Planet Fitness Meltdown Video

Off Topic
21

[quote]JonEightPackGuy wrote:
Why do you always made threads of threads already made and make threads of one woman in specific and nothing else and try to keep it alive by finding out a name for one person instead of making a thread dedicated to all Unknowns or Posting in a thread that the topic has first been brought up.

Purely curiosity you know.

I was hoping it was a different video, ah well Crawls back in hole[/quote]

I think this is the first time I did a repost like this?? And I think the chick with the hot abs is the first time I posted to get a chicks name? I saw people do that and like the 2-3 post had the girls name. I guess i’m not so lucky but I promise I wont do that again. To the T-Nation members I am truly sorry. As an act of contrition I am going to insert a carnivorous earwig into my brain.

22

As a business owner i’m telling you guys its a matter of time before they remove that alarm as a result of a lawsuit. Just a matter of time. In fact this chain will fade in time and it’ll be all over.

They are making the biggest mistake a business can make. They are alienating the CORE fitness people in favor of the lazy customers with fragile egos. This is bad because that customer base is finicky and has NO loyalty to fitness in general. Once their flash in the pan enthusiasm fades so will their gym dues and attendance.

They will get sued for discrimination in short order. Imagine lunk replaced with “Ni$$er Alarm”. It’s a way to bring NEGATIVE attention and DISCRIMINATE based on a newly defined criteria. However Discrimination is discrimination. I predict they will loose the alarms and/or the chain will collapse.

Ahhhhhhhh The Irony of the Judgment free zone.

FYI: In ragards to alarms. Some of you may not know, but if you ever leave a store and they forget the tag and the alarm sounds at the door. You are allowed to leave. If you’re detained or embarrassed at the alarm and everyone looking at you like a thief, you have grounds for a big lawsuit against the store. They know it but chose to run the risk. Been there done that and won even after a confrontation with a state trooper over the issue. Im tired of people getting embarrassed and pushed around for no reason.

23

I’m imagining the camera to be held by a nervous fat person with gravy stains all over their shirt. Regardless of the situation, there should be no reason for shaking the camera that much.

24

[quote]SickAbs wrote:
I think this is the first time I did a repost like this?? And I think the chick with the hot abs is the first time I posted to get a chicks name? I saw people do that and like the 2-3 post had the girls name. I guess i’m not so lucky but I promise I wont do that again. To the T-Nation members I am truly sorry. As an act of contrition I am going to insert a carnivorous earwig into my brain.[/quote]

LOL

25

[quote]SickAbs wrote:

[quote]JonEightPackGuy wrote:
Why do you always made threads of threads already made and make threads of one woman in specific and nothing else and try to keep it alive by finding out a name for one person instead of making a thread dedicated to all Unknowns or Posting in a thread that the topic has first been brought up.

Purely curiosity you know.

I was hoping it was a different video, ah well Crawls back in hole[/quote]

I think this is the first time I did a repost like this?? And I think the chick with the hot abs is the first time I posted to get a chicks name? I saw people do that and like the 2-3 post had the girls name. I guess i’m not so lucky but I promise I wont do that again. To the T-Nation members I am truly sorry. As an act of contrition I am going to insert a carnivorous earwig into my brain.[/quote]

as much as I think you’re a scum bag who brags too damn much (where’s that video?) … but that was a funny response.

26

[quote]Gregus wrote:
FYI: In ragards to alarms. Some of you may not know, but if you ever leave a store and they forget the tag and the alarm sounds at the door. You are allowed to leave. If you’re detained or embarrassed at the alarm and everyone looking at you like a thief, you have grounds for a big lawsuit against the store. They know it but chose to run the risk. Been there done that and won even after a confrontation with a state trooper over the issue. Im tired of people getting embarrassed and pushed around for no reason. [/quote]

Nonsense. And what would the cause of action be? Negligent loss prevention? Defective loss prevention device? LOL. Don’t tell me you’re one of those people that think you have a “big lawsuit” every time you’re inconvienced? You have not “been there done that” because you have had no such lawsuit. And, no such lawsuit would succeed against PF as much as I would like it to. As a business owner, you have a right to establish rules for your business as long as they are not discriminatory (if you’re open to the public; you can be quite discriminatory if you’re a private entity). There is nothing discriminatory about the lunk alarm. They are discouraging conduct they find objectionable. They disclose that fact when you sign up. I can’t believe I had to post something in defense of the lunk alarm. Please shoot me, but your post was weak on law, strong on irrational emotion.

