Shakey suing MSV / BSB
Discussion
Dont have an opinion of the rights and wrongs of the case but did the incident force his retirement from racing?
Is there some sort of insurance payout he took providing he stopped racing?
I know foggy couldnt wait to stop once he injured himself . Same with Doohan.
Scott Russell got a payout and stopped which he actually spoke about.
Is there some sort of insurance payout he took providing he stopped racing?
I know foggy couldnt wait to stop once he injured himself . Same with Doohan.
Scott Russell got a payout and stopped which he actually spoke about.
I'm sure there must be some shared risk on track days. It's shakey's responsibility not to crash, and the circuits responsibility to provide safety barriers if he does.
If Shakey doesn't crash then he never gets injured, so the majority of the responsibility must surely be his? Was his speed excessive for that corner?
The circuit would then argue that it provided the necessary barriers?
I'm only guessing and I suppose, while I don't like him taking it to court, that the court should ultimately decide?
Either that, or, to save costs, there'll be a reduced payout with no liability admitted on the track/ organisers behalf?
If Shakey doesn't crash then he never gets injured, so the majority of the responsibility must surely be his? Was his speed excessive for that corner?
The circuit would then argue that it provided the necessary barriers?
I'm only guessing and I suppose, while I don't like him taking it to court, that the court should ultimately decide?
Either that, or, to save costs, there'll be a reduced payout with no liability admitted on the track/ organisers behalf?
richhead said:
so a grammer nazi to add to your skills, well done, was only trying to say, racing will never be or should be safe, thats why people do it, take it you have never raced.
Calling someone a Nazi for a bit of grammatical pedantry’s a stretch.The Nazis invaded most of Europe and murdered six million Jews. It’s pretty unpleasant to accuse someone of being like them for picking up an idiot’s use of poor English.
Ken_Code said:
richhead said:
so a grammer nazi to add to your skills, well done, was only trying to say, racing will never be or should be safe, thats why people do it, take it you have never raced.
Calling someone a Nazi for a bit of grammatical pedantry’s a stretch.The Nazis invaded most of Europe and murdered six million Jews. It’s pretty unpleasant to accuse someone of being like them for picking up an idiot’s use of poor English.
Rockatansky said:
I heard some speculation that this action is being taken by his insurers to try and recover some of what they paid him out.
Sounds more plausible to me than him taking the action but the potential ramifications still remain.
Slightly off-topic but I can't imagine just how eye watering the premiums must be for a policy that would pay out £1m (or more) to a professional motorcycle racer for being injured, albeit seriously enough to end his career, in the course of his profession. I bet it's a good few quid!Sounds more plausible to me than him taking the action but the potential ramifications still remain.
alfaracer85 said:
Interesting to see this in the 'mainstream' media, I'd wrongly assumed it was common knowledge. I have a tenuous connection to someone involved, for obvious reasons I'm not going to be specific, but I've known of the case a fair while, I'd guess a few months after the accident but I can't really remember now.
To correct a couple of things I've seen a few times :
The case hasn't just started, as I said it's been in motion a fair while. I'd guess the media are only reporting it now as it's progressing to court and into public knowledge.
I don't know Shane and don't think I've ever met him, but from what I'm told the intention isn't to damage the trackday/race scene with extra legislation and cost. Obviously with any activity, a minimum safety standard has to be met, Shane and his solicitors don't feel it was and it's up to the courts to decide. For the same reason a pile of broken up concrete isn't an effective crash barrier, maybe that area of that circuit does require an air fence? There's has to be a minimum standard, the intention isn't to have the TT circuit lined with bouncy castles, far from it.
All that said, as someone who races (badly) and crashes (brilliantly), would I have sued? Probably not, unless I felt my injuries had been worsened by negligence beyond my control.
Fair enough. It might not be his intention of course, but a case like this will inevitably either lead to cancellation or absolutely prohibitive safety expectations. To correct a couple of things I've seen a few times :
The case hasn't just started, as I said it's been in motion a fair while. I'd guess the media are only reporting it now as it's progressing to court and into public knowledge.
I don't know Shane and don't think I've ever met him, but from what I'm told the intention isn't to damage the trackday/race scene with extra legislation and cost. Obviously with any activity, a minimum safety standard has to be met, Shane and his solicitors don't feel it was and it's up to the courts to decide. For the same reason a pile of broken up concrete isn't an effective crash barrier, maybe that area of that circuit does require an air fence? There's has to be a minimum standard, the intention isn't to have the TT circuit lined with bouncy castles, far from it.
All that said, as someone who races (badly) and crashes (brilliantly), would I have sued? Probably not, unless I felt my injuries had been worsened by negligence beyond my control.
I don’t know the man, in fact I know very little about him but while his intention might be of a noble sort anyone with any sense of realism can foresee the damage it will do…
PorkInsider said:
Slightly off-topic but I can't imagine just how eye watering the premiums must be for a policy that would pay out £1m (or more) to a professional motorcycle racer for being injured, albeit seriously enough to end his career, in the course of his profession. I bet it's a good few quid!
Injure someone seriously enough in a car accident and you could easily end up on the wrong end of a 7 figure claim. Think of someone on £50k a year with 20 years of career ahead of them who can no longer work.
I'd be amazed a claim from a championship winning professional bike racer following a career ending injury would *only* be £1m.
Motorcycle racers have a high chance of injury so the premiums are likely to be high due to the chance rather than value of a claim.
nordboy said:
I'm sure there must be some shared risk on track days. It's shakey's responsibility not to crash, and the circuits responsibility to provide safety barriers if he does.
