Page 2 of 19 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 190

Thread: Resignation fromCommittee

  1. #11
    Senior Member wynn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Paps of Shap
    Posts
    698
    Quote Originally Posted by nippersmith View Post
    Wouldn't the insurance company instruct the solicitor to defend a claim in the event of a claim against a RO who was covered by insurance arranged through the FRA.

    The RO could in theory be sued by (a) a member of the public who is injured or suffers loss as a result of a collision with a fell runner in the race (b) by a runner who becomes injured in the race or (c) by the relatives of the fell runner in the event of a death.

    Surely it is in the interests of the insurance company to ensure that ROs are trained and compliant with best safety practice?

    So that both runners and third parties unrelated with the event (eg the walker who gets knocked over and suffers a fracture) are kept as safe as possible in the circumstances?

    Sports law is complex, it would be interesting to know the name of the lawyer advising the FRA. Some lawyers are better than others.

    It is good see that someone has taken steps to show their public support for Always Injured as he often refers in his posts to people supporting him who don't wish to do so in public for a variety of reasons.

    It is difficult to pull all the various strands together and work out the nature of the problem which has compelled Always Injured to continue to type long and detailed posts; many allegations have been made - some serious - together with references to the "Gang of Three" and I have not seen, I could have missed it, any direct response to these allegations.

    If the Committee by their statement put on the home page yesterday, acknowledge that there should be changes to the current rules, "the suite of documentation still needs work" then doesn't it make sense to get working on the required changes, in the interests of safety?
    the committee are saying that they are dealing with this - but why are they only just doing something about this ..... more than 2 weeks into the new years racing.
    I'll ask the question again.... Can the FRA guarantee that race organisers will not find there insurance invalid???





    INSURANCE COVER FOR

    EVENT ORGANISERS/PROMOTERS



    PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE



    General Points

    to Note



    § Hazardous Activities Exclusion – this policy does not apply to

    liability arising out of hazardous activities which increase the

    risk of bodily injury or damage to property. This includes but

    is not limited to amusement rides, bonfires, bouncy castles,

    fairground rides, fireworks, inflatables.



    From FRA website:



    2014 FRA SAFETY REQUIREMENTS FOR FELL RACES and RULES FOR COMPETITION



    Introduction



    Fell running is hazardous and overcoming its various challenges is an integral part of the enjoyment it provides to participants. It attracts competitors with a wide range of ability and experience and

    those who are unfit and inexperienced in dealing with the hazards which mountain terrain and weather routinely present should consider the risk of personal harm. Anyone participating in a fell race may suffer an accident, the consequences of which could be fatal.
    When all else fails and your soul needs a lift - head to the hills

  2. #12
    Master ydt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    1,277
    Quote Originally Posted by wynn View Post

    ..............................
    § Hazardous Activities Exclusion – this policy does not apply to

    liability arising out of hazardous activities which increase the

    risk of bodily injury or damage to property. This includes but

    is not limited to amusement rides, bonfires, bouncy castles,

    fairground rides, fireworks, inflatables.


    .............................................

    Fell running is hazardous ......................... Anyone participating in a fell race may suffer an accident, the consequences of which could be fatal.
    So, there is no insurance cover for those who organise fell races?!

  3. #13
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    The Worth
    Posts
    17,254
    Quote Originally Posted by ydt View Post
    So, there is no insurance cover for those who organise fell races?!
    This obvious contradiction needs sorting, sorting quickly and sorting properly. Or at least we (runners and race organisers) need to be told what's actually going on. Contrary to what one or two people might think (and post anonymously with inane regularity), the majority of fell runners aren't stupid. Enough is enough
    Poacher turned game-keeper

  4. #14
    Senior Member nippersmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    720
    Quote Originally Posted by wynn View Post
    the committee are saying that they are dealing with this - but why are they only just doing something about this ..... more than 2 weeks into the new years racing.
    I'll ask the question again.... Can the FRA guarantee that race organisers will not find there insurance invalid???





    INSURANCE COVER FOR

    EVENT ORGANISERS/PROMOTERS



    PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE



    General Points

    to Note



    § Hazardous Activities Exclusion – this policy does not apply to

    liability arising out of hazardous activities which increase the

    risk of bodily injury or damage to property. This includes but

    is not limited to amusement rides, bonfires, bouncy castles,

    fairground rides, fireworks, inflatables.



    From FRA website:



    2014 FRA SAFETY REQUIREMENTS FOR FELL RACES and RULES FOR COMPETITION



    Introduction



    Fell running is hazardous and overcoming its various challenges is an integral part of the enjoyment it provides to participants. It attracts competitors with a wide range of ability and experience and

    those who are unfit and inexperienced in dealing with the hazards which mountain terrain and weather routinely present should consider the risk of personal harm. Anyone participating in a fell race may suffer an accident, the consequences of which could be fatal.