27

[quote]polo77j wrote:

[quote]SickAbs wrote:

[quote]JonEightPackGuy wrote:
Why do you always made threads of threads already made and make threads of one woman in specific and nothing else and try to keep it alive by finding out a name for one person instead of making a thread dedicated to all Unknowns or Posting in a thread that the topic has first been brought up.

Purely curiosity you know.

I was hoping it was a different video, ah well Crawls back in hole[/quote]

I think this is the first time I did a repost like this?? And I think the chick with the hot abs is the first time I posted to get a chicks name? I saw people do that and like the 2-3 post had the girls name. I guess i’m not so lucky but I promise I wont do that again. To the T-Nation members I am truly sorry. As an act of contrition I am going to insert a carnivorous earwig into my brain.[/quote]

as much as I think you’re a scum bag who brags too damn much (where’s that video?) … but that was a funny response.[/quote]

You have to admit, he takes the hate in stride. Makes me want to believe he can bench 350 and squat 400 :slight_smile:

28

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]Gregus wrote:
FYI: In ragards to alarms. Some of you may not know, but if you ever leave a store and they forget the tag and the alarm sounds at the door. You are allowed to leave. If you’re detained or embarrassed at the alarm and everyone looking at you like a thief, you have grounds for a big lawsuit against the store. They know it but chose to run the risk. Been there done that and won even after a confrontation with a state trooper over the issue. Im tired of people getting embarrassed and pushed around for no reason. [/quote]

Nonsense. And what would the cause of action be? Negligent loss prevention? Defective loss prevention device? LOL. Don’t tell me you’re one of those people that think you have a “big lawsuit” every time you’re inconvienced? You have not “been there done that” because you have had no such lawsuit. And, no such lawsuit would succeed against PF as much as I would like it to. As a business owner, you have a right to establish rules for your business as long as they are not discriminatory (if you’re open to the public; you can be quite discriminatory if you’re a private entity). There is nothing discriminatory about the lunk alarm. They are discouraging conduct they find objectionable. They disclose that fact when you sign up. I can’t believe I had to post something in defense of the lunk alarm. Please shoot me, but your post was weak on law, strong on irrational emotion.
[/quote]

Rationalize this. Someone does not like you at the gym because you’re so much more fit. They sound the loud startling alarm for shits and giggles and you slip and loose form. You get injured. It could be anything. Startled, while maxing out on your personal best, you blow a rotator cuff. Or as in your avatar, you throw out a vertebrate.

I OWN a gym. I know the system. All Private entities rights stop once Discrimination is present. They are discriminating. Say in my private club with a DBA name and a LLC, i have black employees. Can i be quite discriminatory as you mentioned? Why not? Their waiver means nothing unless you went through a through demonstration of what the alarm is, how it sounds and for you to prepare yourself for it’s use AGAINST you. Because it IS there to be used against someone. I’ll bet money they don’t do ANY of that. Any competent Lawyer will get the waiver dismissed, as people truly don’t know what they are signing and it’s not explained or demonstrated to them. That does not stand up to any legalities. Hence oral arguments can make it Invalid. And if they don;t you move to the next judge. Don’t talk down to me about issues you have no idea about as you workout in your garage. Own an actual gym before you talk.

I had a LEASE have a statement that said " Landlord is not responsible for any property liabilities, damages or maintenance ".

I signed it. Knowing it will not stand up in court. Guess what. Sued him. The judge read his lease and Nulled it on THAT statement. He was Forced to pay for his misgivings.

