grown men advocating running away from a broken window no matter how it got broken and no matter who is responsible for it.

[cfritchie]

In this case the course should take the brunt of the responsibility.  Since it should only be one or two holes (unlike 15 or 16 holes on a course through a residential development), they should take whatever precautions are needed to minimize the chance of an errant ball leaving the property in such a way as to be a traffic hazard.  That could mean a screen, or a line of tall and mostly impenetrable trees, or similar to block the ball before it becomes dangerous.

And "what if" the traffic issue came along after the course was already built? Why would the course be liable?

It is simple, to avoid negligence you must take "reasonable care" to avoid liability with respect to golf balls causing damage. If the course does such then I don't believe they are liable either.

I worked as an assistant at a course and we had a sign on #1 and #10 that stated golfers were liable....this was simply to appease the homeowners, we knew the homeowners were the responsible party. The problem is 50%-60% of the people buying a house on a golf course are not golfers, the non-golfers tend to buy houses in the line of fire and then deal with it time and time again.

I consider myself a very moral person, if I cause a door ding I will leave a note. With that said I feel no sense of responsibiilty if property is damaged due to an errant tee-ball. I will feel bad about it but the homeowner knew there was a golf course there, my ball was surely not the first to hit the house, it is their risk...

And yes..I live on a golf course on #9 350 yds off the tee on the right side of the fairway....we hear balls hit every now and then. I've never once blamed the golfer.