    Isn't this part of the policy specifically about public liability insurance?

    Doesn't this section of the policy cover the situation where a member of the public may suffer accidental injury or loss eg if knocked over by a runner, and maybe if the RO can show that he has taken proportionate and reasonable safety measures to safeguard third parties, then the RO will not be negligent?

    I don't think the extract means that the insurance policy as a whole is void due to the hazards involved in fell running.

    I don't know though, I am just guessing.
    a rush and a push and the land is ours

  5. #15
    Master Stick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Wharfedale
    Posts
    1,792
    A personal perspective...
    When it comes to this and someone of Andy's (fellhound) professional and fell running experience feels he has no recourse other than to take this action, and moreover make such a public statement it tells me that there is something fundamentally wrong with how this whole matter has been dealt with. Mike (AlwaysInjured) has used logical arguments and presented sound commentary on the issues; now with Andy 'gone' from the committee what hope for this to get resolved "behind the public glare" look very remote indeed. Those who know Andy will know that for him to have taken this step (resignation) is, to my mind, an extremely worrying case and I hope this is shared by every member of the committee.

    Andy,
    I cannot speak for anyone but myself but from me at least, thanks for hanging in there so long!

    Neil
    ...there's a hill nearby missing its fool...

  6. #16
    Master shaunaneto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Tayside
    Posts
    4,734
    Sports law is complex, it would be interesting to know the name of the lawyer advising the FRA. Some lawyers are better than others.
    I believe it's Lee & Priestley LPP
    pies

  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by wynn View Post
    Look at the statement on the front page -" After the inquest the precise wording of the new ‘rules’ had to comply with the Coroner’s requirements, and also with the advice given by our lawyer, who also acts for the insurance company." surely this is a conflict of interest - how can the insurance lawyer have the interests of RO's at heart.
    There is a misconception that the Coroner imposed prescriptive requirements on FRA. His Regulation 28 Report simply required that "action should be taken to prevent future deaths". He listed seven "matters of concern". There was no actual direction from the Coroner as to what changes should be made. That was for FRA to judge taking advice from wherever it chose. Indeed, when the requests for action (leading to the seven "Matters of Concern") were made to the Coroner in court, he said that he could not guarantee that they could be implemented. So he recognised the potential difficulties himself. It was up to the FRA to determine what was sensible. If FRA chose to take advice mainly from lawyers then it took a very grave risk on behalf of race organisers. By choosing to impose impractical prescriptive demands on race organisers, FRA has presented them with a big problem. Many race organisers have recognised this. Others will follow.

    Andy Walmsley has made a brave determined attempts to steer the FRA ship off the rocks in the face of ill-informed resistance. He has now inevitably decided that his priorities must transfer to those race organisers who recognise the problems. This issue won't be resolved by FRA until those on the bridge of the once great ship FRA (with their eyes closed) hand over to more able captaincy. Otherwise, FRA will be left governing races which are a very faint shadow of what fell racing is all about.

    Good luck Andy. You'll have lots of support because the future of fell racing depends on it.

    Keith Burns

  8. #18
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Ambleside
    Posts
    5,451
    Quote Originally Posted by nippersmith View Post
    Isn't this part of the policy specifically about public liability insurance?

    Doesn't this section of the policy cover the situation where a member of the public may suffer accidental injury or loss eg if knocked over by a runner, and maybe if the RO can show that he has taken proportionate and reasonable safety measures to safeguard third parties, then the RO will not be negligent?

    I don't think the extract means that the insurance policy as a whole is void due to the hazards involved in fell running.

    I don't know though, I am just guessing.
    I think the "public" are those who are neither the insurance company nor those paying for the insurance.

  9. #19
    Senior Member wynn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Paps of Shap
    Posts
    698
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike T View Post
    I think the "public" are those who are neither the insurance company nor those paying for the insurance.
    When an accident occurs where blame can be attributed to a business (RO/Race), there is an insurance policy that can be taken out called public liability insurance.
    So if the PLI is invalid due to conflict of interest ( hazard/non hazard) ... the RO has no insurance cover if anything goes wrong so will have to deal with it him/her self and it will be expensive!!!!
    When all else fails and your soul needs a lift - head to the hills

  10. #20
    Master Witton Park's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Blackburn
    Posts
    8,771
    I have to say a big thanks to Andy for the work he has put in.

    I have sit on a few committees and it's common practise for the Chair to try and draw much needed expertise in and embrace them - can't quite fathom out what's gone on here as people like Andy are hard to come by.

    I also have to say that I'm disappointed in teh committee as a whole for allowing it to get to this point. I am aware that several have voiced "behind the scenes" concerns to try and keep a lid on things. Well this is where it has got you.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •