UKH

Sad story about persons A, B and C.

A and B buy an 80m rope together, joint ownership.

One windy day, B and C go climbing with the almost-new rope. Whilst C is pulling the rope down, it tangles with itself and gets stuck. In the end, the rope has to be cut to 60m.

But now, A is going on a sport climbing trip in Europe, and needs an 80m rope.

Should A ask B and C to obtain an 80m rope? Maybe ask them to sell the 60m for what they can and keep the money to recoup some cost?

Should A contribute at all to the replacement 80m?

Please advise.

Spoiler alert - I am person A!

In reply to cassaela:

Buy a 20m rope and tie them together….. 

More seriously, that’s really tricky and unfortunate. My optimistic hope would be that B and C would come up with a good solution without having to be asked by A to ‘do the right thing’. 

In reply to cassaela:

Damaged or lost group gear needs to be replaced by the group in my opinion - in this case persons B and C.

This is nobody's fault as such, it's just one of those things that happen during climbing. Therefore, the present climbers should not be too difficult about replacing it. Wether they sell the 60 or not is totally up to them. But you need an 80 and the one you had is damaged without you being present so you shouldn't have to bear the burden. 

In reply to cassaela:

In reply to cassaela:

B and C damaged the rope therefore B and C owe A and B an 80m rope.

The remaining 60m still belongs to A and B, they can do what they like with it, C has no say in this. If cut 60m is sold A and B split the proceeds.

In reply to cassaela:

Prevaricating on the moral dilemma: Do you *really* need an 80m to go sport climbing? How many 40m pitches are there for you that you can do. You can still lower off a 40m pitch with a 60m, you just have to go in stages, there may be mid route lower off. Will you only climb 40m pitches? I suspect these will be the exception on most trips, and you could perhaps borrow someone elses rope from your team if you really need to do them.

In reply to cassaela:

If it was just whilst being pulled it sounds like a complete accident. And not like an “I dropped your favourite mug” accident, just something which happened during the normal course of a Day out climbing.

In which case, there’s no way I would ask person C to contribute to a new rope.

In reply to ChrisBrooke:

Yes it sounds like a solution has not been offered which is disappointing. If I was C I would offer to replace the rope. I would hope that B would then offer to go halves, if I was B, I would. But I guess C might have to swallow the "you pulled it, you pay" argument and move on. I have assumed C didn't do anything silly in pulling the rope which may affect the joint liability argument. 

B and C then chop the 60 in half to use as wall ropes - only because I don't like the idea of joint ownership of ropes.

In reply to cassaela:

B and C give A, half the price of a new rope, so that A is back where they started. The 60m rope now belongs to B and C.

B and C will now be a team and A needs a new partner, because B and C think it unfair.

Sharing and lending gear, whilst seeming a nice thing to do can often lead to upsets, and sharing or lending a rope, seems a poor idea from the outset.

Neither a lender or borrower  be.

In reply to cassaela:

A, B and C can each go thirds in on a new 80m rope. 

A and B then each have access to a usable rope when climbing with other partners, A has the 80m rope they need, B and C dont feel crappy about the whole situation and you can all stay on good terms and move on!

In reply to cassaela:

life's not perfect. 60m of rope is still a useful length of rope, more than long enough for the majority of routes.

don't waste a good friendship over a bit of string.

if you're disappointed by your friends actions, get better friends.

and don't go shares on things with people you're not in a serious long term relationship with.

In reply to Jon Read:

Nah for what it's worth I'd say 80 is considered the standard now by the Spanish. It's really common to find easy routes with serious length to them and always rethreading midheight is a faff. It also gives the belayer room to belay from lower in a more comfortable spot instead of on a ledge or similar. 

Of course we all know the true solution... Leading on 50m halves and then abseiling from the anchor. Proper job! 

In reply to cassaela:

I lent a rope off someone to go the verdon and had an absolute nightmare and damaged it a bit. Nowt major just scuffed and a bit fluffy. He took one look and goes You’re buying me a new f**kin rope sunshine. so I did and took the damaged one. so maybe try that? 

In reply to cassaela:

B is responsible.

If B had damaged it some other way without the involvement of C, B would have been responsible for replacing it for the sake of your shared rope partnership. It would have been the honourable thing to do.

Your dilemma as to whether C should contribute is a red herring and is not your business, it's up to B whether  or not they want to recover half from C. As it stands B's duty is to put your partnership back into the same situation as it was before the incident ie joint ownership of an 80m rope.

