|
Post by Doofer on Nov 24, 2012 20:49:59 GMT
Martin, you are getting over excited, the paperwork is a simple BMF membership form, I will try to find a copy to attach so that everyone can see it
As the site currently stands, any member of the site can organise a run in the group's name, and the option to purchase BMF affiliated membership is available to any member of the site whether they choose to organise a run or not, but if you want to organise a run then to be covered by the BMF affiliated club insurance then the organiser of the run must also be an affiliated member through the club. Therefore it is only fair to open this topic to all site members, not just an elite few.
As previously mentioned, whether you wish to take out the affiliated membership (if we do take that route) is entirely voluntary, and a personal decision, if this means you no longer organise group runs or events then I'm sorry to hear that, we are gratefull for the time and effort you have put in over the years, but I also respect your choice as I'm sure the rest of us do.
Doof
|
|
|
Post by pilgrim on Nov 24, 2012 21:06:10 GMT
They are YOUR two choices Doof.
There are other options if you choose to include them.
If members don't take up BMF affiliation then no-one organizes a run again, according to you. So be it!
My last post too on the subject.
|
|
|
Post by teejayexc on Nov 24, 2012 21:09:41 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. My view has already been stated. 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. My final word on this thread.
|
|
|
Post by CD on Nov 24, 2012 22:53:15 GMT
I think in today's litigation led world we must get insurance to protect the club committee and run organisers. I hate the idea but what option do we have..
I want to agree with TJ but it's not "where there's blame there's a claim" It's really "Where there's someone to blame we'll sue & see what we can get."
I really don't see any other option than having insurance.
|
|
|
Post by Fiasco on Nov 24, 2012 23:08:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Fiasco on Nov 24, 2012 23:12:01 GMT
Ps, being an insurance salesman's dream, I would pay the £9 if it means run leaders don't have to worry if it does go t*ts up on one of their runs, or more to the point, if the lack of cover discourages run leaders from organising runs (see Jan Jolly thread ) Dave
|
|
|
Post by DahDit on Nov 24, 2012 23:34:12 GMT
As run Leader / Navigator, where does your responsibility lie if you brief to the effect that attendees are choosing to ride as individuals and are as responsible, as indeed any other motorist is, for their own safety on public roads. Would being a Navigator rather than "Leader" hold less of a legal responsibility?
FFS we're trying to dot the i's and cross the t's for legal circumstances we haven't encountered here, nor do we fully comprehend. On the occasions we have had the odd incident along the way, fellow members have done nothing but be there to assist the unfortunate individual - but "what if" there was a fatality on a run?
What would the family's point of view be?
Shame we don't have any legal experts in our midst - we're obviously attracting the right type of members....... ;D It's worth investigating further though. We need more options.
|
|
|
Post by Fiasco on Nov 24, 2012 23:42:57 GMT
As run Leader / Navigator, where does your responsibility lie if you brief to the effect that attendees are choosing to ride as individuals and are as responsible, as indeed any other motorist is, for their own safety on public roads. Would being a Navigator rather than "Leader" hold less of a legal responsibility? FFS we're trying to dot the i's and cross the t's for legal circumstances we haven't encountered here, nor do we fully comprehend. On the occasions we have had the odd incident along the way, fellow members have done nothing but be there to assist the unfortunate individual - but "what if" there was a fatality on a run? What would the family's point of view be? Shame we don't have any legal experts in our midst - we're obviously attracting the right type of members....... ;D It's worth investigating further though. We need more options. I totally share your non-committal (maybe even sitting on the fence) views Neil, I think we need more meat on the bones here. Dave
|
|
|
Post by Flymo on Nov 24, 2012 23:43:55 GMT
done ! nothing more... Flymo
|
|
|
Post by Reaper on Nov 24, 2012 23:46:06 GMT
Don`t do Facebook or Twitter and never will. ;D Martin I respect your decision just to be clear mine is the opposite I won`t be organising any more runs or staying as part of the Admin without insurance. I also would not ask anyone to pay for my insurance as if I decide I need it to cover my self I would pay for it. I would be willing to stay as a member and take part in runs without the insurance though, so ya not get rid of me.
|
|
|
Post by Fiasco on Nov 24, 2012 23:49:16 GMT
done ! nothing more... Flymo Love ya Man ;D
|
|
|
Post by soggybiker on Nov 25, 2012 0:04:08 GMT
I really can't believe your stance on this. By your arguement you had best worry about about anything that happened in the last 7 years as well. Every road user has a legal duty of care for everone else on the road. You are responsible for your own vehicle. Trying to sue the admin of a web site who may or may not be on the run is a long way below suing the oraniser for some real or imagined negligence and you hear about that happening all the time and it is always successfull. By what you are saying every employer could be held responsible for incidents caused by their staff commuting to and from work. Dave may be sued for teaching someone to drive who subsequently causes a crash.
