ITTs, Group starts, liabilities?

[restlessshawn]

Interested in how this works, say you create a route and put it out there and decide on a group start on a certain date, are there potential liability concerns if something goes wrong? Rider gets injured, rider injures member of public, etc?

Is the principal since you are required to be self supported then the organiser has no duty of care over you? Seems like thin ice...or is everyone just hoping for the best and the position has not been tested yet? If I spanner myself on the Borders 350 next year* what happens if I decide I am going to sue Ray? (I wouldn't obviously but some bellend somewhere would want to)

I have an idea, turning it in to an actual proper event probably** won't happen, running it as an off road audax doesn't seem like it would work as the controls would be impossible. Really I'd like it to be a guerrilla style event, no fee, no timing, no support, no feed / water stops but I guess no one is going to give me insurance for an event like that.

* This is in no way a commitment!
**I do have someone to talk to about it

[Bearbonesnorm]

I shall return once I've had more time to gather my thoughts.

[restlessshawn]

The UK needs a monster gravel event, free or very cheap...especially since the Dirty Reiver is going up to £60

[Yorlin]

T d'Borders could get interesting soon anyway...

http://www.scotsman.com/business/compan ... -1-4565898

[atk]

Do you think you could run DR for less than £60 a pop given the scale, typical rider profile and maintain the event's (general) reputation (Gabes not included )?

[restlessshawn]

Do you think you could run DR for less than £60 a pop given the scale, typical rider profile and maintain the event's (general) reputation (Gabes not included )?

That's not the point really, there are those of us who would be happy with an 'event' with no frills, the lack of frills would be part of the event...like I'd rather do ride to the sun than any road sportive

Despite my complaints I'll probably still end up back at the Reiver next year.

I'm aware how costly even running a small event can be having been involved with the local CX gang running a race...I think we just broke even and that was because of a lot of free hard work and volunteers

[restlessshawn]

T d'Borders could get interesting soon anyway...

http://www.scotsman.com/business/compan ... -1-4565898

Never mind lynx, bring back the wolves I say

[Bearbonesnorm]

This really is a can of worms and there probably isn't a definitive answer to the multiple questions it raises but a few things to consider.

A disclaimer isn't worth the paper it's written on, especially if it states that the organiser accepts absolutely no responsibility. A disclaimer that states that the oganiser accepts certain responsibilities IF THEY WERE IN ANYWAY NEGLIGENT should carry more weight.

This brings us onto ... in order for someone to make a claim against you, they need to prove that you were negligent and that lead to their accident or whatever. In my mind, this is the 'sticky wicket' because a good lawyer on a good day might be able to actually do this but an average laywer on a bad day might not ... sadly, the law is not a level playingfield and good old common sense does not prevail.

Third party insurance is probably the most important. Setting up a 'club' and affiliating that club to a much larger organisation, then charging each rider a nominal fee to 'join' the club is one potential way to secure third party insurance. However, it may mean you adhering to certain rules or applying stipulations that you're not happy with, go against your personal ethos or just seem stupid / pointless / both.

Keeping an event as low key as possible can help, as can only opening it to certain groups ... basically people who understand what you're trying to do and to be honest - know what the score is. Obviously, doing this will likely lead to calls of 'elitest' and such but ... f*ck 'em.

It's all a bit like walking across a minefield on a tightrope. There will always be a risk (liability) involved and there's little you can do to safeguard against it unless you go completely legit which will add great expense / grief and may actually make a claim more likely?

BTW - Obviously I am not a lawyer, I have no legal training but I have been doing this sh!t for a while

[restlessshawn]

Hmmm that's what I feared to be honest

Even getting people to sign a useless disclaimer is maybe sort of an admission that you might have a duty of care towards them

I suppose under the club plan it basically just becomes a club run, though if something did happen not sure claiming 100 people went on just a normal Sunday spin for over 200km round a forest would sound kosher

Off out next week for a few days to finish reccying anyway even if it never becomes more than an invitation only Sunday run. There is a bothy at the 69 mile and 110 mile points which is handy as I'm not fit enough just now for the whole planned 132 miles in one shot.