In reply to MischaHY:

Surely a precedent has been set a long time ago? The solution is to cut the remaining 60m in half, and A and B go their separate ways. We'll soon see who values the rope more!

In reply to cassaela:

What would the position be if B had owned the rope outright? Unless C had done something particularly stupid which would mean they should bear the full cost, I would regard this as just one of those things which is the responsibility of the team, and the team (ie B and C) should replace the rope between them.  The fact that you have part-ownership should be irrelevant - you were not involved and bear no responsibility for the damage. You would be no better off than before, you and B would both end up with a shared 80m rope just as before,

However there is no straightforward answer to this. You also have to think about the impact on your friendship with B - is it worth damaging this relationship over a few quid?

Between you, you still have a functional 60m rope which should be adequate for many (but admittedly not all) situtations.  Maybe a possible solution is for you all to contribute to a new 80m rope for one of you to own outright, with the other keeping the 60m.  If you can remain friends that wouldn't rule out borrowing the 80m when one of you needs it, on the clear understanding that they are responsible for any damage.

This highlights the problems with shared gear. Ideally, you should have thought about this when making the joint purchase and agreed some ground rules for situations like this.  

In reply to cassaela:

Ask Sheldon Cooper. He'll definitely have a clause to cover this in the "Climbing Mates Agreement".

In reply to cassaela:

Easy. B and C were using it, they replace it. Up to them how they sort it out between them.

In reply to cassaela:

This is simple. B gives A half the price of the rope, so B now owns it outright. B does what they want with the rope and A is not out of pocket. This 'joint ownership malarkey won't be a problem going forward.

In reply to cassaela:

It depends on whether you have a prenup or not.  If you do then that determines what happens. 

In reply to cassaela:

A buys their own 80m rope for the trip, as they're not (apparently) going with B/C - sorts any issues with A damaging new rope on their trip.

A continues to climb with B on the original now-60m rope, where that's long enough.

A does not lend out his new 80m rope if he's not climbing on it.

In reply to cassaela:

Not sure why B/C didn't use the non-tangled end of the rope to climb back up and free the tangle - sounds like it was long enough?

In reply to cassaela:

Shit happens. If this happened to my rope It'd be nice if they contributed to a replacement but it doesn't sound like anyone's fault.  If they'd sawn through it top roping over an edge then I'd probably be a bit more annoyed.

In reply to cassaela:

I think the important question here is who made the decision to cut the rope rather than who was pulling it when it got stuck.

You also need to consider why they made the decision to cut it rather than using the 60m of rope that they presumably had on the ground to retrieve the rope intact.

In reply to James Malloch:

Absolutely this. I’d never dream of asking someone to contribute towards a replacement rope because a no-fault “just one of those things” happened whilst they happened to be using it. 

If my car breaks down or develops an expensive fault whilst I’m giving a mate a lift I wouldn’t expect them to pay towards the repair would I? 
 

This is just a shit happens situation for me. You’re gonna need to buy a new rope, but on the bright side you’ve now got a 60 and an 80 so it’s not like it’s been a total waste of money.

In reply to Iamgregp:

I don't see that as really equivalent. Climbing is a partnership, and all members of the team share responsibility for situations they find themselves in, which doesn't usually apply to a passenger in car.  And the rope didn't develop a fault, it was damaged as a consequence of the climbers' actions.

Shit happens, but it happens to a team who pool their gear for a shared purpose, and so in my opinion they should bear the consequences of any loss equally.  If one of the team contributed a £100 rope and the other a £10 nut which then get lost or damaged they should each pay £55 to replace them. That seems fair to me.  

Shit happens, but it's usually the consequence of a misjudgement or a series of misjudgements and it may not be easy or reasonable to apportion blame, especially between partners on a route who have all played a part in getting into that situation.  I don't think that extends to someone who lent their gear but wasn't involved in the climbing. 

If I lend something, whether it's a rope or a lawnmower, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect to get it back in the same condition, and if I were to borrow something I would see that as an obligation on me whether or not it was spoken. If you see it differently, that's very generous of you but I don't think it's necessarily to be expected.  

I find it interesting that for all climbing's obsession with fine points of ethics there doesn't appear to be a consensus on what to do when gear is damaged or lost, which must be a fairly common occurrence.

The OP's situation is complicated by the shared ownership of the rope, but I don't think it affects the basic principles.  However if these principles themselves aren't universally agreed, then unless there had been a clear understanding between them it's going to be more difficult to find a solution that's fair to all of them.

