|
Post by HRHpenfold on Nov 24, 2012 12:21:33 GMT
It might be worth chancing your luck & trying to sue forum moderators / admin or the guy who invited you out for a ride, if you know they have insurance to cover it. (As opposed to whoever was actually responsible - eg, the driver / rider who caused you a problem, the local authority if a road condition problem, etc) Bit of a waste of time if they aren't insured - you & your lawyer won't get any money anyway. (Well, your lawyer might get some legal aid if you qualify but that's tricky/unlikely in civil cases.) Go for the people who have insurance - that's where the money is. Discuss ....... Yes it's much more likely that your sued if you have insurance, than if you don't! again as I said on the safety thread, there needs to be a ban on no win no fee advertising and the re insurance of no win no fee cases, personally I think it's daft, most of the cost of refuting claims is in drafting a letter, or letters, which are easy to do without using solicitors, your sued for negligence, so the easiest way to deal with it, is to have robust rules in place, to insure that negligence does not happen, most of that is already in place, in any run I have been on, there has been plenty witnesses of evidence to prove the organizers innocent in any claim, there's plenty of evidence on the website of safety procedures, though I would admit it is probably useful to do a risk assessment on each run, and provide that to the attendees in addition to the current brief, remove the negligence and you remove the risk!
|
|
|
Post by TwoHat on Nov 24, 2012 12:23:37 GMT
It might be worth chancing your luck & trying to sue forum moderators / admin or the guy who invited you out for a ride, if you know they have insurance to cover it. (As opposed to whoever was actually responsible - eg, the driver / rider who caused you a problem, the local authority if a road condition problem, etc) Bit of a waste of time if they aren't insured - you & your lawyer won't get any money anyway. (Well, your lawyer might get some legal aid if you qualify but that's tricky/unlikely in civil cases.) Go for the people who have insurance - that's where the money is. Discuss ....... Agreed. I think having insurance cover will just set you up to be targetted by compensation lawyers representing other insurance companies - the whole insurance/lawyers scam has become incestuous and corrupt. I haven't been on a club run yet, but I would think twice about it if you had this insurance - I don't want your insurance company's lawyers suing me if I should happen to inadvertantly cause some damage whilst on a club run
|
|
|
Post by m40man on Nov 24, 2012 12:29:14 GMT
Imagine a younger member who because of youth (he said enviously) can only afford third party insurance. If that member has an accident on a run and suffers serious injury he or his legal team may seek to gain funding from wherever possible .. It strikes me that you think your comprehensive insurance covers you for your own personal injury (perhaps you envisage claiming for long-term care if needed?). You need to read your policy, because it doesn't. It only covers damage to your bike plus the same level of injury or death to third parties, not you. It's the same as third party insurance as far as personal injury is concerned, so your reasoning is flawed. Accepting that we need additional insurance cover to meet up & ride together, on top of the third party liability we all carry with our m/cycle insurance, can only encourage claims against it.
|
|
|
Post by pilgrim on Nov 24, 2012 12:36:08 GMT
Being a one-time only organizer here at Easter in 2011 I made it quite clear to the few attendees that they chose to come and ride with me as friends and it wasn't an official YDC event (YDC forum being the mode of communication to invite other riders to meet up). I included a safety briefing stressing that they alone were responsible for their own safety and behaviour whilst riding and were under no obligation to ride where and how I do. I don't think that left YDC liable to any potential problems. At the time I felt that was sufficient. I wouldn't change my actions on another meet/run other than perhaps to put it in writing and get the runsters to sign it. If something needs to change it might be to organize 'meets' and not 'runs'.
|
|
|
Post by ContourMac on Nov 24, 2012 12:37:26 GMT
Oh and Mac, what you do in your private life is up to you, but *covering* your cat? Corrected for you ;D
|
|
|
Post by ContourMac on Nov 24, 2012 12:56:40 GMT
I understand that some are against joining the BMF and others are against insurance for the club but is any member prepared to put their name to the following statement?
"I am totally convinced, without any doubts whatsover, that there is absolutely no possibility of any situation, incident or accident arising on any run or meet held in the name of YDC, either now or at any time in the future, that may, for whatever reason, cause legal action against any, or all, of the organisers or managers."
