Group Rides & Insurance

[Bromptonaut]

I am a member of the Bike User Group at my place of work, a large government department. As well sorting out bunfights with facilities over parking and lockers we're keen to get some social activity going. Planned so far is a team entering L2B (me leading) and a social ride in london, perhaps using the hire bikes.

Now I don't think cycling's a risky activity but a quick risk assessment for accidents has consequences including death and serious injury. My own thinking is that I'd not want the risk, however remote, of being personally pursued for the lifetime earnings of a promising lawyer so we should be taking out organisers insurance probably via affiliation to the CTC. Others, amongst them the organisation's recreational association to whom we might look to fund the affiliation fee, are asking if insurance is strictly necessary.

I've seen ColinJ's thread and don't have his confidence in the lasting effects of a disclaimer.

What do others who lead rides do?

 

[mark barker]

If you are a member of British Cycling you'll have ride leader insurance included with your membership.... Not sure if the CTC offer the same?

 

[Bromptonaut]

If you are a member of British Cycling you'll have ride leader insurance included with your membership.... Not sure if the CTC offer the same?

I'm a CTC member as an individual and my impression, without looking very hard, is that their cover does not include leading except perhaps in the context of CTC member rides. Others asked to lead may not be members of CTC (or BC/London Cyclists who are the other major club insurer providers).

 

[dellzeqq]

Well, I may be uniquely, and depressingly able to answer this one, having expended about sixty phone calls trying to get to the bottom of this.

1. Don't be negligent. That sounds like a stupid thing to say, but you'll take the point. It's the first thing to think through
2. Claims hunt money, and if you were negligent and somebody suffered a loss, then you'd expect people to go for your insurance policy. Actually you'd welcome it, because the last thing you'd want is for somebody to suffer damage because of your negligence you'd want them to be compensated in some way.
3. Get yourself a structure that is insurable. The cheapest way to do this is via the CTC affiliation scheme unless you can have your rides adopted by the LCC, and for that they really have to be rides in London. Matt Mallinder at the LCC is the person to talk to if you need advice on that.
4. You're absolutely right about the helper thing. It's a ****ing minefield. Do not go for the CTC's organisers insurance. The only solution, in my view, is to seek confirmation that the helpers are covered by their own 3rd party insurance. Which means that every helper (and potential helper) has to have third party insurance. The cheapest way to do this is (again) via the CTC affiliate thingy.
5. Don't touch BC. Their policy is, in my inexpert view, a steaming pile of hornswoggling doodah. Do the words Code of Best Practice give your bowels a shivery feeling? They should. And it costs individuals £24 as opposed to £12 with the CTC

He's not going to thank me for telling you this, but Rob Fuller at the CTC is very helpful. Might I ask that you preface any correspondence with an apology from yours truly?

(later edit) sorry - I should have said. Recoup the affiliation fee by taking a quid off all your members. You might even make a small profit. This post has been conveyed to Cycle Chat from my yacht, moored somewhere off St. Lucia.

My number is 07776 210 731 if you want to chat about it.

 

[Bromptonaut]

Simon,

Thanks very much for that advice; you were on the list of people I was tempted to pm about this. There's a complication regarding charging as it's a workplace BUG but I'm hopeful that either the employer or, now I've got the material to make a case with, the recreational association will stump up the affilliation fee. Any ride leaders will be members of the BUG and registered with CTC as such but I guess I'd need to watch the 5/5 thing for those who bring guests.

 

[monkeypony]

I am a member of the Bike User Group at my place of work, a large government department. As well sorting out bunfights with facilities over parking and lockers we're keen to get some social activity going. Planned so far is a team entering L2B (me leading) and a social ride in london, perhaps using the hire bikes.

Now I don't think cycling's a risky activity but a quick risk assessment for accidents has consequences including death and serious injury. My own thinking is that I'd not want the risk, however remote, of being personally pursued for the lifetime earnings of a promising lawyer so we should be taking out organisers insurance probably via affiliation to the CTC. Others, amongst them the organisation's recreational association to whom we might look to fund the affiliation fee, are asking if insurance is strictly necessary.