People are generally too sheepish and uninformed to know that many places push the boundaries of what makes for a respectful interaction between the customer and the business.

29

lol, I love how everyone is pretty much on the side of the guy who flipped (i am too, that was funny as shit). I sooo want to go and set the lunk alarm off…I bet holymac could make a funnier video. He’d prob slap a couple girls on the ass before he stormed out.

30

[quote]Gregus wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]Gregus wrote:
FYI: In ragards to alarms. Some of you may not know, but if you ever leave a store and they forget the tag and the alarm sounds at the door. You are allowed to leave. If you’re detained or embarrassed at the alarm and everyone looking at you like a thief, you have grounds for a big lawsuit against the store. They know it but chose to run the risk. Been there done that and won even after a confrontation with a state trooper over the issue. Im tired of people getting embarrassed and pushed around for no reason. [/quote]

Nonsense. And what would the cause of action be? Negligent loss prevention? Defective loss prevention device? LOL. Don’t tell me you’re one of those people that think you have a “big lawsuit” every time you’re inconvienced? You have not “been there done that” because you have had no such lawsuit. And, no such lawsuit would succeed against PF as much as I would like it to. As a business owner, you have a right to establish rules for your business as long as they are not discriminatory (if you’re open to the public; you can be quite discriminatory if you’re a private entity). There is nothing discriminatory about the lunk alarm. They are discouraging conduct they find objectionable. They disclose that fact when you sign up. I can’t believe I had to post something in defense of the lunk alarm. Please shoot me, but your post was weak on law, strong on irrational emotion.
[/quote]

Rationalize this. Someone does not like you at the gym because you’re so much more fit. They sound the loud startling alarm for shits and giggles and you slip and loose form. You get injured. It could be anything. Startled, while maxing out on your personal best, you blow a rotator cuff. Or as in your avatar, you throw out a vertebrate.

I OWN a gym. I know the system. All Private entities rights stop once Discrimination is present. They are discriminating. Say in my private club with a DBA name and a LLC, i have black employees. Can i be quite discriminatory as you mentioned? Why not? Their waiver means nothing unless you went through a through demonstration of what the alarm is, how it sounds and for you to prepare yourself for it’s use AGAINST you. Because it IS there to be used against someone. I’ll bet money they don’t do ANY of that. Any competent Lawyer will get the waiver dismissed, as people truly don’t know what they are signing and it’s not explained or demonstrated to them. That does not stand up to any legalities. Hence oral arguments can make it Invalid. And if they don;t you move to the next judge. Don’t talk down to me about issues you have no idea about as you workout in your garage. Own an actual gym before you talk.

I had a LEASE have a statement that said " Landlord is not responsible for any property liabilities, damages or maintenance ".

I signed it. Knowing it will not stand up in court. Guess what. Sued him. The judge read his lease and Nulled it on THAT statement. He was Forced to pay for his misgivings.

People are generally too sheepish and uninformed to know that many places push the boundaries of what makes for a respectful interaction between the customer and the business. [/quote]

I think you’re incorrectly using the word “discrimination”. PF is not discriminating in an illegal manner, i.e. due to race, creed, nationality, sex or age. They are targeting behavior. Now, if you could show that asian people are setting off the lunk alarm much more frequently, that may be a different story. As for a future lawsuit due to the lunk alarm, I think it would be pretty difficult to prove in court that an injury incurred during a max attempt was due to a loud noise and not because of excessive weight. But hey, that’s what ambulance chasers are for. But, I doubt you’d get a favorable jury make-up.

And please tell me you’re not serious about comparing the word “lunk” and “nigger”. I hope for your sake you don’t truly think those words are even close.