Shirley if there is any doubt we need to be covered?
|
|
|
Post by tomcat on Nov 24, 2012 13:03:50 GMT
Ditto, your reasoning is flawed Martin. It isn't always going to be a member of this forum that instigates the claim, it could be the insurers of a third party involved in a collision with one of our unfortunate membership. Until the solicitor sues, they are unaware if there is a policy protecting the organiser or not. To quote the solicitor that represented me when I was knocked of my own bike, "If we throw enough sh*t out, something will stick." My own policy covers me for personal injury to £250,000. It was an option and I paid for it. A third party only policy would cover me for nil. Macs earlier post highlighted the way events can pan out. As HRPenfold highlighted in another thread, solicitors will pursue the most ludicrous of claims in the hope of some gain. It's often cheaper to offer some level of payment than fund a protracted legal case sadly.
|
|
|
Post by teejayexc on Nov 24, 2012 13:11:57 GMT
I understand that some are against joining the BMF and others are against insurance for the club but is any member prepared to put their name to the following statement? "I am totally convinced, without any doubts whatsover, that there is absolutely no possibility of any situation, incident or accident arising on any run or meet held in the name of YDC, either now or at any time in the future, that may, for whatever reason, cause legal action against any, or all, of the organisers or managers." Shirley if there is any doubt we need to be covered? As Martin said in t'other thread, "it's a slippery slope" I reiterate my earlier post, If the club goes down the road of compelling run organisers to have insurance, I for one will no longer organise/participate in any such run. I attend/organise a run for the enjoyment and friendship I know I will get from it, and quite frankly I would be not wish to be associated with any forum dictating such terms.
|
|
|
Post by tomcat on Nov 24, 2012 13:16:48 GMT
I understand that some are against joining the BMF and others are against insurance for the club but is any member prepared to put their name to the following statement? "I am totally convinced, without any doubts whatsover, that there is absolutely no possibility of any situation, incident or accident arising on any run or meet held in the name of YDC, either now or at any time in the future, that may, for whatever reason, cause legal action against any, or all, of the organisers or managers." Shirley if there is any doubt we need to be covered? Very well put sir.
|
|
|
Post by tomcat on Nov 24, 2012 13:25:33 GMT
I understand that some are against joining the BMF and others are against insurance for the club but is any member prepared to put their name to the following statement? "I am totally convinced, without any doubts whatsover, that there is absolutely no possibility of any situation, incident or accident arising on any run or meet held in the name of YDC, either now or at any time in the future, that may, for whatever reason, cause legal action against any, or all, of the organisers or managers." Shirley if there is any doubt we need to be covered? As Martin said in t'other thread, "it's a slippery slope" I reiterate my earlier post, If the club goes down the road of compelling run organisers to have insurance, I for one will no longer organise/participate in any such run. I attend/organise a run for the enjoyment and friendship I know I will get from it, and quite frankly I would be not wish to be associated with any forum dictating such terms. I believe Doof is attempting to find the most cost effective manner in ensuring you, or any other organiser, can continue to do so with the benefit of legal insurance cover should someone attempt a claim against the organiser or club. I will personally state, I will pay your affiliation to the BMF or help cover the cost of an insurance policy for the club rather than leave you or the club open to spurious claims. Organisers, such as yourself, do so on our behalf and deserve our best efforts to protect them.
|
|
|
Post by sledgegreen on Nov 24, 2012 14:05:35 GMT
I spent some time doing some research on this a couple of years ago, and came to the conclusion that the the amount of concern was out of proportion to the actual risk. I couldn't find any case where a club or run organiser had been held automatically liable - in every case, the organiser was held liable because they had committed some offence themselves which contributed to the claimant's claim.
But that doesn't prevent somebody trying to bring a claim. Even if a court were to decide in favour of the club/organiser, the costs of defending the case would be significant and would be incurred before the case was decided.
I think insurance is a good idea, and would be prepared to contribute my £9.
However, I also think that there should be an 'investigate other sources' option, so no vote from me.
