Think that liabilities don't exist ?

[Motorsport Mickey]

I hadn't seen this reported before, but this surely underlines why it is the height of folly to take risks when involved with motorsport.

 

Whether using a car in a controlled environment and even if driving or not (say just organising) if you don't protect yourself and rely on a signing away of liability by another competitor you expose yourself to big risks.

 

http://www.pistonheads.com/gAssing/topic.asp?h=0&t=1332239&d=0&nmt=

 

There is a statement from the involved insurance company around page 15, whether you believe their statement or think that the accumulation of protest from interested parties made them think again is something you would have to decide yourself.

 

Mick Richards

 

 

[Alec Pringle]

Mick,

 

you'll recall the days when The TR Register used to do proper TR stuff, organising Sprints and Practice Days at Goodwood and Curborough, and End to End and Round Britain Runs, rather than just cream tea afternoon outings and convoy runs for mimsers.

 

Every event was organised with the relevant MSA permit in place (or RAC back then), which provided a degree of insurance and reassurance to organisers, participants and spectators alike. Yes it was more work doing it by the Blue Book, but at least we knew everything was as good as we could make it - which benefited everybody concerned.

 

Need I add that Practice Days, which attracted a fair number of complete novices, were regarded by us as a significantly higher risk factor than a competitive Sprint in which a larger proportion of entrants were reasonably experienced. So we ensured that Practice Days had at least as much safety precaution in place as a pukka Sprint, far more provision than the rules of the time required. A handful of incidents demonstrated the wisdom of the approach - we were able to cope without drama, let alone crisis.

 

If so-called 'Track Days' were organised to the same standard, there would be less of the sort of discussion I've just read on PH.

 

It wouldn't be that hard, surely, for the MSA to produce a set of proper rules for 'Track Days' ?

 

Younger TR pilots might be amused at the 1970s potential penalty for inconsiderate driving - the Goodwood Clerk of Course took a dim view of hooliganism on or off track, he was a distinctly large chap with a sheath knife (for cutting safety harness to release a driver after a prang) hanging on his belt. Jim Bowie himself wouldn't have been ashamed of Dave's knife. Hooligan driving resulted in the offending driver being lifted bodily by Dave's left paw, whilst the right paw waved the knife in the direction of the offender's personal tackle. Doc McG the medical officer looking on, acidly observing that he wouldn't be sewing back on the removed bits, he'd be frying them for lunch with the bacon and eggs.

 

That never failed to calm down the over-excitable.

 

Cheers

 

Alec

[MadMarx]

In Germany a trackday is treated as a driving school. All cars needs insurances. Trouble starts if race cars mixed up with road cars. It would be like driving with no insurance.

[roy53]

I always thought the waiver we sign was be all /end all but no seems not the case.

just try to imagine personal injury claims.

I do hope that this ruling is challenged but i would not like the costs of this.

 

Is the caterham driver not equaly at fault for spinning on a track day and stopping on the track.

 

ROY

[Stanpartmanpartwolf]

Yes, Caterham man was at fault, no doubt; however, he claimed on his insurance, most likely not expecting the company to hunt down & shaft the other driver.

There are reasons why insurers have underwriters.

The write-off payout on the C**terham was £11,500; we assume the leeches all but doubled that- so who paid the legal costs? Presumably Chaucer, the insurers.

The PH thread is full of the usual waffle, extending to 31 pages, but the salient points are very worrying.

If I may be so bold, at the root of all this, is that the ladies seem to be turning into chaps, and the chaps into ladies.

Can someone explain to me how the hell a single game of Rugby can still be played, without 30 men all having hissy fits over unsightly bruises and trying to sue each other for scrum whiplash. (Yeah, I know..)

The real point is, if you can't do it properly & accept the consequences of that-

STAY HOME

[Motorsport Mickey]

Interesting to note, the original date of the incident was back in 2010 so the insurance company pursued this claim for 3 years !

 

Didn't realise how diligent an insurance company could be JUST to get a ruling "in the interests of clarity" !