DB

31

[quote]Gregus wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]Gregus wrote:
FYI: In ragards to alarms. Some of you may not know, but if you ever leave a store and they forget the tag and the alarm sounds at the door. You are allowed to leave. If you’re detained or embarrassed at the alarm and everyone looking at you like a thief, you have grounds for a big lawsuit against the store. They know it but chose to run the risk. Been there done that and won even after a confrontation with a state trooper over the issue. Im tired of people getting embarrassed and pushed around for no reason. [/quote]

Nonsense. And what would the cause of action be? Negligent loss prevention? Defective loss prevention device? LOL. Don’t tell me you’re one of those people that think you have a “big lawsuit” every time you’re inconvienced? You have not “been there done that” because you have had no such lawsuit. And, no such lawsuit would succeed against PF as much as I would like it to. As a business owner, you have a right to establish rules for your business as long as they are not discriminatory (if you’re open to the public; you can be quite discriminatory if you’re a private entity). There is nothing discriminatory about the lunk alarm. They are discouraging conduct they find objectionable. They disclose that fact when you sign up. I can’t believe I had to post something in defense of the lunk alarm. Please shoot me, but your post was weak on law, strong on irrational emotion.
[/quote]

Rationalize this. Someone does not like you at the gym because you’re so much more fit. They sound the loud startling alarm for shits and giggles and you slip and loose form. You get injured. It could be anything. Startled, while maxing out on your personal best, you blow a rotator cuff. Or as in your avatar, you throw out a vertebrate.

I OWN a gym. I know the system. All Private entities rights stop once Discrimination is present. They are discriminating. Say in my private club with a DBA name and a LLC, i have black employees. Can i be quite discriminatory as you mentioned? Why not? Their waiver means nothing unless you went through a through demonstration of what the alarm is, how it sounds and for you to prepare yourself for it’s use AGAINST you. Because it IS there to be used against someone. I’ll bet money they don’t do ANY of that. Any competent Lawyer will get the waiver dismissed, as people truly don’t know what they are signing and it’s not explained or demonstrated to them. That does not stand up to any legalities. Hence oral arguments can make it Invalid. And if they don;t you move to the next judge. Don’t talk down to me about issues you have no idea about as you workout in your garage. Own an actual gym before you talk.

I had a LEASE have a statement that said " Landlord is not responsible for any property liabilities, damages or maintenance ".

I signed it. Knowing it will not stand up in court. Guess what. Sued him. The judge read his lease and Nulled it on THAT statement. He was Forced to pay for his misgivings.

People are generally too sheepish and uninformed to know that many places push the boundaries of what makes for a respectful interaction between the customer and the business. [/quote]

I didn’t even read your entire post - no offense. You are a gym owner. I’m an insurance claims guy and risk management consultant, having supervised the defense of more than 100,000 lawsuit in my 20+ year career.

Your examples are terrible. I stated private clubs CAN discriminate. Businesses open to the public (like yours and PF cannot) like a gym CANNOT. The lunk alarm does not rise to the level of discrimination. Since you’re so interested, look up the State statutes for discrimination and quote me chapter and verse where the lunk alarm would be covered. It’s ideology like this that clogs our courts.

Leases that are contrary to law are just that - contrary to law. It doesn’t stop someone from printing them up. If they are unenforceable by law, they are unenforceable. Period. There are tons of examples of unenforceable contracts, none of which have to do with the lunk alarm.

Yes, I workout in my garage and you own a gym. I directly supervise the defense of lawsuits, you do not. So much for assumptions :slight_smile:

32

[quote]dollarbill44 wrote:

[quote]Gregus wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]Gregus wrote:
FYI: In ragards to alarms. Some of you may not know, but if you ever leave a store and they forget the tag and the alarm sounds at the door. You are allowed to leave. If you’re detained or embarrassed at the alarm and everyone looking at you like a thief, you have grounds for a big lawsuit against the store. They know it but chose to run the risk. Been there done that and won even after a confrontation with a state trooper over the issue. Im tired of people getting embarrassed and pushed around for no reason. [/quote]