I for one have been a member of the BMF and MAG I am not currently a member of either and have no intention of rejoining the BMF even as an affiliate over this nonsense. Pander to this and you soon wind up not being able to step out of your own front door for fear of who will sue you.
|
|
|
Post by Fiasco on Nov 25, 2012 0:06:43 GMT
Dave may be sued for teaching someone to drive who subsequently causes a crash. Yep, but pay £18.15 a quarter to be a member of the Driving Instructor Association (DIA), which includes cover against such claims
|
|
|
Post by Fiasco on Nov 25, 2012 0:09:21 GMT
Pander to this and you soon wind up not being able to step out of your own front door for fear of who will sue you. This is such an important point, I remember hearing horror stories from the US about litigation that seemed so daft it would never reach the UK. Unfortunately seems that it now has
|
|
|
Post by neilmud Lord Protector on Nov 25, 2012 2:30:40 GMT
It seems to me that we all agree that there are no circumstances that we can see where run organisers or club "what ever that may be" management could be held responsible for any accident on a club run.
If at the briefings it is stated that your bike/riding safety is up to each rider any known possible hazards are pointed out IE. take care the roads are wet/icy/covered in mud etc. or as I had on one of my runs a particular bit of road with deceptive bends.Speed is not an issue as we use the marker system so all can ride at their own pace & don't feel pressured to keep up.
After such a briefing it would be hard for any court to find against the YDC or member/representative or management.
BUT as Doofer has said, that may not stop someone from trying & neither Doofer or I or I suspect most here could afford to take on such a defense without a great personal financial loss so regrettable as it seems some form of insurance is the route to take.
Club 3rd party insurance would I think be the best solutionif it could be got to cover all runs/meets etc. associated with the club this could also cover club nights out on runs or even ND p1ssups auctions/fund-raising etc.
At the right price could be funded by voluntary contributions or donations at runs etc.
If this is not possible then the BMF route seems to be the way to go I have no animosity to the BMF as I have had nothing to do with them in the past, some here have issues with them I don't know what they are & I don't think they are relevant.
I like to buy all my meat from farmers markets my fish of the fishing boats on the beach & my onions from some foreign chappy with a stripey jumper & a bike but this is not always possible & although I don't like the way they do things most of my shopping comes from Tescos.
So what ever issues you may have with the BMF If Doofer decides that BMF is the way to go I will support her & I hope everyone here will as well.
Neil
|
|
|
Post by cam7777 on Nov 25, 2012 10:52:04 GMT
Count me out.
I won't need 'extra' insurance, I pay enough as it is
|
|
|
Post by HRHpenfold on Nov 25, 2012 11:12:23 GMT
If this is not possible then the BMF route seems to be the way to go I have no animosity to the BMF as I have had nothing to do with them in the past, some here have issues with them I don't know what they are & I don't think they are relevant. Neil So if you don't know what issues others have with the BMF, how can you possibly know how relevant they are! this is looking like the end of YDC club runs, whatever the poll result!
|
|
|
Post by bobh on Nov 25, 2012 11:30:12 GMT
Firstly, I'll say that I think Martin, Trevor, Clive et al are right in principle. The trouble is, history is littered with people who went to their graves proclaiming that they were right, but unfortunately that's not generally how the world actually works. In fact it's how wars start.
So sometimes we all have to swallow our pride, compromise our principles and accept a pragmatic way forward.
In this case Jen has rightly identified that there is a risk, however remote, that she, and/or others involved in helping to run this not-a-club, might at some time face litigation which would result in a lot of expense, irrespective of whether the suit were successful or not. So, very sensibly, she has looked at measures to minimise that risk, and some form of insurance looks like the obvious way to go.
It's not as if the cost is really anything to get steamed up about. So, with some reluctance, I have to go with Neil (and CD, earlier) - for once he's talking complete sense rather than taking the pi$$!
I think Neil's "Tesco" analogy is perfect, by the way. And I like his suggestion of a small donation on club runs as probably the easiest way of administering payment.
|
|
|
Post by alan292 on Nov 25, 2012 12:52:53 GMT
This thread has caused quite a stir.... ...having read through all the replies I am left thinking .... 1.How would anyone affected by an accident or the like by a run attendee know they were on a club run ? 2. If an individual posted up an intended run couldnt admin post directly below indicating the run would have no linc to the club/forum thus negating the admin from any possible claim? ( Pilgrim has allready proposed something similar) 3. If the runs were orginised on facebook (or the like) , would the owners of facebook require to take out this insurance? 4. If the cost of this insurance is around £180 ( 20 members @£9) then possibly everyone attending a run could contribute to the cost of the insurance.....I have attended events orginised by a poker forum where eveyone who attended contributed to provide trophys , tips for dealers and the card manager put on buffets for the party....yes some would pay twice or more but then they are participating more than once too, Im sure at least 180 or more attend the club runs in any one year which is a £1 a run each. I have only attended a part run in the past but I hoped to get to a few in the coming year/s.....if they were to cease I think it would be a shame....
|
|
|
Post by TwoHat on Nov 25, 2012 13:03:24 GMT
There have been a number of instances brought to our attention recently of Club Organisers being held accountable for accidents at runs or events. Any chance you could provide links to some examples of this happening? I haven't heard of any, and a quick search on Google has failed me, unfortunately. Please be assured that I'm not doubting you, just that I would like to be able to do more research into this before making a decision. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by Pool Boy on Nov 25, 2012 23:57:30 GMT
FWIW I'm with Martin, Trev, Clive etc on this one.
I think there's a major difference between an Aero club (or in my case an Amateur Dramatics group at a local theatre ) and a loose group of friends who happen to meet to ride their bikes together - the difference being that as motorcyclists we already have insurance. I cannot see how any liability attaches to the "navigator" (thanks Neil) or to the forum admin any more than it does to Proboards themselves - unless there is clear incitement to 'compete' or 'keep up with the group' and there is patently neither of these - quite the opposite in fact.
I've also got a lot of sympathy with the view that having insurance could actually attract a claim, having seen our own car insurers pay out for a vexacious claim that had no merit but was more costly to defend than to settle.
I also fail to see how an insurance policy could be effected without members having to provide personal details (name, address etc) to 'validate' their membership which I think some would find intrusive.
I think that as long as all Runsters are told that they are riding for themselves and must be responsible for their own actions, that is enough.
If Doofer, Reaper or anyone else behind the scenes feels vulnerable due to their position as site admin then I for one would respect that and either accept their decision (even if I don't agree with it) or suggest we start looking for an alternative admin team !
Just my 2p worth
|
|
|
Post by neilmud Lord Protector on Nov 26, 2012 0:52:57 GMT
If Doofer, Reaper or anyone else behind the scenes feels vulnerable due to their position as site admin then I for one would respect that and either accept their decision (even if I don't agree with it) or suggest we start looking for an alternative admin team ! Just my 2p worth If they do decide its not in their interest to run the "club" because of insurance issues are you! I for one would not if it came to it. Neil
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2012 6:46:57 GMT
This looks like it could turn in to an administrative nightmare. It has been said elsewhere, where are the the precedents, and what action resulted? The police involvement must have a strong bearing too, and that must vary from area to area. (North Wales comes to mind). I can see the argument for insurance but how do we know the policy will cover all eventualities. Is there a document we can study to see if as individuals we're happy with it? Apart from one run (Oatcake) we've only been involved with the Jock one, so I'm very tempted to go along with the view that if anybody wants to meet for a social occasion, fine, all arranged by text or email.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2012 7:32:00 GMT
What about a standard disclaimer on each run sign up sheet stating that each individual accepts responsibility for their own actions and legality of their steed. We could emphasise the use of a marker system to enable all riders to ride at their own pace.
Job done.