In reply to cassaela:

This is BS, to be honest. Climbing gear gets damaged - that's what happens. Especially if you a) lend your gear to others; b) buy shared gear; c) lend your gear to people who aren't competent enough to retrieve a rope without cutting it. Suck it up. If you aren't prepared to accept that other people might damage your gear that you've agreed they can use, then don't climb with other people.

Separately, you need an 80m rope. That's your problem, pal. Don't expect others to fund your holiday.

Good luck!

In reply to cassaela:

I think it is just one of those things, particularly as it doesn't sound like the damage was negligent.  It could as easily have been the OP who was unfortunate enough to cause the damage.  Ropes are consumables (albeit expensive ones!)

Personally I'd not go halves on a rope, I'd buy my own.  Each partner buying a half rope and using both together to climb is probably a more usual approach for trad, at least.

In reply to cassaela:

Was B negligent leading to the damage?  If not, and it was within normal use i'd suggest he wasn't responsible and it was in the sh1t happens category of incident.

B half owned the rope, A presumable agreed for him to use it with C, when it's in normal use it will perhaps get damaged - A took this risk when he agreed for B/C to use the rope.

If A feels he needs an 80m rope for his next trip he should buy one.

Consider the similar situation if BC were using the rope and A was sitting having a sandwich at the bottom of the crag, in this situation I don't think A would ask BC to pay for the damage (assuming there wasn't any negligence, I see it as equivalent.

In reply to Howard J:

Bourgeois ethics. People don't start out equal.

If I'm climbing with someone and I've chosen that we're going to use my gear that I've been fortunate enough to be able to afford and some of it gets lost or damaged, I suck it up. I don't stand demanding payment, like a blood-sucking landlord who insists all the risk belongs to those without property. Anyone with any honour would do the same, and if your friend insists on replacing your gear despite your vehement protestations then it's only because they too feel the need to act honourably. Climbing is a potlatch and to have friends who wish to give their time and energy is already a wonderful gift.

In reply to Howard J:

Oh please.  It's nothing formal an arrangement as a cost sharing pool.

A bought a rope with her partner B, B went climbing with his mate C.  Rope got stuck.  They cut it.  B will have to replace it. 

He took his (their) tope along to go climbing with his mate, we all know things can happen (and a rope getting suck doesn't need to involve any negligence) when we go climbing.  Shit happens.

A shouldn't have to pay anything, she wasn't even there.  C shouldn't have to pay anything, it's not his bloody rope and he's done nowt wrong.  B pays.  Shit luck.

In reply to cassaela:

Accept that these things happen and be gracious/stoic, unfortunately stuff gets damaged, pretty unlucky when this new, but "it" happens. 

Be forgiving of B (and C), climb with B again and never grumble about this. Grumbling and bitterness will cause you more harm (and others) than the value of half a rope and might even cause you to miss out on some great climbing days in future if you grumble too much

In reply to Howard J:

Thinking about this, you're absolutely right here.  And if I lent somebody a rope of mine to go off climbing somewhere and it came back 20m shorter, I'd expect them to offer to replace it.

But if I went climbing with a mate, and we were using my rope and for one reason or another it ended up 20m shorter, that's different.  I hadn't lent him anything. 

In reply to cassaela:

While A and B are joint custodians of the rope, it was in Bs care at the time, therefore B should replace like for like. This is a great chance the chop the now 60 into 2 30s, A and B keep one for grit cragging and gift the other part to C. 20m left for dog leads, tat, bondage etc

Ive only read the OP and none of the answers so it’ll be interesting reading whole thread later to see how far off I am or am I just sensible, replace rope, AB&C all move on. Ropes like crabs, nuts etc are consumable items really. 

In reply to C Witter:

You're assuming that the person who lost the more expensive kit is also the wealthier partner, which doesn't follow.  When shit happens it's largely a matter of chance whose kit gets lost or damaged, their relative wealth has nothing to do with it.

Thankfully I've never lost an item as expensive as a rope, but I've been in situations where we've had to abandon gear to get down safely, and it adds up.  There was no question of "demanding payment", we never even discussed it but took it for granted that we would share the cost of replacement.  The risk belongs to the whole team.  However it occurs to me that based on my own experiences I'm mainly thinking of situations where gear is sacrificed or damaged for the safety of the team, perhaps a simple stuck rope raises different questions.