I also think that we should be careful not to make things worse than they are. If the worst happens and somebody ends up defending a negligence claim, then their defence is likely to be that they took reasonable care in organising the event, and the posts on the forum would support that - they would show that the route was planned and recced, that leaders and tail end charlies were appointed, that a route was published etc etc. To change to the ad hoc approach of someone posting "I will be going for a run if anyone wants to join me" means all of that preparation (or at least documentation of the preparation) is sacrificed, and to my mind it increases liability rather than reducing it.
|
|
|
Post by m40man on Nov 24, 2012 14:39:47 GMT
There perhaps are a variety of reasons why some are for or against BMF affiliation, or insurance separately.
For the avoidance of doubt, my objections are thus:
I have no objection to BMF affiliation. But not in order to acquire insurance, for the reason below.
(I have no objection to paying for a needed insurance product. I have sufficient means at my disposal to pay for said products.)
For me it isn't about the BMF or the cost. It's about the principal of assuming a risk when there isn't one which isn't already fully covered by my road insurance. Assume a risk, insure for it, & someone will come along and exploit it. You feed the culture when you aren't expressly doing anything to warrant it. That is my objection.
As for club liability - we are not a club. Just because some management posts suggest otherwise, doesn't make it so. We have no subs, no treasurer, no chairperson, no stated aims, no joining criteria, no regular election of club officials. We need to accept the limitations of what we are - just an open forum for anyone to participate in, or not. Even our forum 'site rules'(they are not called 'club rules') are essentially just a re-hash of the Proboards ones & in any event are only advisory to help with the smooth running of the forum.
|
|
|
Post by teejayexc on Nov 24, 2012 15:04:27 GMT
For me it isn't about the BMF or the cost. It's about the principal of assuming a risk when there isn't one which isn't already fully covered by my road insurance. Assume a risk, insure for it, & someone will come along and exploit it. You feed the culture when you aren't expressly doing anything to warrant it. That is my objection. As for club liability - we are not a club. Just because some management posts suggest otherwise, doesn't make it so. We have no subs, no treasurer, no chairperson, no stated aims, no joining criteria, no regular election of club officials. We need to accept the limitations of what we are - just an open forum for anyone to participate in, or not. Even our forum 'site rules'(they are not called 'club rules') are essentially just a re-hash of the Proboards ones & in any event are only advisory to help with the smooth running of the forum. Well put. Also on the point of principals. In my view, the whole essence of me owning a motorbike is the freedom to enjoy the open roads, with or without a group of likeminded individuals, and to do so I pay the price, albeit grudgingly, of what that requires by law, ie, Mot, insurance and road tax. What ifs, buts or maybes are what these parasitic no win no fee twobit lawyer types feed off and I'll be bnggered if I'm gonna comply with their theories. Paying 'fees' on the premise of feeding these leeches on society is something I object too on principal.
|
|
|
Post by Doofer on Nov 24, 2012 15:05:26 GMT
As for club liability - we are not a club. Just because some management posts suggest otherwise, doesn't make it so. We have no subs, no treasurer, no chairperson, no stated aims, no joining criteria, no regular election of club officials. We need to accept the limitations of what we are - just an open forum for anyone to participate in, or not. Even our forum 'site rules'(they are not called 'club rules') are essentially just a re-hash of the Proboards ones & in any event are only advisory to help with the smooth running of the forum. Nor was my local group, but that didn't stop some solicitor trying for compensation from the group leaders when one of the group was knocked off their bike by a myopic 3rd party on a ride out with other group members. (whether that claim was succesful or not is irrelevant, it cost money to set up a legal defense and that is the issue I want to insure against) As was quite accurately pointed out by Tomcat, it isn't necessarily going to be a 'club' member who initiated a claim against us, it is their legal representation and they don't take that route based on whether or not the 'club' has insurance. I have supported the no need for insurance theory for a number of years now when it has come up and have avoided feeding the compensation culture trolls up until now, but that culture has become so strong that we are now looking at a choice, get insurance and meet whatever stipulations they require so that we are insured for any club events we wish to organise, or stop organiseing events in the name if YDC, Diversion Club or any other name with may be associated with this forum and website. If anyone is prepared to say (and put in writing) that they strongly disagree with insurance but will happily fund any legal representation (regardless of amount or blame) that we may require as a result of a claim against the club then please stand up and make yourself known either in public or by PM. Doof