I've seen ColinJ's thread and don't have his confidence in the lasting effects of a disclaimer.

What do others who lead rides do?

You're ****ing kidding.

Is there no such thing as being responsible for your own actions anymore?

Stop the world, I want to get off........

 

[dellzeqq]

to be honest I'd make this case to your fellow BUG members. Going out without 3rd party insurance is a risk that's cheap to mitigate. The CTC makes a sizeable profit on your £12, but the menace of counterclaims is such that it's so well worth having.

I didn't really feel able to press full CTC membership on all the FNRttCers because £37 is a lot of money, but I have no problem at all beating them up for twelve quid when I know it's really in their interest to spend the dough.

If you want to go for event insurance (and this may leave your helpers exposed) then you might try Towergate. I think this would only work with bigger rides. The going rate is, I understand, about 50p a rider.

And, on Monday, it's a meeting with the Martlets' insurers. Who are insisting on helmets. *******++++++++%%%^^^********

 

[Bromptonaut]

Further inquiries have been made and it seems the recreational association are themselves insured under the auspices of the Civil Service Sports Council. To be honest I thought they would be but I had an email earlier today saying that (the RA) does not have any insurance for running events. Most of our events are run without.

Struck me as odd that they organised Five a Side and suchlike without but one assumes at first that the elected officials are well informed!!

Helmets may however be an issue now (and I ain't wearing one).

 

[italiafirenze]

Our club has it written into the constitution that no club ride has any leader. Every-one must be 3rd party insured and all riders are responsible for their own bike and their own navigation. It is up to each individual to decide if the route is one they can safely take.

This was due to somebody in wales being sued by the police after leading a group ride down a road with some ice. Or something like that.

 

[Bromptonaut]

Our club has it written into the constitution that no club ride has any leader. Every-one must be 3rd party insured and all riders are responsible for their own bike and their own navigation. It is up to each individual to decide if the route is one they can safely take.

This was due to somebody in wales being sued by the police after leading a group ride down a road with some ice. Or something like that.

Italia,

You may like to read the CTC guidance on 'Law & Liability for Cycling Events' which suggests such measures may not achieve the desired end.

http://www.ctc.org.uk/resources/Go_Biking_with_CTC/LawandLiabilityforCycleActivityProviders.pdf

 

[Bromptonaut]

Dell,

I note you also require CTC membership for FNRttC, except for five guest places. My reading of the affiliation thing is that provided all riders are members of the group, in your case The Fridays, with no breach of the 5/5 provision then you're covered as leader. Is the proof of CTC memebershio thing to make sure you've got any cross cover between riders in place on one model or have I missed something about members of affiliated orgs also having to be (at least at the £12 cut rate) members of the CTC?

TIA

Simon

 

[italiafirenze]

Italia,

You may like to read the CTC guidance on 'Law & Liability for Cycling Events' which suggests such measures may not achieve the desired end.

http://www.ctc.org.u...tyProviders.pdf

I'm not sure I can quite fathom all that. I do not hold any position of any responsibility anywhere anyway, and that's how I like it.

It did feel like it was a panic thing when they introduced it at the AGM, and of course all these disclaimers and what not cannot protect anyone against negligence, which is the only thing you can really be in trouble for.

 

[dellzeqq]

I'm not sure I can quite fathom all that. I do not hold any position of any responsibility anywhere anyway, and that's how I like it.

It did feel like it was a panic thing when they introduced it at the AGM, and of course all these disclaimers and what not cannot protect anyone against negligence, which is the only thing you can really be in trouble for.

the time to fathom is now. If you lead a ride, and somebody comes to grief then they or their relatives may well look for recompense - at which point you have to defend yourself against the charge of negligence. Leading a ride is a position of responsibility, whether you choose to give yourself a title or not.

here's the extract from Bromptonaut's link

5.2 Expectations of APs.​

Courts have shown that they will consistently make judgements based on the skill, knowledge, experience of claimant and organisation. Paid professionals and large organisations have the highest expectations. They cannot claim ignorance or lack of resources to provide good policies and practice.​

At the other end of the spectrum children and inexperienced adults are not expected to be able to make good judgements on safety issues and the “professionals” are expected to bear the greater brunt of responsibility.​