The preservation of the friendship should be the overriding consideration. That is worth more than a half-share in a rope.

In reply to cassaela:

In think it is a 'shit happens' situation, but not necessarily in the way others are suggesting. As someone up the thread suggested, if I lend someone something (rope, lawnmower, etc.), I expect it back in essentially the same condition. If I borrow something then that's how I return it, or offer to make up the difference. I avoid lending anything out where I think I would be upset if someone broke it but offered to replace it (i.e. with sentimental value). I presume that's not the case here, in which case it's up to B to reimburse A reasonably, and it's up to A not to whine about it

Anyway, I think it's between A and B to sort out. I would suggest B 'buys out' A, and B then owns a 60m rope. Whether C wants to contribute to B's costs is between B and C. 

Emergency solution: get huffy, cut off your 40m and keep it, and give B their 20m.

In reply to cassaela:

The correct answer is to direct the attention of B to this thread.

The issue will then be sorted promptly. 

In reply to cassaela:

Tricky! As a pragmatist, I'd suggest taking another 60m half rope on your trip and abbing off any pitches longer than 30m.

If I climb with someone on my gear and it gets knackered in an obvious no-fault accident, I suck it up and accept that that's the cost of climbing. I can hardly blame my mate for my rope getting stuck, even if my mate was the person who physically pulled it. But I don't jointly own any ropes, so it's obviously a bit different.

I don't think A should contribute to a replacement rope, but I also don't think that B and/or C should cough up for a full replacement rope. If (and it is a big if) the cost isn't a massive and problematic expense for those involved, I'd suggest that B and C buy you 20m worth of beer, and if you really need a replacement 80m rope, maybe go 50:50 with your friend B again (if you want to potentially repeat the problem in the future!) or replace it yourself.  Friendships are far more valuable than nylon, but are sometimes just as easily trashed.

But I'm still voting for taking another 60m rope and abseiling.

In reply to cassaela:

I'm just going to answer your original question here, with what I would do in this situation.

I'd go and buy myself an 80m rope for my sport climbing trip without expecting anyone else to contribute.

I still have a 60m shared rope for climbing in the UK with my joint owner. Very adequate.

In reply to cassaela:

Wow.

I guess we're all different and you need to decide what is more important, friendship or rope.

Outdoor kit gets worked hard and damaged. Is it worth working your friendship so hard that you damage it?

It seems you know how this happened, one windy day. Shit happens in life. We don't have to choose to react to something happening that we don't like by expecting it to be made up to you.

In reply to Howard J:

Hmmm... in that case, I'm more in agreement with you.

I'm not suggesting that the one with the gear is wealtheir or even wealthier partner should be the one to pay. I'm suggesting that everything you bring to the ceremony of climbing is sacrificed and you give without hope of return, because the joy of climbing exceeds such trivialities. According to the same logic, I will give my sweat blood and tears to retrieve your nut, even though it's worth £10, and I will leave a probably unnecessary extra piece of my gear to ensure we're definitely safe down. Because for me that spirit of generosity and of reckless giving is part of what constitutes the specialness no only of climbing but of climbing friendships.

In reply to cassaela:

My view is that the solution really depends of what the real value of half a rope is to the OP and the other parties.

If the OP is proper skint and spending their last money on a holiday then this loss is more of an issue than if it just means they have to ease off the Bollinger for the evening. The same could be said about the other parties then this sways the argument.

If I were person B or C I'd feel pretty guilty and would try to at least offer some compensation if not so far as paying for the whole rope.

In reply to cassaela:

I think that this is a matter between A and B.  Unless C has done something stupid then C has no obligation at all.  However, etiquette might suggest to C that a person of good character/god mate might offer to bear some of the loss that B should make good between B and A

If C is not such a person then the outcome might determine the future of relations between B and C but that is as far as it goes.

In reply to cassaela:

You're all missing something so obvious. A, B and C all have a grown up chat and agree a solution that all are happy with.

In reply to cassaela:

A should accept that accidents happen sometimes. A asks B to buy A out of the 60m rope share at a reasonable cost of 1/2 60m - depreciation at 1/3 60m new value per year. Then A should go and buy themselves a 80m rope.

If the rope is more than 3 years old that means A gets no money from the original rope but A should be sanguine about this as it was old and damaged and not really fit for purpose anyway (i.e. its too short for the routes A wants to climb).

A should never get involved in a kit share again as A clearly has climbing ambitions and never wants to be defeated by  this sort of problem again.

In reply to cassaela:

Am I the only person who is baffled why 20m needed to be cut off. The only time I’ve had to cut a rope was the bottom of an ab rope on a sea cliff when the tail end got entangled in boulders in the water in rough weather

In reply to JimR:

I wondered that.  Guessed that they might have yanked it hard to get it down, and whatever it was caught on tore into the sheath?  No idea really though…

In reply to Ryan23:

Agreed

Disagree.

It belongs to B and C if they replace it with an 80m rope. Why should A and B gain a free 60m rope on top of a new 80m rope.

In reply to cassaela:

Damage to ropes is normal wear and tear. If you read their packaging it clearly details that the rope may be good for only one use and whilst rope snags climbing when windy are a reasonably expected occurrence I doubt people would class climbing in the wind as unreasonably reckless.

Unless you had agreed when purchasing the rope that it was only to be used by both of you in a pair you were expecting that normal wear and tear would occur when you were not personally using the rope.

If the rope had lasted three years would you have demand a rebate as B had used it for more than their share of design wear? Is this any different?

I would take this on the chin. If you insist of having your investment returned then consider that B could take a leaf out of King Solman's book and cut 40 m off and return that as being your half of the original purchase. 

In reply to nickinscottishmountains:

Wow indeed.

No reasonable person would make A choose between friendship and rope. 

In reply to cassaela:

B owes you half the price of the 80m rope, so you are back where you started.

How B gets that money (whether they cover it all, or ask C to chip in) is not your concern, imo. 

Then B has a 60m, and you can buy an 80m (with a bit more of your own money). 

You join bought something, they broke it, they pay for it. 

If I was B, I would either be buying a new 80m for us, or more likely buying A out of their half and then making do with the 60m. I'd not get C involved at all. 

In reply to Mike Stretford:

Agreed.

But if you did have to choose it would be rope right? Surely.

In reply to cassaela:

Unenviable situation. 

For me the challenge is how to broach the subject with B without making things awkward.

I'd work out a neutral opening line such as "what are we going to to do about this rope then chap? I could do with an 80m for my trip to Spain next month" and see how they respond. If they don't offer anything after this opener then I'd drop it. 

One way forward may be for you both to buy another 80m together to replace the damaged one. That way at least you get what you need for your trip without having to buy the whole thing. 

Good luck!

In reply to Chris Haslam:

Umm. If B hasn't broached the subject already, it's likely that the partnership/friendship with A would become awkward. Wouldn't it be hard to maintain such a friendship with such a large elephant in the room!?

In reply to cassaela: set up a poll on UKC. As always the result is binding

In reply to Mike Stretford:

No reasonable person would put themselves in the position of choosing between friendship and rope.

In reply to Mike Stretford:

No one is making him choose between anything. OP is describing pondering where to draw a line between friends over a rope; this approach does involve placing one above the other.

In reply to cassaela:

I think, basically, the OP is after money for old rope.

In reply to cassaela:

It would be interesting to learn the outcome? Did you get it resolved satisfactorily? And did you get away to Europe to enjoy your sport climbing?

In reply to tehmarks:

Of course it works both ways. A as asked opinion on what's fair, and there's suggestions, but really it comes down to how 'nearly-new' rope is (IMHO).

What I mean is that friends should be able to have an open and honest conversation about this stating how they feel without the friendship ending. Some of the replies on here seem to suggest having the conversation risks the friendship. That shouldn't be the case.

In reply to Trangia:

I did occur to me this could be a very good old skool troll..... if so much better than the usual dross bros pat each other on the back for nowadays.

In reply to Jon Read:

Au contraire, the OP is hoping for money towards a new rope.

In reply to cassaela: great thread, but I did loose interest  a bit halfway down . I’m in agreement with : C pays nothing as they were not negligent . B buys A half and A  buys themselves a new rope .  If A GENUINELY  can’t afford it I suggest they set up a crowd funder or something and everybody who has found this thread entertaining chucks in 50p or , what the hell , £1 ?  I am however of the opinion that the per day cost of a new rope will be be a hell of a lot less than all the other malarkey - flights , accommodation , hire car etc so maybe A should stop whining and pop over to Rack and Ruin and get spendy .

In reply to kevin stephens:

This . Very entertaining .

Edit : I really need to get out more .

In reply to Trangia:

If B hasn't broached the subject then B is the sort of "friend" A can do without.