|
|
|
Post by cam7777 on Nov 24, 2012 15:14:14 GMT
There perhaps are a variety of reasons why some are for or against BMF affiliation, or insurance separately. For the avoidance of doubt, my objections are thus: I have no objection to BMF affiliation. But not in order to acquire insurance, for the reason below. (I have no objection to paying for a needed insurance product. I have sufficient means at my disposal to pay for said products.) For me it isn't about the BMF or the cost. It's about the principal of assuming a risk when there isn't one which isn't already fully covered by my road insurance. Assume a risk, insure for it, & someone will come along and exploit it. You feed the culture when you aren't expressly doing anything to warrant it. That is my objection. As for club liability - we are not a club. Just because some management posts suggest otherwise, doesn't make it so. We have no subs, no treasurer, no chairperson, no stated aims, no joining criteria, no regular election of club officials. We need to accept the limitations of what we are - just an open forum for anyone to participate in, or not. Even our forum 'site rules'(they are not called 'club rules') are essentially just a re-hash of the Proboards ones & in any event are only advisory to help with the smooth running of the forum. For once, I fully agree with M40man . We are not an official club, I don't and won't wear anything with any branding of YDC and I am just coming out for a ride with others. Probably the best way forward is to arrange any future meet via text or email, inviting friends to join you for an unofficial ride.
|
|
|
Post by soggybiker on Nov 24, 2012 15:50:40 GMT
I do not understand why you think the club, whatever that may be could be sued.
The YDC has no assets, the logo and name are not trademarked, it has no appointed officers beyond website admins. It has no membership fee, nobody gets paid, itdoes not comply with the rules required to validate a society and I am guessing actually runs at a loss of both time and money. Sued implies private prosecution. It is hard to prove that something you willingly partake in without paying for. If there was a case under civil law if would be to prove an individual was in some way negligent or uncaring of the safety of others. For the YDC to somehow be held jointly and equally liable is not going to happen.
Under criminal law individuals could be charged as has happened in some cases where someone has crashed and other riders have been held accountable, but not a club to date as far as I know. That would likely be a conspiracy charge and as the YDC has hundreds of some active some not I really can't see that happening.
You have valid bike insurance you are legally covered. You may have accident insurance on top of that but on the extremely unlikely event that someone should try and sue the YDC we join another organization, formalize membership and start channeling money through the club. Then you actually have accounts and an AGM and something to target with a law suit.
I Don't think you can be held accountable for running a website Doofer but you should be able to get public liability insurance for under a £100. The last cover I had was for £5,000,000 when I was playing around with cannon and that cost £36 a year. Strangely enough if we had used pyrotechnics instead of actually firing the things it would have been thousands per year. I guess more people are hurt with pyro's than guns.
Actually worrying about this and preparing for it validates the sort of amulance chaser who could try this on.
|
|
|
Post by General Gman on Nov 24, 2012 15:53:45 GMT
I'm not going to rant at length about this - Martin, Clive, Trev etc. have stated my feeling more eloquently than I could
|
|
|
Post by tomcat on Nov 24, 2012 17:42:31 GMT
From the legal directory. I'm hoping we might fall into the description highlighted in the final paragraph. Club. An organization composed of people who voluntarily meet on a regular basis for a mutual purpose other than educational, religious, charitable, or financial pursuits. A club is any kind of group that has members who meet for a social, literary, or political purpose, such as health clubs, country clubs, book clubs, and women's associations. The term club is not a legal term per se, but a group that organizes itself as a club must comply with any laws governing its organization and otherwise be cognizant of the legal ramifications in undertaking to organize itself in this manner.
Various types of clubs exist. An incorporated members' club is composed of a group of individuals who each contribute to the club's funds, which are used to pay the expenses of conducting the society. An unincorporated proprietary club is one whose proprietor owns the property and funds and conducts the club to attempt to make a profit. The members are entitled to use the premises and property in exchange for the payment of entrance fees and subscriptions to the proprietor as well as any additional rights and privileges provided in their contractual agreement.