Nonsense. And what would the cause of action be? Negligent loss prevention? Defective loss prevention device? LOL. Don’t tell me you’re one of those people that think you have a “big lawsuit” every time you’re inconvienced? You have not “been there done that” because you have had no such lawsuit. And, no such lawsuit would succeed against PF as much as I would like it to. As a business owner, you have a right to establish rules for your business as long as they are not discriminatory (if you’re open to the public; you can be quite discriminatory if you’re a private entity). There is nothing discriminatory about the lunk alarm. They are discouraging conduct they find objectionable. They disclose that fact when you sign up. I can’t believe I had to post something in defense of the lunk alarm. Please shoot me, but your post was weak on law, strong on irrational emotion.
[/quote]

Rationalize this. Someone does not like you at the gym because you’re so much more fit. They sound the loud startling alarm for shits and giggles and you slip and loose form. You get injured. It could be anything. Startled, while maxing out on your personal best, you blow a rotator cuff. Or as in your avatar, you throw out a vertebrate.

I OWN a gym. I know the system. All Private entities rights stop once Discrimination is present. They are discriminating. Say in my private club with a DBA name and a LLC, i have black employees. Can i be quite discriminatory as you mentioned? Why not? Their waiver means nothing unless you went through a through demonstration of what the alarm is, how it sounds and for you to prepare yourself for it’s use AGAINST you. Because it IS there to be used against someone. I’ll bet money they don’t do ANY of that. Any competent Lawyer will get the waiver dismissed, as people truly don’t know what they are signing and it’s not explained or demonstrated to them. That does not stand up to any legalities. Hence oral arguments can make it Invalid. And if they don;t you move to the next judge. Don’t talk down to me about issues you have no idea about as you workout in your garage. Own an actual gym before you talk.

I had a LEASE have a statement that said " Landlord is not responsible for any property liabilities, damages or maintenance ".

I signed it. Knowing it will not stand up in court. Guess what. Sued him. The judge read his lease and Nulled it on THAT statement. He was Forced to pay for his misgivings.

People are generally too sheepish and uninformed to know that many places push the boundaries of what makes for a respectful interaction between the customer and the business. [/quote]

I think you’re incorrectly using the word “discrimination”. PF is not discriminating in an illegal manner, i.e. due to race, creed, nationality, sex or age. They are targeting behavior. Now, if you could show that asian people are setting off the lunk alarm much more frequently, that may be a different story. As for a future lawsuit due to the lunk alarm, I think it would be pretty difficult to prove in court that an injury incurred during a max attempt was due to a loud noise and not because of excessive weight. But hey, that’s what ambulance chasers are for. But, I doubt you’d get a favorable jury make-up.

And please tell me you’re not serious about comparing the word “lunk” and “nigger”. I hope for your sake you don’t truly think those words are even close.

DB[/quote]

Dude, he OWNS a gym - you just workout in one. He knows what he speaks!

33

[quote]dollarbill44 wrote:

[quote]Gregus wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]Gregus wrote:
FYI: In ragards to alarms. Some of you may not know, but if you ever leave a store and they forget the tag and the alarm sounds at the door. You are allowed to leave. If you’re detained or embarrassed at the alarm and everyone looking at you like a thief, you have grounds for a big lawsuit against the store. They know it but chose to run the risk. Been there done that and won even after a confrontation with a state trooper over the issue. Im tired of people getting embarrassed and pushed around for no reason. [/quote]

Nonsense. And what would the cause of action be? Negligent loss prevention? Defective loss prevention device? LOL. Don’t tell me you’re one of those people that think you have a “big lawsuit” every time you’re inconvienced? You have not “been there done that” because you have had no such lawsuit. And, no such lawsuit would succeed against PF as much as I would like it to. As a business owner, you have a right to establish rules for your business as long as they are not discriminatory (if you’re open to the public; you can be quite discriminatory if you’re a private entity). There is nothing discriminatory about the lunk alarm. They are discouraging conduct they find objectionable. They disclose that fact when you sign up. I can’t believe I had to post something in defense of the lunk alarm. Please shoot me, but your post was weak on law, strong on irrational emotion.
[/quote]

Rationalize this. Someone does not like you at the gym because you’re so much more fit. They sound the loud startling alarm for shits and giggles and you slip and loose form. You get injured. It could be anything. Startled, while maxing out on your personal best, you blow a rotator cuff. Or as in your avatar, you throw out a vertebrate.

