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

[jamo]

The homeowner deserves to have his house hit, or is responsible for it having been hit. Nothing but semantics. Scary.

I disagree entirely.

[AmazingWhacker]

I've never done any damage but, honestly, I'd probably run away.  I don't believe I'm liable . .I've read various things on the internet that say I am and also that I'm not .. I just figure why muddy up the waters . .just run away, lol.

You can call me cowardly or dishonest or whatever . .but I won't hear you because I've already run away, lol.

[Dave2512]

I've never done any damage but, honestly, I'd probably run away.  I don't believe I'm liable . .I've read various things on the internet that say I am and also that I'm not .. I just figure why muddy up the waters . .just run away, lol.

You can call me cowardly or dishonest or whatever . .but I won't hear you because I've already run away, lol.

What if it's posted on the course you are responsible? There are a couple here where it prints on the receipt, a few have you sign it like the cart rental agreement.

[Lihu]

The golfer (who's not getting drunk and teeing up sideways on purpose) is doing precisely what he's supposed to be doing - attempting to hit golf balls towards the hole to the best of his ability on the course as it's presented to him.

Yup, even with the revisions, it's what the golfer is more or less supposed to be doing.

For many golfers, drinking beer and golfing seems to go hand in hand. The only issue is that some might exceed their limits a bit in the beer part of the activity, and furthermore, it's this excess that might be to blame for the other unmentionable activity (which I purposely excluded).

[Dave2512]

Yup, even with the revisions, it's what the golfer is more or less supposed to be doing.

For many golfers, drinking beer and golfing seems to go hand in hand. The only issue is that some might exceed their limits a bit in the beer part of the activity, and furthermore, it's this excess that might be to blame for the other unmentionable activity (which I purposely excluded).

Peeing on the course?

[Lihu]

Peeing on the course?

There's always that risk too.

[mdl]

Take it a step further....

What happens when this aforementioned golfer inadvertently backs into another car in the parking lot?

When his kid hits a baseball through the neighbor's window, what life lesson does he choose to teach?  After all, the neighbor bought that house knowing that the neighborhood had kids in it, heck, he may have even done it purposely, and knowing that, should have at least put in Plexiglas windows.....

I know, I'm just an old guy who grew up in a different time, but my old man would've dragged my butt over to apologize, and then I'd have been mowing lawns for the rest of the summer to pay for the window.

This is a poor example.  A better example is someone buys a house that sits 30 feet foul halfway down the left field line of a little league field. Can we agree that it would be ridiculous to ask a little leaguer who pulls a foul ball that breaks a window on that house to pay for it?  How is asking a golfer to pay for damage to a house lining the fairway any less ridiculous?

I disagree.  Slicing a ball into someone's property pretty clearly rises to the level of negligent.  A person exercising reasonable care would know: (1) they don't have the skill to ensure they're not going to lose a ball right; (2) there is property located in the area where they might lose a ball; and (3) an errant shot might damage that property. With that in mind, the reasonable choice would have been to either hit a club that wouldn't reach the window, or not take the shot.  Choosing to do otherwise is negligent.

Whether there was assumption of the risk on the part of the property owner is a different argument, as is the level of contributory negligence.

As @Golfingdad said , this is a ridi culous definition of negligent.  According to your definition every single golfer in the world should just skip the hole and take an ESC score on any hole with houses lining the fairway, because even the pros hit wild shots and it's negligent to play a hole where you know it's not 100% you won't hit the houses built close to the fairway.

[Golfingdad]

This is a poor example.  A better example is someone buys a house that sits 30 feet foul halfway down the left field line of a little league field. Can we agree that it would be ridiculous to ask a little leaguer who pulls a foul ball that breaks a window on that house to pay for it?  How is asking a golfer to pay for damage to a house lining the fairway any less ridiculous?

Right.  My thoughts exactly ... except my example was cars and not houses.  Same thing though.  I played baseball, watched baseball, and coached baseball for several years, so I've parked my car next to fields many many times.  I knew the risk and was willing to take it.  Trying to get some poor kid to pay for my broken window due to my lack of foresight is, to me ..... wait for it .... my not accepting responsibility for my actions.

As kids we used to go to Fresno State baseball games and one of the parking lots was beyond the outfield fence.  My friends dads window got shattered by a home run once.  I don't remember who ended up having to pay for it, but I definitely remember who DIDN'T have to pay for it ... the dude who hit it.  And nobody would have ever expected him to, either.

[David in FL]

You don't need to have been negligent to have caused someone harm. When you cause someone harm, you should acknowledge your responsibility and offer to make restitution. It's really not that difficult. Shame on any adult who cannot understand that moral imperative.