[Single Speed George]

could just only advertise it on here I dont think we will take you to cort haha Postie Ritch might have some knowlage of this after his jenride and SSUK stuff they have been big events

[Bearbonesnorm]

I suppose under the club plan it basically just becomes a club run, though if something did happen not sure claiming 100 people went on just a normal Sunday spin for over 200km round a forest would sound kosher

The club route would still provide third party cover. An off-road Audax run via AUK could be one way round it.

One of the biggest problems are those unknown ... like when some bored public sector tw@t sat behind a desk suddenly decides to take an interest in what you're doing. Before too long, a whole group of similar tw@ts are on your back trying hard to make their world a happier / safer place ... did I say they were tw@ts?

[restlessshawn]

I sort of looked at audax but there's no way to validate someone has ridden the route as it twists and turns too much through forest and you could easily short cut chunks out. I don't care about this as yer only cheating yourself but it seemed fundamental to running an audax that the route had to be verifyable through controls.

Audax tends to mean lots of rules and I'm not big on rules

[whitestone]

Invariably the problem isn't with participants but with their relatives. I'm prepared to live with the consequences of my actions and since we don't have kids or any significant financial commitments then Cath probably is too. But if we had kids then removing my income from the household would be a big problem and she might be persuaded to pursue a claim.

[ianfitz]

We have a similar situation with our fell running club. liability around clubs runs and races.

Short version - we ended up becoming a LTD. company with the articles of association specifying what sorts of (daft) things we did. Joining strongly implies that 'members' understand the context and risks involved, and liaibility is limited to individuals and we have insurance.

to my mind it would be possible to use this model to have a 'british bikepacking club' and limit 'offical participation in events to members only. It needn't be an expensive membership

[Bearbonesnorm]

Invariably the problem isn't with participants but with their relatives.

That is very true Bob and a very good point, Certainly adds to the 'problems unknown'.

One thing seemingly often overlooked is that people are free to take out their own personal accident insurance - as they might if they were going skiing or whatever.

[psling]

From my limited experience I'd go along with a lot of what Stu says in his main post above.
Somebody trying to make a claim against an organiser of a ride would need to prove some sort of negligence leading to whatever incident occurred; equally, the organiser would need to show that they had taken sufficient steps to reduce the chances of an incident. You cannot account for every eventuality but you would need to show that you had taken actions to reduce the likelihood.
This could be in the form of holding some sort of relevant leadership qualification, having carried out a risk assessment of the route, having issued or held a briefing before the start, etc..
Third party insurance is usually as Stu says by way of affiliation to a body or club and each participant would be joining that club as part of the entry. Any other way would likely be cost prohibitive.
Claims can be brought against a club rather than the actual organiser though, a reason clubs look at becoming limited companies (otherwise you just claim against the wealthiest committee member/s!).
It can become more and more complex the more you worry about it to the point of not bothering but the reality is that as long as all reasonable precautions are taken to reduce the liklihood of an incident occurring then you're probably on firm ground.

[padonbike]

The UK needs a monster gravel event, free or very cheap...especially since the Dirty Reiver is going up to £60

After 2 years, I'll be doing a 200km Audax in that area for 1/6 of the price!

[restlessshawn]

After 2 years, I'll be doing a 200km Audax in that area for 1/6 of the price!

off road?

[padonbike]

Keeping an event as low key as possible can help, as can only opening it to certain groups ... basically people who understand what you're trying to do and to be honest - know what the score is. Obviously, doing this will likely lead to calls of 'elitest' and such but ... f*ck 'em.

This is the current model for the great events in the UK at the moment: BB, CL, HT, YD etc. Long may it continue.
Two weeks ago I bailed in the Cairngorms in what I considered where conditions that I wasn't correctly prepared for and I had no desire to be a liability to myself or anyone else - mountain rescue and certainly NOT the guy who had organised it!
Couldn't agree more with Stuart's last sentence.
Fell running and bikepacking "races" continue to thrive, but it sometimes feels like these sports are just one big, malicious claim away from ruin.

[GregMay]

Fell running has already had to deal with claims. It's also dealt with several deaths. As has climbing and most other mature mountain sports. I've had friends die both climbing and cycling. At no point would their direct family have any inclination to seek blame other than where it was - gravity. I find the assumption that "relatives" are the issue insulting to anyone I am related to. This issue isn't relatives, it's people. People will be dicks no matter their relation to anyone who becomes injured or killed.