I OWN a gym. I know the system. All Private entities rights stop once Discrimination is present. They are discriminating. Say in my private club with a DBA name and a LLC, i have black employees. Can i be quite discriminatory as you mentioned? Why not? Their waiver means nothing unless you went through a through demonstration of what the alarm is, how it sounds and for you to prepare yourself for it’s use AGAINST you. Because it IS there to be used against someone. I’ll bet money they don’t do ANY of that. Any competent Lawyer will get the waiver dismissed, as people truly don’t know what they are signing and it’s not explained or demonstrated to them. That does not stand up to any legalities. Hence oral arguments can make it Invalid. And if they don;t you move to the next judge. Don’t talk down to me about issues you have no idea about as you workout in your garage. Own an actual gym before you talk.

I had a LEASE have a statement that said " Landlord is not responsible for any property liabilities, damages or maintenance ".

I signed it. Knowing it will not stand up in court. Guess what. Sued him. The judge read his lease and Nulled it on THAT statement. He was Forced to pay for his misgivings.

People are generally too sheepish and uninformed to know that many places push the boundaries of what makes for a respectful interaction between the customer and the business. [/quote]

I think you’re incorrectly using the word “discrimination”. PF is not discriminating in an illegal manner, i.e. due to race, creed, nationality, sex or age. They are targeting behavior. Now, if you could show that asian people are setting off the lunk alarm much more frequently, that may be a different story. As for a future lawsuit due to the lunk alarm, I think it would be pretty difficult to prove in court that an injury incurred during a max attempt was due to a loud noise and not because of excessive weight. But hey, that’s what ambulance chasers are for. But, I doubt you’d get a favorable jury make-up.

And please tell me you’re not serious about comparing the word “lunk” and “nigger”. I hope for your sake you don’t truly think those words are even close.

DB[/quote]

Regardless of the two words and their point and intensity, the focus here is the Labeling of people. Labeling people and then taking an action to call attention to them in a not clearly defined manner as to “why” and Singling them out and threaten expulsion is Discrimination.

This does not fall into the established precedents of what the “traditional” discrimination is about. New discrimination pops up all the time. Their business practices are embarrassing, dehumanizing and discriminatory. They Defame a persons character.

I would have no problems finding a lawyer to take a case like that on. Especially if someone got injured as a result. Even an overweight person against whom the alarm was not used, can startle and trip on a treadmill. It’s a bad business practice.

For the same reasons you can’t startle people in a crowded theater by yelling “FIRE!” It startles people and yes they can stampede and kill others in the process. I know this is a different situation so don;t assume i don’t. Just using it as an example. The Lunk Alarm is a discriminatory term used against guys like me and you. We’re the “Lunk”

And There is a HUGE sign stating “LUNK” referring to you. Your derogatory label is being advertised to the whole gym and they even have a loud siren to draw attention of everyone to YOU, the Lunk. According to the law, it does not matter if the term “lunk” is recognized. And Guido is also an unrecognized term but recently had an uproar over it’s use. That’s all it takes. For someone to get ripped and pursue it. Hell will open up quickly. Especially when you setup press coverage. Press interviews with unhappy members, pump negative publicity and file lawsuits. They’ll dump that alarm before they ever spend a penny litigating.

A more legal less shady way for planet fitness to do their business would be with a verbal announcement reminding of club rules in a general manner and a non startling way.

OR

I get a permit and picket outside their gym with 10-20 people holding up signs as to their practices.