An incorporated club is generally governed by state statute. Many statutes provide for the incorporation of clubs, and the statutory requirements must be strictly observed. A statute may require that an application for incorporation state the purposes of the club in a definitive manner to help the court determine whether the objective of the club is legal. In addition, the application should state the manner in which club revenues are to be provided and the basis upon which an individual may become a member of the club.
A club's certificate of incorporation should indicate pecuniary means (i.e., funds, money, property), describe the objective of the club, and specify a place of business or office. If a club is unincorporated, the rules that govern associations apply.
Voluntary clubs are not partnerships, since the members do not join them for profit-making purposes and, unlike partners, are not responsible for the acts of each other. If a club's members do unite for a commercial venture, however, this association would constitute a partnership. In such cases, a club might be required to comply with state law governing partnerships.
|
|
|
Post by m40man on Nov 24, 2012 18:08:26 GMT
From the legal directory. Is there a UK version of the definition of a club? I can't see one. I don't believe I'm a member of one here though.
|
|
|
Post by pilgrim on Nov 24, 2012 18:56:45 GMT
"I refer the honorable members to the reply I gave earlier."
YDC is a chat 'club'. We ask people to meet up and enjoy the company of other like-minded bikers to join in runs that are voluntarily offered by forum contributors. That's all we are even if we have a 'Run Coordinator' or 'Run Organizer'. We then turn up if we want to join in. If you had a membership scheme, fees for joining, entry forms and fees for official club runs etc. implies you have extra compliance requirements including sanctioning of the routes and maybe even police involvement. That would determine whether the club should be insured against absolutely anything.
My Brittany Run had no involvement from anyone else other than if dates for other Runs coincided. No-one vetted me from within the club, checked out my proposed routes for any danger or even if the attendees were competent to ride on the right hand side of the road! Hence my statement before the runs started.
A simple disclaimer signed by runsters is surely the best option?
Is there room to put that to the vote?
|
|
|
Post by bobh on Nov 24, 2012 19:08:30 GMT
So - if we decide to pay for insurance, and money changes hands, does that mean that YDC does officially become a "club", and will have to meet all the statutory requirements such as having a constitution, an elected committee, AGM etc?
|
|
|
Post by teejayexc on Nov 24, 2012 19:09:21 GMT
"I refer the honorable members to the reply I gave earlier." YDC is a chat 'club'. We ask people to meet up and enjoy the company of other like-minded bikers to join in runs that are voluntarily offered by forum contributors. That's all we are even if we have a 'Run Coordinator' or 'Run Organizer'. We then turn up if we want to join in. If you had a membership scheme, fees for joining, entry forms and fees for official club runs etc. implies you have extra compliance requirements including sanctioning of the routes and maybe even police involvement. That would determine whether the club should be insured against absolutely anything. My Brittany Run had no involvement from anyone else other than if dates for other Runs coincided. No-one vetted me from within the club, checked out my proposed routes for any danger or even if the attendees were competent to ride on the right hand side of the road! Hence my statement before the runs started. A simple disclaimer signed by runsters is surely the best option? Is there room to put that to the vote? Why the need to sign anything, thereby leaving a paper trail. Far better for the forum to just post a general disclaimer from responsibility. I park in several car parks where such a disclaimer is posted. I've yet to be asked for a signature before parking. Incidentally if I ran over someone in the car park would the injured party sue the owners of the car park or me? Just saying.
|
|
|
Post by silverdave on Nov 24, 2012 19:26:18 GMT
Its boiling down to the fact that the club is "damned if you do and damned if you dont." I for one would pay a small amount per annum for cover even if I do not take part in any organised event. Why destroy the benefits of being part of a well run organisation for the cost of a packet of cigarettes and a glass of beer. Unfortunately we now live in a "claim culture" wether we like it or not
|
|
|
Post by Doofer on Nov 24, 2012 19:38:47 GMT
It doesn't matter if we are legally a club or not We call ourselves a club in writing and verbally It doesn't matter how high the risks of being sued are They are high enough for me to no longer wish to take that risk It doesn't matter how likely the outcome of a legal case going against us is We would still have to pay for our defense up front
Paul and Mac both agree with me on this, we need to get some form of insurance or we cease to organise events in the name of YDC or any other name associated with this forum and website.