[mdl]

You don't need to have been negligent to have caused someone harm.

When you cause someone harm, you should acknowledge your responsibility and offer to make restitution.

It's really not that difficult. Shame on any adult who cannot understand that moral imperative.

How is it different than thinking it's immoral for the little leaguer to not offer to mow lawns all summer long to pay for the broken window?  Sure, he could apologize, but any expectation of payment from him is ridiculous.

[Lihu]

You don't need to have been negligent to have caused someone harm.

When you cause someone harm, you should acknowledge your responsibility and offer to make restitution.

It's really not that difficult. Shame on any adult who cannot understand that moral imperative.

Seems logical.

Most of the times this happened to me, I just went into the pro shops and they simply said they have insurance and don't worry about trying to find the right house etc. In some cases it is really hard to find the owner to apologize, plus many of these houses are gated communities. Sometimes, it is better to let the golf course handle the situation rather than risk a less than friendly encounter.

In one case, I went to the owners house and he said he has insurance even if there were any damage. I hit a metal trash can and it sounded a lot worse than it was. This was the only time I was able to find the owner at his house, but the pro-shop usually handles these incidents.

[David in FL]

How is it different than thinking it's immoral for the little leaguer to not offer to mow lawns all summer long to pay for the broken window?  Sure, he could apologize, but any expectation of payment from him is ridiculous.

Because he's a child. He needs to be taught values by his parents.

[mdl]

Because he's a child. He needs to be taught values by his parents.

Fine, what if it's an adult league game at the local park where there's a house 30 feet foul?  Anyone who hits a foul ball is responsible for (potentially) many thousands of dollars of repairs?

[David in FL]

Fine, what if it's an adult league game at the local park where there's a house 30 feet foul?  Anyone who hits a foul ball is responsible for (potentially) many thousands of dollars of repairs?

Strawman. If you don't believe that if you cause someone harm, you should take responsibility for having done so, and offer to make restitution, then we simply operate from differing moral perspectives.

[Hammer 4]

How is it different than thinking it's immoral for the little leaguer to not offer to mow lawns all summer long to pay for the broken window?  Sure, he could apologize, but any expectation of payment from him is ridiculous.

That's where the parents come in. They are Responsible for their child until he or she is 18 yrs of age. If the parents want the kid to mow lawns to pay them back, then that's another matter.

IMHO, some of you guys seem think there's a free ride out there when you, or your kids breaks something. In some cases it may be legal to walk away, but morally imho, it's not.

Unsubscribed.....

[mdl]

Strawman.

If you don't believe that if you cause someone harm, you should take responsibility for having done so, and offer to make restitution, then we simply operate from differing moral perspectives.

It's not a straw man at all.  It's EXACTLY the same situation but a different sport.  Why is that a straw man but the golf case engenders moral indignation?

And I didn't harm them.  The golf ball or baseball as essentially a natural event in this case.  If I bought one of those houses, I would 100% believe that it was 100% my responsibility to put up protective screening or just accept that I'd be out $X every once in a while when a ball landed in the wrong spot.  I would 100% feel that the golfer or baseball player assumes absolutely zero moral responsibility for my property just because I chose to build/buy a house essentially in the middle of the space built for that sport.

[David in FL]

It's a strawman because no house, anywhere, exists 30 feet foul of an adult league baseline. Period. We operate under very different sets of values.

[Aflighter]

Anyone know what the law says about this? It seems to me it's come up a few times before. I seem to recall the homeowner is responsible, not the golfer nor the course, especially if the course pre-dates the home.

As far as moral culpability, I think OP did the right thing. It isn't as though you hit a drive a few miles to a house far from the golf course. You didn't tee it up on someone's front lawn, aim at the living room window, and let 'er rip. As far as I'm concerned, this should be the homeowner's responsibility; whether or not he or she goes through homeowner's insurance isn't your concern. Maybe if the homeowner thought the course was a strange free-range chicken farm or something.

And the same is true if you park your car somewhere that golfers might reasonable hit yours. Putting something valuable near a golf course where a ball can reasonably hit it is your fault. It isn't like the red light example -- "well off the road" isn't within even most unusual car paths (certainly not far enough off the road to hit a house).

And to anyone who would ask if I'd feel differently if the situation were reversed: yes, I think if OP hooked a ball into an expensive window, I'd feel the same way

.Absolutely agree with you.You paid to play golf on a golf course and if someone happened to choose to build house on course then its there problem to deal with.You cannot expect a golfer to be perfect and not hit a bad shot that could hit your house.That is the risk you run by living on a golf course.