34

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]Gregus wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]Gregus wrote:
FYI: In ragards to alarms. Some of you may not know, but if you ever leave a store and they forget the tag and the alarm sounds at the door. You are allowed to leave. If you’re detained or embarrassed at the alarm and everyone looking at you like a thief, you have grounds for a big lawsuit against the store. They know it but chose to run the risk. Been there done that and won even after a confrontation with a state trooper over the issue. Im tired of people getting embarrassed and pushed around for no reason. [/quote]

Nonsense. And what would the cause of action be? Negligent loss prevention? Defective loss prevention device? LOL. Don’t tell me you’re one of those people that think you have a “big lawsuit” every time you’re inconvienced? You have not “been there done that” because you have had no such lawsuit. And, no such lawsuit would succeed against PF as much as I would like it to. As a business owner, you have a right to establish rules for your business as long as they are not discriminatory (if you’re open to the public; you can be quite discriminatory if you’re a private entity). There is nothing discriminatory about the lunk alarm. They are discouraging conduct they find objectionable. They disclose that fact when you sign up. I can’t believe I had to post something in defense of the lunk alarm. Please shoot me, but your post was weak on law, strong on irrational emotion.
[/quote]

Rationalize this. Someone does not like you at the gym because you’re so much more fit. They sound the loud startling alarm for shits and giggles and you slip and loose form. You get injured. It could be anything. Startled, while maxing out on your personal best, you blow a rotator cuff. Or as in your avatar, you throw out a vertebrate.

I OWN a gym. I know the system. All Private entities rights stop once Discrimination is present. They are discriminating. Say in my private club with a DBA name and a LLC, i have black employees. Can i be quite discriminatory as you mentioned? Why not? Their waiver means nothing unless you went through a through demonstration of what the alarm is, how it sounds and for you to prepare yourself for it’s use AGAINST you. Because it IS there to be used against someone. I’ll bet money they don’t do ANY of that. Any competent Lawyer will get the waiver dismissed, as people truly don’t know what they are signing and it’s not explained or demonstrated to them. That does not stand up to any legalities. Hence oral arguments can make it Invalid. And if they don;t you move to the next judge. Don’t talk down to me about issues you have no idea about as you workout in your garage. Own an actual gym before you talk.

I had a LEASE have a statement that said " Landlord is not responsible for any property liabilities, damages or maintenance ".

I signed it. Knowing it will not stand up in court. Guess what. Sued him. The judge read his lease and Nulled it on THAT statement. He was Forced to pay for his misgivings.

People are generally too sheepish and uninformed to know that many places push the boundaries of what makes for a respectful interaction between the customer and the business. [/quote]

I didn’t even read your entire post - no offense. You are a gym owner. I’m an insurance claims guy and risk management consultant, having supervised the defense of more than 100,000 lawsuit in my 20+ year career.

Your examples are terrible. I stated private clubs CAN discriminate. Businesses open to the public (like yours and PF cannot) like a gym CANNOT. The lunk alarm does not rise to the level of discrimination. Since you’re so interested, look up the State statutes for discrimination and quote me chapter and verse where the lunk alarm would be covered. It’s ideology like this that clogs our courts.

Leases that are contrary to law are just that - contrary to law. It doesn’t stop someone from printing them up. If they are unenforceable by law, they are unenforceable. Period. There are tons of examples of unenforceable contracts, none of which have to do with the lunk alarm.

Yes, I workout in my garage and you own a gym. I directly supervise the defense of lawsuits, you do not. So much for assumptions :slight_smile:
[/quote]

I did not mean to really be derogatory in regard to your garadge workouts. I had some of my best ones in garadges. Sorry.

Im well aware of the gray area in regards to this. This is why we have courts and they are practicing in a shady arena.

Lastly you don;t have to mock me for owning a gym. So what? That means i am self employed. That means i put my money where my mouth is. I Deal with legalities on a Personal level. Not as an employee supervising paperwork on lawsuits of other people. THAT will not give you an inkling into the legal process and the philosophy upon which it is founded.

If you understood that philosophy you would see my point and not go about proving me wrong for God knows what reason.

