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

[MSchott]

  Aflighter said:

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.

Perfect response. Spot on.

[flopster]

Doesn't it say on the ticket stubb at baseball games that batted balls can fly into the stands and that the bearer of this ticket has no legal right to find those who hit the ball liable for injuries? I think this exactly paralells having a home adjacent to a golf course, the stands are not part of the baseball field just like the house is not on the golf course but those who decide to put themselves in close proximity are assuming the risk of either property damage or injury willfully.

[MS256]

  flopster said:

Doesn't it say on the ticket stubb at baseball games that batted balls can fly into the stands and that the bearer of this ticket has no legal right to find those who hit the ball liable for injuries? I think this exactly paralells having a home adjacent to a golf course, the stands are not part of the baseball field just like the house is not on the golf course but those who decide to put themselves in close proximity are assuming the risk of either property damage or injury willfully.

Courts more consistently apply "The baseball rule" than they do in golf wayward shot cases.

Results of cases of wayward shots in golf vary from case to case and among different locations.

I can understand why (even though I generally don't like inconsistency in the law).

The bounds of a worse case scenario ball is much easier to predict in baseball than it is in golf.

[newtogolf]

I owned a home on a golf course in Virginia, we signed a waiver that stated we could not hold the golfer or course responsible for any damage caused by golf balls during casual play.  This basically means unless the golfer intentionally tried to hit the house with a golf ball we were responsible for any damage to our home.   That said, not every golf course community requires such a waiver be signed, so varies by community.

The OP made an ethical / moral decision to run based on the assumed wealth of the home owners, but had no consideration for the fact that someone in the home could have been injured by the poor golf shot.  I don't see this much differently than when someone backs into another car in a parking lot and races off because they refuse to take responsibility for their actions.  Even if he wasn't financially responsible for the damage he should have checked to make sure everyone was okay.

[DocWu1948]

  flopster said:

Doesn't it say on the ticket stubb at baseball games that batted balls can fly into the stands and that the bearer of this ticket has no legal right to find those who hit the ball liable for injuries? I think this exactly paralells having a home adjacent to a golf course, the stands are not part of the baseball field just like the house is not on the golf course but those who decide to put themselves in close proximity are assuming the risk of either property damage or injury willfully.

I've played this course often and it was involved in a lawsuit over a neighbor struck by an errant tee shot . It was not mentioned in that link, but the lady also sued the entire foursome, not just the golfer who hit the ball that struck her. They were dismissed from the suit by the judge early in the case when it was shown they had yelled "fore".

So always yell fore, if you play in Illinois. It means you gave a proper warning.

On the other hand, if you have a bad slice and deliberately aim at a house and hit the dreaded straight ball, that's negligence. Get lessons and fix that slice.

[mvmac]

  newtogolf said:

The OP made an ethical / moral decision to run based on the assumed wealth of the home owners, but had no consideration for the fact that someone in the home could have been injured by the poor golf shot.  I don't see this much differently than when someone backs into another car in a parking lot and races off because they refuse to take responsibility for their actions.  Even if he wasn't financially responsible for the damage he should have checked to make sure everyone was okay.

Yes agree with this. The OP asked if he did the right thing, I don't think he did. Not saying he needs to pay for the damages (I don't know what the answer is in this situation) but he needed to man up and check in with the homeowner.

I also think he would have ran off regardless of the price of the home, @Michael Lee is just using that as an excuse so he didn't have to deal with the situation.

[Zeph]

You broke another person's property, I think you should contact them and sort it out.

So no, I don't think you did the right think.

[Golfingdad]

Hit a house today. Didn't run, just blamed it on @mvmac .

[jamo]

  Golfingdad said:

Hit a house today. Didn't run, just blamed it on @mvmac .

First time I read that I thought you said "horse," which had me way more interested.

[iacas]

  jamo said:

First time I read that I thought you said "horse," which had me way more interested.

That's what he hit the house with.

[jamo]

  iacas said:

That's what he hit the house with.

[neophytea]

First problem is not having homeowners and personal liability insurance that protects you and your family.