Snipped. Wasn't there a case some years back where one person on a track day successfully sued another participant?
I don't imagine we'll get to know the fine details, even after the resolution but the organisers have to provide a safe enviroment, within what is possible and proportianate.
They don't always get it right, look at the 2020 Austrian motogp for an example. We were lucky there not to have one or more riders killed, and the circuit very quickly made changes. Could/should they have forseen the potential for a crash there? Possibly. Does the changes they made mean that motorsports or trackdays are unaffordable at that circuit, or are those alterations only now in place for the biggest events?
Altitude said:
Snipped.
Wasn't there a case some years back where one person on a track day successfully sued another participant?
I don't imagine we'll get to know the fine details, even after the resolution but the organisers have to provide a safe enviroment, within what is possible and proportianate.
They don't always get it right, look at the 2020 Austrian motogp for an example. We were lucky there not to have one or more riders killed, and the circuit very quickly made changes. Could/should they have forseen the potential for a crash there? Possibly. Does the changes they made mean that motorsports or trackdays are unaffordable at that circuit, or are those alterations only now in place for the biggest events?
They changed the shape of the track at the Red Bull Ring, so it's like that all the time/for everyone. Wasn't there a case some years back where one person on a track day successfully sued another participant?
I don't imagine we'll get to know the fine details, even after the resolution but the organisers have to provide a safe enviroment, within what is possible and proportianate.
They don't always get it right, look at the 2020 Austrian motogp for an example. We were lucky there not to have one or more riders killed, and the circuit very quickly made changes. Could/should they have forseen the potential for a crash there? Possibly. Does the changes they made mean that motorsports or trackdays are unaffordable at that circuit, or are those alterations only now in place for the biggest events?
Forester1965 said:
PorkInsider said:
Slightly off-topic but I can't imagine just how eye watering the premiums must be for a policy that would pay out £1m (or more) to a professional motorcycle racer for being injured, albeit seriously enough to end his career, in the course of his profession. I bet it's a good few quid!
Injure someone seriously enough in a car accident and you could easily end up on the wrong end of a 7 figure claim. Think of someone on £50k a year with 20 years of career ahead of them who can no longer work.
I'd be amazed a claim from a championship winning professional bike racer following a career ending injury would *only* be £1m.
Motorcycle racers have a high chance of injury so the premiums are likely to be high due to the chance rather than value of a claim.
Zarco said:
They changed the shape of the track at the Red Bull Ring, so it's like that all the time/for everyone.
I think there was also an argument that bikes taking air off each other contributed to this by creating a new type of crash when the overtaker pulls back across and takes air off the wings of the bike being overtaken, I guess there was always some impact if you cut back across, but in this case it caused load to suddenly leave the front of the bike just as they had to brake very hard. I think I recall this anyway.Hungrymc said:
Zarco said:
They changed the shape of the track at the Red Bull Ring, so it's like that all the time/for everyone.
I think there was also an argument that bikes taking air off each other contributed to this by creating a new type of crash when the overtaker pulls back across and takes air off the wings of the bike being overtaken, I guess there was always some impact if you cut back across, but in this case it caused load to suddenly leave the front of the bike just as they had to brake very hard. I think I recall this anyway.Forester1965 said:
PorkInsider said:
Slightly off-topic but I can't imagine just how eye watering the premiums must be for a policy that would pay out £1m (or more) to a professional motorcycle racer for being injured, albeit seriously enough to end his career, in the course of his profession. I bet it's a good few quid!
Injure someone seriously enough in a car accident and you could easily end up on the wrong end of a 7 figure claim. Think of someone on £50k a year with 20 years of career ahead of them who can no longer work.
Forester1965 said:
I'd be amazed a claim from a championship winning professional bike racer following a career ending injury would *only* be £1m.
It depends on how much he's willing to stump up in premiums for his own personal injury/loss of earnings insurance. That was the whole point of my post.Forester1965 said:
Motorcycle racers have a high chance of injury so the premiums are likely to be high due to the chance rather than value of a claim.
Yes, we know. Hence the discussion about the sort of premiums payable. Edited by PorkInsider on Monday 20th May 08:40
You made a point about how high the premiums must be to cover £1m in damage.
Most mundane motor policies regularly pay out amounts well over that. Most employers' liability policies cover 10x that for a few hundred £ a year.
The premium would be high for a motor racer due to the high risk of payout rather than focused on value of one.
Not really a hill to die on.
Most mundane motor policies regularly pay out amounts well over that. Most employers' liability policies cover 10x that for a few hundred £ a year.
The premium would be high for a motor racer due to the high risk of payout rather than focused on value of one.
Not really a hill to die on.
Forester1965 said:
You made a point about how high the premiums must be to cover £1m in damage.
Most mundane motor policies regularly pay out amounts well over that. Most employers' liability policies cover 10x that for a few hundred £ a year.
The premium would be high for a motor racer due to the high risk of payout rather than focused on value of one.
Not really a hill to die on.
We are talking about someone insuring himself for career ending injury/loss of earnings when being a professional in a high-risk sport.Most mundane motor policies regularly pay out amounts well over that. Most employers' liability policies cover 10x that for a few hundred £ a year.
The premium would be high for a motor racer due to the high risk of payout rather than focused on value of one.
Not really a hill to die on.
Nothing to do with motor insurance or the potential 3d party liabilities for those policies.
You seem to have missed the original premise for my question, which was that Byrne's own personal insurers are alleged to be pursuing this action to recover some of their loss. This isn't a discussion about 3rd party insurance in any way.
Rockatansky said:
I heard some speculation that this action is being taken by his insurers to try and recover some of what they paid him out.
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff