FNRttC - could it be a club?

[gbs]

in the end I have to ask myself - was I negligent? 'B-52 Stu went off the rails approximately two minutes after I told the group 'don't take the piss' but I didn't actually say 'don't run over the catseyes' which, in all honesty, I might have done.

DLZQ, the answer to yr qn is NO. Thinking like that will lead to safety briefings at HPC that last until dawn!

In any mass activity with a minimum of regulation (travelling on the tube for example) we have to rely upon the common sense of others. FNRttC has no regulation other than the moral suasion that you as leader can exert. We have to recognise that accidents happpen on group rides, sometimes trivial sometimes not; in the jargon - low probability and potential high impact. Hence, l feel that a requirement to have insurance to provide for any damage to fellow riders is not unreasonable. Recognising the general wish for minimum interference at the level of the individual, refuseniks are free to find their individual cover and others can join CTC, BC or whatever organisation appeals.

 

[srw]

How much would it cost to get a reasonable level of insurance, covering intra group and 3rd party risks, for a year's worth of FNRttC for up to X riders on any given ride? Preferably without having to specify who those riders are at all.

A trip to an insurance broker would tell Simon that.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

a company perhaps, a co-operative, a band of sisters and brothers, a society, a club in all but name, each perhaps contributing voluntarily according to their means above a basic level of subscription of £12 for a year?

it had not occurred to me that others on the ride might not have 3rd party insurance. Nor until now had I considered that my own tactics on Reigate Hill, don't touch the brakes, drop like a stone, overtake on the right, might actually scare the wotsits out of others.

food for thought.

 

[gbs]

y own tactics on Reigate Hill, don't touch the brakes, drop like a stone, overtake on the right, might actually scare the wotsits out of others.

food for thought.

Greg, go as fast as you like on the outside.

The prats I mentioned in my earlier post passed on the inside, with no warning call, into a gap between me and the roadside of about 5 feet. There was plenty of room on the outside so I cannot imagine what was going through their minds at the time.

 

[PpPete]

What about effectively creating a club but without the word club in the title or any of the detail? My concern here being that clubs can readily be more about excluding than including and many people could be put off having a go if it were so described. It could just be called the FNRttC group insurance policy but just sit in the background.

To make life easier, the online registration idea has lots of advantages. Tim would be able to write his script to register as soon as it opens whilst he is still asleep after the previous ride. A clever person would be able to get all the names, mobiles and emergency contact numbers uplifted to your phone. A rider sheet can be printed off just before setting off to HPC, or Sloane Sq. Once registered the first time riders can have a rider number (avoiding the word member) which would fill in all their details for them. Certain names could be pre-selected requiring personal contact before confirming registration. It can make people tick the terms and conditions, confirming that the basics have been read. It can confirm the insurance details with options:

I have joined the FNRttc group insurance policy for the year

I would like to join the FNRttC insurance policy for this ride at a cost of £x

I am a member of the CTC, my membership number is

I am am a member of LCC, my membership number is

etc for all likely options

I have my own 3rd party insurance, details are

and if none of these can be provided, "I have no insurance and accept that I am undertaking this ride at my own risk, etc"

It could keep track of how many times a person has ridden, only allow a very limited number without having one insurance covering membership or another and tell that person how many such rides they have left. This last bit should in fact be a lie in that having registered the rider would unknowingly be covered by some slack in the group insurance which the rest of us would generously be covering. This would all be dependant on being able to arrange an annual insurance policy for the ride that is reasonable enough that we can thus cover it. I realise that I missed a detail here, it should have included "up to Y people in the year.

Obviously I don't know how to do any of this but am confident that it really is a simple job for the right person.

Seems eminently sensible to me.... maybe just add a waiver to be "signed" agreeing that the individual rider will not hold the organisers (Simon principally, but also TECs and wayfinders) liable for anything whatsoever...

I'm thinking along the lines of the audax entry form here - although the circmstances are admittedly somewhat different.

Also... thinking about TECs... when I trained as an unpaid instructor for cycling proficiency scheme (or rather our local council's version thereof - before they decided that it was more cost effective to pay a Bikeability provider)
I was told that the scheme's insurance covered us to inspect the kids bikes and report any defects - but under no circumstances were we undertake any maintenance or adjustment however simple. I'm thinking that if a TEC (unless holding some sort of paper that says he is a competent person - like a Cytech qualification?) fixes a riders bike, it opens up a whole minefield of potential liability beyond that of participation in a FNR

 

[Aperitif]

Pete! You...you don't mean...I'm....going...to get....put...away...for trying to...blow up....this bike?

 

[dellzeqq]

Actually, Geoff, if you can recall who they are I'd like to know. I've taken to telling people off and warning them not to do stuff again. Overtaking on the left is a particular bugbear.

 

[deckertim]

I've got a bit of a problem. The CTC's 5x5 rule is catching me out,

I just read the notes on the cover

"A CTC guideline is therefore that there should not be more than 5 non-members on any one ​

​

ride, nor should a non-member participate in a CTC ride more than 5 times."​

So it is not a rule, but a guideline. Does this change anything?