Second problem is not being able to discuss this with your parents.

Third problem is that these cases can and do end up in court.  Even though the window could cost a couple of hundred dollars to over a thousand dollars, your lawyer fees will probably be ten times that.  Hearing fees, billables, and filing fees add up fast with a decent to good lawyer.

The average person needs to understand that Courts are "courts of law and not "courts of what is right".

As a golfer I found that to be protected,  I had to get Cart insurance, personal liability insurance, as well as having special riders added to my home owners insurance.  Total cost around $200 per year.  Much cheaper than the alternative.

.

[Lihu]

  neophytea said:

[SIZE=12px]First problem is not having homeowners and personal liability insurance that protects you and your family. [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]Second problem is not being able to discuss this with your parents.  [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]Third problem is that these cases can and do end up in court.  Even though the window could cost a couple of hundred dollars to over a thousand dollars, your lawyer fees will probably be ten times that.  Hearing fees, billables, and filing fees add up fast with a decent to good lawyer.[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]The average person needs to understand that Courts are "courts of law and not "courts of what is right". [/SIZE] [SIZE=12px]As a golfer I found that to be protected,  I had to get Cart insurance, personal liability insurance, as well as having special riders added to my home owners insurance.  Total cost around $200 per year.  Much cheaper than the alternative.[/SIZE] [SIZE=12px].[/SIZE]

I should look into this too.

[mdl]

So I was gonna come back after a cooling off period and ask a non-angry question. But it looks like it's been mostly answered.  I was caught up in what I perceived as a belief that the right thing to do is to pay for damages.  It may not have sounded like it cause I was (admittedly a bit pissily) arguing against the suggestion that I'm morally (if not always legally) incurring huge financial risk by choosing to play a course where some holes have very close houses.  And because I was also arguing against the idea that the honorable thing to do is to go through a sort of kabuki dance of showing dramatic regret and offering to pay whatever money could be requested with the other side playing the benevolent role of politely refusing payment but being profusely thankful for the offer.

But in a half backtrack from my pissy arguments against the above, I can fully agree that the honorable thing to do if you hear some shattered glass is to check in to make sure everyone's okay under the assumption that the financial responsibility lies with the homeowner.

[Rip24]

  Dave2512 said:

My take on it is if you can't afford to replace the windows then you shouldn't be playing on courses like that. It's not the homeowners fault you can't control your drives.

This is one of the douchiest comments I've ever read on this site.

[Abu3baid]

I never thought that a player would ever be responsible for damages to a window except in one case and one case only.. If somehow it was proven that he purposely aimed and executed a shot to break that window, and in that case things are different! If I was an owner I would have a reasonable expectation that it isn't going to be pros playing week in and week out.. I would be worried more about my kids getting hit outside rather than the window as well, and it would be unfair for me to hold a golfer accountable for hitting a bad shot.. It isn't a matter of him hitting a bad shot or not, it is only a matter of when he will hit one, and believe me they do!! Let us face it, a window is not more valuable than humans, so if there is no responsibility for me to pay medical bills for the poor guy that I hit with my golf ball, then how is it that I could ever be responsible for fixing a guys window on a golf course?? ***t happens, and you know that when you buy a house at a CC! Not sure why everyone I so fired up, I see this as an open and shut case really!

[Lihu]

  Abu3baid said:

If I was an owner I would have a reasonable expectation that it isn't going to be pros playing week in and week out.. I would be worried more about my kids getting hit outside rather than the window as well, and it would be unfair for me to hold a golfer accountable for hitting a bad shot.. It isn't a matter of him hitting a bad shot or not, it is only a matter of when he will hit one, and believe me they do!!

I googled this one: http://www.golf.com/special-features/cover-your-asset

Having kids is one of the reasons I didn't purchase that house on the golf course. Even so, I wish I did, because I could have sold it for more than five or six times the price I would have payed for it only three years later.

[rehmwa]

  Rip24 said:

This is one of the douchiest comments I've ever read on this site.

Oh no...   I'm sure there are plenty that are even more so.  You just need to look harder.