This has cropped up before, I haven't heard of any court cases up here for this and I frequent a couple of sites with as active, if not more active, run sections. I'm pretty sure if there were court cases it would be discussed immediately.
|
|
|
Post by billywhizz on Nov 26, 2012 12:07:10 GMT
Having read the long thread, I can see this splits the 'membership!!'
It is a shame we don't have any legal bods to help us here, but a few of my thoughts..
Why is it, that this type of insurance is only available from one source?
If the insurance is needed to protect admin, why do run navigators need to be BMF affiliated? (just seems a way to boost BMF members!)
I have made a lot of new friends (acquaintances) since being on this forum, and have enjoyed many miles getting to and attending a run round areas of the country that I would have otherwise missed, this may (by the posts here) well stop or be greatly reduced.
having said that, would 'this insurance' cover the route getting to and returning from a 'run'?
I for one would still 'like' to put on a run, as well as attend others again. I would do both, with or without this insurance. Of course I could just email a bunch of friends to tell them of a forthcoming ride! Now, if these people happen to be from a forum, does that make it a 'club' run?? I often wear my YDC T shirt, while riding, so would that make my journey a 'club ride' I also often wear other 'branded' clothing, as do ALL bikers, so is that a club?
there are many more questions, and probably no answers as we discuss, but a small cost to potentially stop our 'admin' from being out of pocket isn't a bad thing, don't some already contribute to the actual running of the site ?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2012 12:14:00 GMT
Not even in California. A voluntary participant in a recreational activity cannot recover damages for injury from a co-participant or a sponsor or organizer of the activity if the injury stems from a risk inherent in the activity and the defendant does nothing to increase that inherent risk.Posted on another forum from: www.metnews.com/articles/2011/amez102811.htmHas there actually been a case in this country or is this a panic over nothing ?
|
|
|
Post by Doofer on Nov 26, 2012 12:46:30 GMT
To Clarify,
The insurance covers the admin team and any member organising a group run or event (so long as all of the above have purchased membership).
It provides cover for any 3rd party making a claim against the group, that may be anyone, but also includes 'guests' to the run/event (ie. anyone who chooses to join the run/event but has not purchased membership through the group).
However membership is available to any person who wishes to take it out and is not restricted to the admin team and run/event organisers.
I'm not going to argue the point any further, however I will try to answer any questions raised.
With regard to providing links to cases...if you were being sued for any reason do you really think it would be either clever or helpful to write about it on the internet? Mac and I have both mentioned cases that are currently ongoing that we are aware of, but you will have to take our word for those.
If you are dead set against the group taking out insurance of any form then please consider this... would you be prepared to take on the financial responsibility of this group and be legally named as its owner?
Doof
|
|
|
Post by ContourMac on Nov 26, 2012 13:07:49 GMT
Not even in California. A voluntary participant in a recreational activity cannot recover damages for injury from a co-participant or a sponsor or organizer of the activity if the injury stems from a risk inherent in the activity and the defendant does nothing to increase that inherent risk.Posted on another forum from: www.metnews.com/articles/2011/amez102811.htmThis is interesting. Can you advise how much the organiser had to pay his legal team to defend himself, if these costs were recouped and how initially they were funded? It goes to show that an action against an organiser can be brought even if he has prepared disclaimer paperwork and given a safety briefing. It may be unsuccessful but still has to be contested. See post 16
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2012 13:47:52 GMT
Not even in California. A voluntary participant in a recreational activity cannot recover damages for injury from a co-participant or a sponsor or organizer of the activity if the injury stems from a risk inherent in the activity and the defendant does nothing to increase that inherent risk.Posted on another forum from: www.metnews.com/articles/2011/amez102811.htmThis is interesting. Can you advise how much the organiser had to pay his legal team to defend himself, if these costs were recouped and how initially they were funded? It goes to show that an action against an organiser can be brought even if he has prepared disclaimer paperwork and given a safety briefing. It may be unsuccessful but still has to be contested. See post 16 I've seen it but we don't know the circumstances of the case in post 16. I don't think court costs or their methods of recouping them in California would be particularly relevant to us. I posted that as California is obviously a more litigious society than ours and the case was still not found.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2012 14:12:12 GMT
From what I can find a forum is a communications channel and nothing more. Proboards would therefore be as liable as any on here.
We do not have a club membership. We do not have club fees. Does the VJMC ? If so they are not like us.
You'd be as well sueing Facebook.
|
|