FWIW, this whole issue is one of the main reason i infrequently ride with people I neither know, nor trust, not to turn a crash into a cash cow. I've walked away from group rides/runs in the past when people have asked who's insurance the days is being covered by. As with Ian, our fell running club deals with what we do in a similar manner to DPR. Only due to the numbers, and the variable levels of members taking on local terrain at... poor times of the year.

Take responsibility for yourself. Let others know that you're doing so. Or don't partake.

Elitist, sure, why not. Frankly, I don't care who is covering an event I've entered. If I'm partaking, I'm doing so of my own free will. I will assume the liability. If I'm thick, or unlucky, enough to get myself into trouble as someone has not done their job properly I'll chalk it up to life experience and adapt. Or be dead, and not care too much.

Now to launch my annual drunken chainsaw juggling ITT. Come one, come all, go home will less than you came with!

[SixPotBelly]

One thing seemingly often overlooked is that people are free to take out their own personal accident insurance - as they might if they were going skiing or whatever.

I gather that, in part, is what gives rise to the potential liabilities. Participant has life changing accident, and claims on their insurance. Insurance company has to pay up. Insurance company then seeks to recover that cost by suing someone..

[Bearbonesnorm]

I find the assumption that "relatives" are the issue insulting to anyone I am related to. This issue isn't relatives, it's people. People will be dicks no matter their relation to anyone who becomes injured or killed.

I think Bob's point still stands Greg ... yes, it is people but relatives are people. The only people likely to try and claim in the event of a death / accident are the relatives of those killed or injured and as we know - they are people. I certainly don't think Bob (or myself) was implying that the relatives of bikepackers, fell runners or climbers are in anyway more likely to try and claim than anyone else

Take responsibility for yourself. Let others know that you're doing so. Or don't partake.

Elitist, sure, why not. Frankly, I don't care who is covering an event I've entered. If I'm partaking, I'm doing so of my own free will. I will assume the liability. If I'm thick, or unlucky, enough to get myself into trouble as someone has not done their job properly I'll chalk it up to life experience and adapt. Or be dead, and not care too much.

If even just a few more folk held this belief, we would all live in a far better place than we do.

[ZeroDarkBivi]

It is entirely understandable that events being run by commercial organisations for profit should comply with H&S law, and the requirements to reduce risk to As Low as Reasonably Practical. The tricky bit is, this can only ever be tested in a court, hence the need for comprehensive Risk Assessments and evidence of effective mitigations, etc.

Is it reasonable to expect the same requirement of an individual organising a free event for the benefit of those who wish to partake? Again, I expect there is no definitive answer, and this would have to be determined by the relevant courts, after a claim has been made. There is probably some legal precedent out there, but I am not familiar with this area.

[Bearbonesnorm]

As an aside ... has anyone unfortunate enough to have suffered any H&S bollox of late, noticed how the official stance now seems to be that 'accidents don't happen'? I was given this example by someone in an offical capacity:

'Imagine you're sat at your computer and you knock your tea over onto your computer and ruin it. That 'accident' wasn't an accident - oh no, the reason it happened was that whatever you were doing at your computer, was something you didn't want to be doing and to prevent you from having to continue carrying out this unpleasant task, your subconscious decided to knock your brew over and destroy your £1000 computer' ..... really.

[sean_iow]

Interesting topic, just to take it further.... When I ride with my mates I sometimes pre-plan the route and print it out. If during one of these rides there was an accident and someone died then I wouldn't expect their relatives to take any action against me, but, in their state or grief and say faced with the prospect of losing their home as the breadwinner was no longer around I can imaging an ambulance chasing lawyer being able to persuade them that is must be 'someone's' fault. Could that be me? I chose and planned the route so am I responsible? And what if the route had a cheeky trail on it?

For balance, to show that people do still take responsibility for their own actions, I'm not currently riding with my usual riding buddy as he fractured his jaw when he fell off his bike at an organised MTB event. At no point has he even thought about it being anyone's fault but his.