 

As opinionated before none of us can sign away our own or other peoples responsibilities and liabilities. As regards trying to get third party insurance ...? Good luck with that ! An open insurance to cover any or all other possible cars which may turn up on a track day would be something to see.

 

Mick Richards

[john.r.davies]

I'm not reading through 30+ pages of Pistonheads, so forgive if what I say is already dealt with.

 

To start with, I thought that road car policies had, as a part of the boilerplate text included in every single policy, "excluding speed and time trials, racing and track events". Mine does! So I've always thought that road insurance was void if you took a road car on track in any event, as I think did the person who was taken to court.

 

So the Caterham must have had a specialised, trackday insurance. When on public roads everyone MUST have third party insurance, it's reasonable that an injured insurer seeks repayment from another drver and thier insurer. But on a track day, not everyone will have valid insurance. So an insurer who accepts a track day risk should accept the risk themselves, make that clear in the policy, and charge a corresponding premium.

 

I'm interested in Christian's remark, that in Germany a track day is a driving school, cars must be insured and road and race cars seperated. My first time at the 'Ring, I was told that I could not take my race car on the circuit on a public session with road cars, because it was a race car. I protested that it was road legal and insured in the UK and I had a 'Green Card' but to no avail.

Then on the second 'Ring trip, I collided with a Gp2 Porsche. I span, rolled and totalled the car. He stopped (good for him) and had only superficial damage. I told him (across the track, not face to face!) that I blamed him for the incident, (why would he try to overtake me on the second of the narrow Hatzenbach curves, when we were both in untimed practice?) but I took it as a motorsporting incident, and never even thought of claiming anything.

 

I didn't have an insurance policy let alone a rapacious insurer to pursue the poor guy.

 

John

 

PS *** STOP PRESS ***

Has no one Googled for this case? No one on PistonHeads, I think

See: http://www.opentrack.co.uk/track-day-news/

 

Statement by the injured party's broker (REIS) and insurer (Chaucer), to say that they will not pursue the judgement, "as the claim was made in error"! You would have thought that our Learned Friends might have spotted the error before it got as far as the Court! It says that thbis case sets no precedent, and Chaucer has proposed a policy paragraph that would prevent future insureds claiming against anyone else. About time too! J.

Edited October 24, 2013 by john.r.davies

[thescrapman]

I always assumed that Trackday insurance was "First Party Only". You are insuring yourself, and nothing else.

 

Is that not the case??

 

Seems so from the bits of the PH thread I read.

 

Cheers

 

Colin

[Alec Pringle]

It's not difficult to write disclaimers, waivers of liability, whatever . . . . whether they will stand up in court is another matter entirely.

 

Hence my preference for organising events under the MSA umbrella, which does potentially provide a great deal of backup if things go awry.

 

Cheers

 

Alec

[MichaelH]

Hi Alec,

What sort of cover/rules do the MSA impose on MSA authorized racing ?

Does it cover practice and the race

More info please

Interested

Michael

[thescrapman]

Michael

 

I would have thought it would all be in the Blue Book.

 

The 12-car permits I have seen, and the associated insurance that has been organised (via REIS and others) define the times and places the permit and insurance are valid.

 

I assume that track permits also define the coverage.

 

The Blue Book is on line so worth a look.

 

Cheers

 

Colin

[Alec Pringle]

Hi Michael,

 

as Colin notes, it's all in the Blue Book.

 

There is no short cut, you have to plough your way through the relevant sections, but the list of contents and the index are reasonably good.

 

In my past experience the MSA, and RAC before them, have invariably been more than helpful - they are in the business of making motor sport happen, and if approached in the proper manner they can and will go the extra mile.