35

IS that like being the Limo Driver in Dumb and Dumber?

36

Gregus:

I am not going out of my way to prove you wrong. You’re simply wrong…and misguided. Kudos to the business owner stuff - I am too, it’s too be admired, but has nothing to do with this thread. I can’t believe I’m giving you an actual analysis of “why” you’re wrong, but here goes, in an attempt at a peace treaty. By the way, I don’t “supervise” paperwork. I am the final arbiter of what will be paid, if it gets paid, and if we go to verict or settle. The lawyers are doing “paperwork” and interpreting law - I am making the actual decisions.

First, “meathead” is not a protected class under the discrimination laws. Look up your state discrimination laws - you will not find a spot for your cause. “Lunk” will not get you there either. Further, if there was a viable cause of action, an enterprising class action lawyer (they own their own business too) would have taken it on.

Even if the damages were miniscule (they would be), a class action lawyer can reap a nice sum for legal fees, just for bringing a successful action, while those in the class would get pennies.

Next, you as a business owner have a perfect legal right to regulate, encourage or discourage certain “conduct” in your establishment. This is no different than those gyms that don’t have free weights. Are they “discriminating” against meathead free weight users? No. They are making a choice, you’re aware of the choices, you can either choose to join or go elsewhere. Same with chalk. Same with acceptable attire and other dress codes.

I could go on and on and on. I hope you get the point. Just because you find something “objectionable”, doesn’t mean it rises to the level of “actionable” under tort law.

Further, if someone did get injured while the lunk alarm went off, you’d have some tough hurdles to leap, and no, lawyers would not be fighting for your case. First, you are engaged in a dangerous activity by its very nature. There is an assumption of risk to sporting events and lifting weights. Convincing a jury that the proximate cause of your injury was the sounding of a lunk alarm as opposed to the actual execution of the lift would be a long row to hoe.

A gym is noisy. There are startling noises all about. Your case would be extremely weak and given that they probably don’t allow overhead lifting either, I don’t see what lift you could do at PF to be startled enough to lose it.

I wish you and your gym much success, but you’re a bit misguided here. I’m not even sure I share your outrage. I’m no more outraged by PF than I am Curves as I have no desire and/or intention of joining either. They both cater to and market a certain segment of business, as is their right.

37

[quote]Gregus wrote:

I would have no problems finding a lawyer to take a case like that on. Especially if someone got injured as a result. Even an overweight person against whom the alarm was not used, can startle and trip on a treadmill. It’s a bad business practice.
[/quote]

Gregus has a point with this and I can definitely see this as a reason why those alarms really are never used. Sure, the guy dropping the weights or whatever would know the alarm was for them, but what about everyone else that is just there minding their own business and doing their workouts. I can just see a bunch of them tripping on the treadmills, slipping when lifting something and getting some type of injury and then suing PF for their pain and suffering and taking them to the cleaners for the trauma they have suffered and psychological problems of never being able to go into a gym again because of fear of the alarm going off.

As for the video, I don’t see what the guy was doing at that moment that would have warranted the alarm. The only gym near me is a PF and an Anytime Fitness, which isn’t much better, just no Lunk Alarm. So I use the PF because it’s cheap. And I can tell you that they don’t have dumbbells big enough to be considered heavy. (Biggest they have is 60 lbs). So the only thing I can see is that he did something before that they objected to. But again, having used these facilities, I can’t see what that could have been.

38

The dude in the video is quite the gentleman, cussing out the woman and all.

39

BG … you learned all that being a doorman? Impressive :slight_smile:

40

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

Convincing a jury that the proximate cause of your injury was the sounding of a lunk alarm as opposed to the actual execution of the lift would be a long row to hoe.

[/quote]

When a jury can be convinced that someone spilling a cup of coffee on themselves and getting burned by said hot coffee is deserving of thousands of dollars in compensation from the coffee purveyor, then I think a lawyer could convince a jury of just about anything.