Paul and Mac are lucky in the respect that if they chose to do so all they need do is ask and I can remove their names from any management references, they can become ordinary members and therefore no longer liable for any action or inaction either real or perceived on behalf of the group.
I on the other hand am financially and legally linked to the group, therefore I would be held accountable in any legal dispute.
If a run organiser chooses to take the risk of being held accountable for any incident on a run then that is their choice, in the same vein if any run organiser chooses to stop organising runs because they do not want to take that risk that is their choice.
There is nothing stopping any of you from organising runs between yourselves so long as you do not associate YDC with those runs
If we take the insurance route it will not affect the way we currently do things with one exception, run/event organisers will be expected to complete the necessary paperwork to satisfy the insurance.
I have looked into the legal aspect of whether or not we are a club, it is a very fuzzy area and there are no clear answers, but what is clear is that we are open to legal action and would be required to defend ourselves if called upon to do so and this will cost money, money that I am in no position to spend.
So I will ask again - are you prepared to pay for any legal costs to defend our club, the management team and any run organisers in the event that legal action is taken against us? I'm not, but I am prepared to pay for insurance to cover the club's proverbial rear.
If anyone can name a company that will allow me to insure the group without having to provide specifics about the run organisers to ensure anyone who might be held accountable is covered then please, please do so, as it currently stands the only cover that I can find available for the type of activities we hold is the BMF cover and that comes with conditions that event and run organisers are affiliated members.
Basically, if I could get cover that only required the group management team to agree, or even simply myself, then I would have already done so and none of your would be any the wiser, those who are at most risk would be covered and it would have no effect anyone else. After all you don't need to know if I have insurance on my home, you can call round for a cuppa anytime you are in the area, but if you slip on my kitchen floor because you happen to call when I've just mopped it whose fault is that?
Plenty of clubs use the BMF purely for the insurance cover, but this could also be an opportunity to expand and get ourselves out there a bit, we could if we chose have a club stand at one of the 3 shows, those of us with political opinions about biking can choose to express them directly to those who are representing bikers in a number of political avenues, even if you disagree with their views, its a chance to be heard. We are not obliged to do anything for or with the BMF, but there are things that we can choose to take advantage of either as individuals or as a group.
If cost is an issue then I need an accurate figure of who would be prepared to conrtibute towards insurance before I can give an accurate price, however the MAXIMUM cost would be £9 per person, per year, based on a membership onf 20, this goes down as the membership grows, and if it could be subsidised by voluntary collections on group events then even better for everyone who wishes to sign up.
There is no obligation for anyone to sign up, the rules are quite simple, if you choose not to sign up then you cannot organise any event in the name of or on behalf of the group, it does not mean you aren't welcome to attend the event
Doof
|
|
|
Post by teejayexc on Nov 24, 2012 19:47:31 GMT
It doesn't matter if we are legally a club or not We call ourselves a club in writing and verbally It doesn't matter how high the risks of being sued are They are high enough for me to no longer wish to take that risk It doesn't matter how likely the outcome of a legal case going against us is We would still have to pay for our defense up front Paul and Mac both agree with me on this, we need to get some form of insurance or we cease to organise events in the name of YDC or any other name associated with this forum and website. Paul and Mac are lucky in the respect that if they chose to do so all they need do is ask and I can remove their names from any management references, they can become ordinary members and therefore no longer liable for any action or inaction either real or perceived on behalf of the group. I on the other hand am financially and legally linked to the group, therefore I would be held accountable in any legal dispute. If a run organiser chooses to take the risk of being held accountable for any incident on a run then that is their choice, in the same vein if any run organiser chooses to stop organising runs because they do not want to take that risk that is their choice. There is nothing stopping any of you from organising runs between yourselves so long as you do not associate YDC with those runs If we take the insurance route it will not affect the way we currently do things with one