 

[dellzeqq]

I just read the notes on the cover

"A CTC guideline is therefore that there should not be more than 5 non-members on any one ​

​

ride, nor should a non-member participate in a CTC ride more than 5 times."​

So it is not a rule, but a guideline. Does this change anything?

I have taken advice on this, and having it placed on the factsheet gives it some effect.

Put it this way - if I was applying the guideline and, on one ride, seven non-members turned up then I would argue that a guideline is just a guideline. On the other hand.......having an average number of non-members in excess of 20 is outside of the guideline even if I manage to get a good half of them to join up eventually.

 

[PpPete]

Pete! You...you don't mean...I'm....going...to get....put...away...for trying to...blow up....this bike?

No, that be classed as mercy killing... you are emigrating to Switzerland aren't you?

 

[PpPete]

Actually, Geoff, if you can recall who they are I'd like to know. I've taken to telling people off and warning them not to do stuff again. Overtaking on the left is a particular bugbear.

Hands up - I'm guilty.
Mitigating circumstances: up hill, trying to get legs going again after cabin stop, wanting to go quicker (for once) than small group of riders who were all clustered on right hand side of road.
Sorreee!

 

[Bollo]

Hands up - I'm guilty.
Mitigating circumstances: up hill, trying to get legs going again after cabin stop, wanting to go quicker (for once) than small group of riders who were all clustered on right hand side of road.
Sorreee!

I found this on the last ride in particular. There were a number of occasions where I came across little groups either spread across the road or certainly taking enough of it to make any sort of safe pass difficult. I'm cool with that generally, but as I'm a little mono-paced up the hills it did become a problem when I was trying to maintain a cadence. Also I witnessed the odd occasion where motorists were held up without good cause because a group was either completely oblivious or unconcerned.

This segues into my personal safety gripe - observation! My commuter instincts have my head swivelling like an owl on speed, especially at the start. I don't expect everyone to share my levels of paranoia, but the odd glance back when changing road position or when you're having a chat and taking the lane would help smooth the flow, allow people past on the right side and reassure me no end. I think some of the problem is that the big group tends to give people a false sense of security and empowerment, causing all those little safety checks to be neglected.

Having said that, there's a difficult balance to strike between keeping safe and turning the ride into an overly regimented club run. 'Echelons to Bognor' would make a great Battle of Britain film title, but it's not what the FNR is about. I guess the trick is to educate newer or less experienced riders enough for them to ride responsibly while not frightening them off with an intimating list of rules and regulations.

 

[Aperitif]

...or even being an arse like me and falling foul of the Felinfoel - something like that anyway!

 

[dellzeqq]

Seems eminently sensible to me.... maybe just add a waiver to be "signed" agreeing that the individual rider will not hold the organisers (Simon principally, but also TECs and wayfinders) liable for anything whatsoever...

I'm thinking along the lines of the audax entry form here - although the circmstances are admittedly somewhat different.

I've been thinking through the admin thing.

Cost of affiliating the Club - (say) £75 annually
Subs from each and every rider £1 - which probably gives us £250 in a year. Everybody pays on their first ride of the year. Mercifully the first ride of the year is Southend, but you may see me struggling up Bread and Cheese...
Stick it in a moneybox and use as a float for sandwiches at Rochester or for the occasional taxi fare, or for inner tubes (pre-talced). So everybody is a member of the Club. Except that it's not called a Club. It's called The Friday Night Familiars. Or whatever. The Friday Night Fancy. The Friday Night Fandango and Flapdoodle. The Fridays (very rock and roll). I like The Fridays.

The basics would be revised

CTC/LCC/BC number or other 3rd party insurance.
If somebody doesn't have 3rd party I sell them the £12 affiliate thing before their second ride. The £12 just goes straight to CTC/LCC

The basics don't include a waiver, but, to be honest, I've always had my doubts about these. I'm sure that the courts would strike out the standard Events waiver within seconds if there was a sniff of negligence on the part of the organisers

running that off a spreadsheet would be scarcely more onerous than the present system.

Also... thinking about TECs... when I trained as an unpaid instructor for cycling proficiency scheme (or rather our local council's version thereof - before they decided that it was more cost effective to pay a Bikeability provider)
I was told that the scheme's insurance covered us to inspect the kids bikes and report any defects - but under no circumstances were we undertake any maintenance or adjustment however simple. I'm thinking that if a TEC (unless holding some sort of paper that says he is a competent person - like a Cytech qualification?) fixes a riders bike, it opens up a whole minefield of potential liability beyond that of participation in a FNR

All the TECs are experts. The standard of mechanical talent is way higher than the average branch of Evans, and the scope of work considerably smaller. I am, however, toying with the idea of registering all CTC members who TEC as Rides Leaders.

 

[gbs]

Hands up - I'm guilty.
Mitigating circumstances: up hill, trying to get legs going again after cabin stop, wanting to go quicker (for once) than small group of riders who were all clustered on right hand side of road.
Sorreee!

PP: No certainly not you; the location was down Reigate Hill immediately after Stu's crash.

PS not often am I overtaken going up hill except by young whippets.