jeff oakley Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 Discussing this later yesterday the problem is simple. The track day insurance covers just the owners car. There is no insurance I am aware of that covers third party liabilities in any way. So even if everyone had TD insurance the underwriters could still come after you if they deemed you were at fault. Clearly this is a threat to the Hobby as I am sure other underwirters will now be aware of this case and although as I understand it, this does not set a legal precedent, it can be used to try to sway a judge in future. I am sure there have been other cases that perhaps we have not known about as the amounts may well have been managable, but £21k most would hurt with that. I still will do track days as they are safer in my mind than the M4 and M25 daily slogs but I have always been careful when on track. Castle Combe did go through a bad patch with the Action Days, which are much different to track days. On there you can soon see who the accident waiting to happen are and I kept away from them as did most sane people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M444TTB Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 I've just stopped doing the action days now. Back to too many cars and utter mayhem. There were a few good years though. Despite this the amount of car on car contact was very infrequent. However it does happen sadly. Dommo was taken out by another club member at our last track day. I don't even recall an apology afterward either. He just said it was that or running up the back of him! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s2rrr Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 Jeff, That's were I was coming from we would all need it or no one have it. Bit of a farce and a way of pumping up the prices cynically. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Algar - Competition Secretary Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 Some interesting comments on the original Pistonheads thread, page 10 onwards. It was interesting that a case had been chucked out !! I wonder how long before an insurance company starts offering 3rd party trackday insurance. Big money maker for them i would think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestyNottm Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 I must say that being new to all things Westfield, I had been looking forward to doing some track days next year once my car is run in. Not so sure now.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexander72 Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 funny you say that Nick, I am having a chat with underwriting colleagues today Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Eastwood (Gadgetman) - Club Chairman Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 Interesting to see the completely different approach to third party insurance in Europe; with it even being effectively mandatory in some countries. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Algar - Competition Secretary Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 funny you say that Nick, I am having a chat with underwriting colleagues today Don't forget my 10% for the idea :D I was going to PM you about it today, but you beat me to it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Pete Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 Looks like the statement from Chaucer has sorted the issue - Details on Blatchat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexander72 Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 Pete, the court award stands, the insurer has merely decided not to recover the funds from the defendant. I am discussing with reputable insurers a way of writing a policy that would cover such liability going forward. The risk is still there to third parties as a result of ones actions. Should have more to report in next few weeks. JAmes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Pete Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 What about the revise declaration wording suggested by Chaucer? Which appears to be the point they were trying to highlight by bringing this issue to the forefront. A strange way of doing it but hey ho! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 I think the re-worded dissclaimer is all that's needed. In my opinion we don't need insurance companys any more involved with trackdays than they already are. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexander72 Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 Yes the disclaimer has been redrafted and yes participants are effectively holding each other harmless but one's civil liability under Tort in the UK remains an exposure. It is intended to draft a policy that INCLUDES the reps and warranties that each participant is providing to all others AND provide a pot of money for legal, technical and defence costs should an unfortunate incident occur. Insuring of reps and warranties and "hold harmless" agreements is common place within specialist risk transfer markets. Until our legal partners have given opinion on the Chaucer case we cant comment much further but I believe there is a demand for such an insurance product sourced from FSA Authorised and Regulated Motorsport Specialist Brokers for what is a high risk and very specialist market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexander72 Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 plenty of room for the mankinis in the back Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 Yes the disclaimer has been redrafted and yes participants are effectively holding each other harmless but one's civil liability under Tort in the UK remains an exposure. It is intended to draft a policy that INCLUDES the reps and warranties that each participant is providing to all others AND provide a pot of money for legal, technical and defence costs should an unfortunate incident occur. Insuring of reps and warranties and "hold harmless" agreements is common place within specialist risk transfer markets. Until our legal partners have given opinion on the Chaucer case we cant comment much further but I believe there is a demand for such an insurance product sourced from FSA Authorised and Regulated Motorsport Specialist Brokers for what is a high risk and very specialist market. Well, I read that three times.. is it english? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.