exception, run/event organisers will be expected to complete the necessary paperwork to satisfy the insurance. I have looked into the legal aspect of whether or not we are a club, it is a very fuzzy area and there are no clear answers, but what is clear is that we are open to legal action and would be required to defend ourselves if called upon to do so and this will cost money, money that I am in no position to spend. So I will ask again - are you prepared to pay for any legal costs to defend our club, the management team and any run organisers in the event that legal action is taken against us? I'm not, but I am prepared to pay for insurance to cover the club's proverbial rear. If anyone can name a company that will allow me to insure the group without having to provide specifics about the run organisers to ensure anyone who might be held accountable is covered then please, please do so, as it currently stands the only cover that I can find available for the type of activities we hold is the BMF cover and that comes with conditions that event and run organisers are affiliated members. Basically, if I could get cover that only required the group management team to agree, or even simply myself, then I would have already done so and none of your would be any the wiser, those who are at most risk would be covered and it would have no effect anyone else. After all you don't need to know if I have insurance on my home, you can call round for a cuppa anytime you are in the area, but if you slip on my kitchen floor because you happen to call when I've just mopped it whose fault is that? Plenty of clubs use the BMF purely for the insurance cover, but this could also be an opportunity to expand and get ourselves out there a bit, we could if we chose have a club stand at one of the 3 shows, those of us with political opinions about biking can choose to express them directly to those who are representing bikers in a number of political avenues, even if you disagree with their views, its a chance to be heard. We are not obliged to do anything for or with the BMF, but there are things that we can choose to take advantage of either as individuals or as a group. If cost is an issue then I need an accurate figure of who would be prepared to conrtibute towards insurance before I can give an accurate price, however the MAXIMUM cost would be £9 per person, per year, based on a membership onf 20, this goes down as the membership grows, and if it could be subsidised by voluntary collections on group events then even better for everyone who wishes to sign up. There is no obligation for anyone to sign up, the rules are quite simple, if you choose not to sign up then you cannot organise any event in the name of or on behalf of the group, it does not mean you aren't welcome to attend the event Doof So there's no reason for the poll then. It's a foregone conclusion from that post.
|
|
|
Post by Doofer on Nov 24, 2012 20:06:25 GMT
So there's no reason for the poll then. It's a foregone conclusion from that post. The foregone conclusion is that we either take out some form of insurance Or We stop organising runs in the name of any club/group with my name legally and financially attached, therefore making me and anyone who chooses to assist me in the management of that club/group liable in the event of legal action against the club/group Hence the 2 available options on the poll, my post above explains why option one is the BMF option rather than a more generalised Get Insurance. Doof
|
|
|
Post by pilgrim on Nov 24, 2012 20:14:27 GMT
I agree with Teejayexc.
I'd like to see a 'leave it as it is' and a 'disclaimer' choice in the poll.
|
|
|
Post by m40man on Nov 24, 2012 20:23:32 GMT
If we take the insurance route it will not affect the way we currently do things with one exception, run/event organisers will be expected to complete the necessary paperwork to satisfy the insurance. This is actually worse than I thought - are you saying that each individual run would need advance paperwork?? Or am I getting over-excited ? In any event, if it only affects run organisers, just ask those who organise runs [1], not everyone else who isn't affected. [1] I accept that excludes me, as I won't be organising any more given the option provided.
|
|
|
Post by m40man on Nov 24, 2012 20:31:59 GMT
My final word: I won't participate in this thread any more, because I have had my say & nothing I've heard has persuaded me my position is wrong. (Cheer if you like .) To go on & on does nothing to further the debate & might be construed as being a personal attack on Doof or anyone else who has a position counter to mine. So it makes sense to leave further discussion to others. On that point, it might be helpful to hear from other run organisers if you see fit to express a view.
|
|
|
Post by TwoHat on Nov 24, 2012 20:33:51 GMT
Simple answer to that is to create another forum unconnected with Doofer purely to organise runs and meets. The YDC would not then be involved, other than linking to it from this forum. Like this for example:- runs-and-meets.freeforums.net/Or just use Facebook or Twitter to organise runs and meets, again outside of the umbrella of the YDC
|
|