For cycling there is an important middle ground. Where do experienced but unpaid volunteers fall? Are they expected to be at the professional end of the spectrum, or will a court decide they cannot be negligent if they are not being paid.​

What if everyone in a group is equally experienced?​

This has been discussed extensively within cycling but as and as there is little case law in our sector we have to look at parallel activities and take advice from legal advisors and insurers.​

The feedback we have suggests:​

The general common sense approach the Courts take is that an experienced but unpaid volunteer would be expected to act the same way as any paid person of his/her particular experience and expertise. Where the activity was part of a structured programme provided by a national or local body such as a sports club or scout group the expectation is on the governing body to provide structures and codes of conduct which the AP should adhere to.​

​

Now, if I do something stupid, and somebody suffers as a result, the judge is likely to say 'Mr. Legg, you've been leading these rides for five years, and you should have known better'. I don't think you can argue with that. And if I lead a ride down a road with ice then there's a procedure in place. If somebody had come off on Old Stock Lane last month, then I would at least have been able to say that a) I knew the road sufficiently well to realise that there would be ice and b) I'd told the riders immediately before we went down the road and c) I restricted the speed to about nine miles an hour. As opposed to club runs I've been on when people have piled down a hill and the first person has shouted 'ice' as he hits it at 30mph.

My view is that you shouldn't rely on your own judgement, but pull in any advice you can get from the CTC - which I've done, and will do again.

Setting aside all this legal mullarkey, the real, human duty of somebody leading a ride is to reduce risk. Forget insurance and fighting off claims - just think about what you do, take advice and reduce the risk as best you can.

 

[dellzeqq]

Dell,

I note you also require CTC membership for FNRttC, except for five guest places. My reading of the affiliation thing is that provided all riders are members of the group, in your case The Fridays, with no breach of the 5/5 provision then you're covered as leader. Is the proof of CTC memebershio thing to make sure you've got any cross cover between riders in place on one model or have I missed something about members of affiliated orgs also having to be (at least at the £12 cut rate) members of the CTC?

TIA

Simon

members of affiliated clubs who pay their twelve quid to become affiliated members have 3rd party. I'm not taking anybody who doesn't have third party. So, if I read you right, yes...

(and, actually, riding out without 3rd party is a bit daft and you'll probably make some or all of it back with the discounts at shops - so I haven't the slightest qualm about taking the 'all 3rd party' line')

The troubling thing is that LCC insurance doesn't line up with the CTC insurance (despite the two having both broker and underwriter in common) and BC insurance lines up with nothing at all.

http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/membership/article/memst-Insurance-For-Clubs

 

[ColinJ]

I've seen ColinJ's thread and don't have his confidence in the lasting effects of a disclaimer.

What I actually wrote was...

The first thing to say is that there might be some legal ramifications if someone gets hurt on a ride organised by you. I don't know what the legal situation is if no money changes hands. I'd like to think that the law is sensible enough to treat a forum ride the same as a bunch of mates meeting up for a ride, but perhaps a ride organiser has some legal responsibility for the safety of the other riders. I worried about it the first few times, and then stopped worrying.

If it really bothers you, then perhaps it would be better to leave ride organisation to someone else. If it worries you slightly, then include a disclaimer at the beginning of the first post of each ride thread that you start. "It is your responsibility to make sure that your bicycle is in safe working order. Riding in a group is a potentially hazardous activity and you recognise this and accept the risk of doing so. By taking part in this ride you agree that you will not take legal action against the ride organiser or other riders if an accident occurs on the ride." That kind of thing. It might not stand up in court, but it might give you some peace of mind!

I don't want to live in a world where I'm afraid to do something because I might be sued. If a forum member sues me because they lose control on a steep descent or collide with somebody/something on one of my rides then shame on them!

There are enough charges on my house that they wouldn't get much if they forced its sale. I don't have any savings and my possessions are worth far less than £5k. I couldn't even afford to pay their legal expenses so if anybody is stupid enough to try it - go for it! I'd go bankrupt and that's that.

Some of you have a lot more to lose, so either jump through the hoops to protect yourself or don't organise anything!