 

Link to the Blue Book online - http://www.msauk.org/site/cms/contentChapterView.asp?chapter=234

 

Cheers

 

Alec

Edited October 25, 2013 by Alec Pringle

[MichaelH]

Yea OK i'm being lazy

I will dig out the blue book and have a look

Michael

[MichaelH]

Looking at the blue book, MSA arranges insurance in respect of legal liability of events with all events authorised by a permit. this protects a club et al for their legal liabilty to 3rd parties injured or property damaged following an accident arising etc

but not one competitor claiming against another competitor, damage to cars in competition is not covered

there is a Jardine Lloyd Thompson policy to assist clubs for 12 car events etc

In summary with no MSA permit the organisers of a track day and or anything else are on their own

 

This is a brief quote and not definitive

 

Michael

[Alec Pringle]

In the days of TR Practice Days the events were authorised by permit, even though this was not mandatory at the time, as one means of protecting the club's interests.

 

The MSA disclaimers signed by those involved in motor sport, as competitors or officials, are regarded as definitive - presumably the disclaimers involved in the court case in question were rather less so ?

 

Cheers

 

Alec

[MichaelH]

BTW I once asked about comprehensive insurance for a days stage rallying - about £800, fire only was about half that

Michael

[Motorsport Mickey]

Just to differentiate, a track day is supposed to be strictly non competitive. No times,placings, or other competition based practices to be employed.

Hence the practices and well tried arrangements and disclaimers put in place by the MSA for actual competition don't apply, on more than one occasion the MSA has had to apply these through a court of law and the disclaimers have stood up to rigorous scrutiny. This is why the TR Registers stance of organising Motorsport practice days and other events by the book through the MSA has proved to be very sensible, protecting the organising club and the individuals involved. Any deviation when organising events by individuals drops the whole responsibility into their own laps, not a pleasant thought.

 

Mick Richards

Edited October 26, 2013 by Motorsport Mickey

[Peter Cobbold]

I'm not reading through 30+ pages of Pistonheads, so forgive if what I say is already dealt with.

 

To start with, I thought that road car policies had, as a part of the boilerplate text included in every single policy, "excluding speed and time trials, racing and track events". Mine does! So I've always thought that road insurance was void if you took a road car on track in any event, as I think did the person who was taken to court.

 

So the Caterham must have had a specialised, trackday insurance. When on public roads everyone MUST have third party insurance, it's reasonable that an injured insurer seeks repayment from another drver and thier insurer. But on a track day, not everyone will have valid insurance. So an insurer who accepts a track day risk should accept the risk themselves, make that clear in the policy, and charge a corresponding premium.

 

I'm interested in Christian's remark, that in Germany a track day is a driving school, cars must be insured and road and race cars seperated. My first time at the 'Ring, I was told that I could not take my race car on the circuit on a public session with road cars, because it was a race car. I protested that it was road legal and insured in the UK and I had a 'Green Card' but to no avail.

Then on the second 'Ring trip, I collided with a Gp2 Porsche. I span, rolled and totalled the car. He stopped (good for him) and had only superficial damage. I told him (across the track, not face to face!) that I blamed him for the incident, (why would he try to overtake me on the second of the narrow Hatzenbach curves, when we were both in untimed practice?) but I took it as a motorsporting incident, and never even thought of claiming anything.

 

I didn't have an insurance policy let alone a rapacious insurer to pursue the poor guy.

 

John

 

PS *** STOP PRESS ***

Has no one Googled for this case? No one on PistonHeads, I think

See: http://www.opentrack.co.uk/track-day-news/

 

Statement by the injured party's broker (REIS) and insurer (Chaucer), to say that they will not pursue the judgement, "as the claim was made in error"! You would have thought that our Learned Friends might have spotted the error before it got as far as the Court! It says that thbis case sets no precedent, and Chaucer has proposed a policy paragraph that would prevent future insureds claiming against anyone else. About time too! J.

 

But note the heavy print in that document the sentence about not pursuing claims against other particpant " save in respect of injury or death".

And the sentence below that about the Unfair Contract Terms act 1977

So I think that means that signing a waiver is no protection form being sued - a personal injury claim.

That would apply to track days and MSA events surely?

I'm no lawyer.... but particpating without personal damages cover seems a risk to house and home.

Yes? No?

 

Peter