Claim from a track day

[Jobbo]

agtlaw said:

I repeat - negligence cannot be disclaimed.

Except in cases where it was, successfully, such as Buckpitt v. Oates.

[agtlaw]

Jobbo said:

Except in cases where it was, successfully, such as Buckpitt v. Oates.

Good luck applying that to anyone but a minor.

[GreigM]

Maybe the solution is to prevent anyone with insurance from attending track days?

[QBee]

GreigM said:

Maybe the solution is to prevent anyone with insurance from attending track days?

Nothing to stop a wealthy owner of a wrecked McLaren from suing.......and before you say don't be silly, there was one on a track day I did at MSV's Bedford Autodrome

[Elliott_3R]

I've been on a track day at Silverstone with Nick Mason's 250 GTO on circuit... imagine hitting that!

Unfortunately, due to financial circumstances, Owen decided to represent himself, which perhaps was a mistake.

[GreigM]

QBee said:

GreigM said:

Maybe the solution is to prevent anyone with insurance from attending track days?

Nothing to stop a wealthy owner of a wrecked McLaren from suing.......and before you say don't be silly, there was one on a track day I did at MSV's Bedford Autodrome

I was being somewhat facetious, but the point stands (kind of) that the costs here were probably amplified by a factor of 10 by the involvement of a 3rd party on a trackday who's only interest is profit.

Also had he not been insured, perhaps the caterham driver would have been driving within the limits of his car/ability and kept it on track and prevent the chain of events which led to the crash.

[Mr E]

newestie said:

What would it take for trackday attendees to have the same legal protection as someone in a race?

Out of interest, if exactly the same thing had occurred in a race, why could a similar claim not be made?

[anonymous-user]

Some points to bear in mind:-

(1) There is a contract between each driver and the track operator, but no contract between drivers.

(2) Therefore, liability as between drivers is governed by ordinary common law principles as to duty of care and negligence. Negligence is falling below the standard of a reasonable driver in the circumstances.

(3) It is never possible to disclaim liability for personal injury or death.

(4) Liability for damage to property can be limited and excluded in some circumstances by contract, but there is here no relevant contract. The agreement with the track operator is about the liability of the operator.

(5) We don't have the full facts of the accident. The Court did.

(6) As agtlaw says, this case does not set a precedent.

[edh]

and 7)

Elliott_3R said:

Unfortunately, due to financial circumstances, Owen decided to represent himself, which perhaps was a mistake.

[Dakkon]

whipround said:

Neither MSV nor any other Relevant Person shall be liable for any loss, damage, claims, costs, expenses, injury or demands suffered directly or indirectly by
me as a consequence of my attendance at or participation in this Activity provided that nothing in this form shall exclude any Relevant Person’s liability for
personal injury or death caused by its negligence. I shall reimburse MSV and other Relevant Persons against any loss or liability suffered by them as a result
of my error, default, act or omission.


I shall reimburse MSV and other Relevant Persons against any loss or liability suffered by them as a result
of my error, default, act or omission.

Has been sneaked in - imvho. Basically if I make a mistake I am liable for it. No more MSV for me.

Yup, same here, will not use them ever again now.

[Screacher]

whipround said:

I shall reimburse MSV and other Relevant Persons against any loss or liability suffered by them as a result
of my error, default, act or omission.

Has been sneaked in - imvho. Basically if I make a mistake I am liable for it. No more MSV for me.

Is that for an event organised by MSV or for all TDs run on their circuits?

[AshVX220]

I have a few thoughts.
I always insure my car on track. The only reason is that because of the fact she's plastic, any shunt, no matter how small, has the potential to write her off. Which I don't want and can't afford. Kissing goodbye to £7k's worth of motor is not something I'm prepared to risk. So banning people with insurance is not a good idea, in my view of course.

Second, if we as enthusiasts want to do anything about this becoming more common, then the first thing and most obvious thing is to boycott the insurer.

If isnurance becomes a requirement to cover this eventuality, the costs will go up. As soon as it becomes a standard requirement more companies will offer it and premiums will rise, as they know we have no choice but to insure if we want to attend track days.

I'm hoping (though unfortunate for the OP's mate), that there was in the footage something which clearly shows that he could have avoided the accident, waved yellows of something.

Finally, when I go on track, I'm not trying to beat lap times, I'm not trying to be "last of the late brakers", I don't use second gear and I change up with 500 revs to spare. For me it's having fun, finding the line, feeling my cars grip in teh corners and not much else. I always keep a very close eye on the mirrors as I know I'm not the fastest out there. If people want to be on the ragged edge constantly on a track day, then for the money that some of the cars are worth, they should just race and leave the track days to the keen novices and enthusiasts.

All IMHO of course.

[QBee]

GreigM said:

QBee said:

GreigM said:

Maybe the solution is to prevent anyone with insurance from attending track days?

Nothing to stop a wealthy owner of a wrecked McLaren from suing.......and before you say don't be silly, there was one on a track day I did at MSV's Bedford Autodrome

I was being somewhat facetious, but the point stands (kind of) that the costs here were probably amplified by a factor of 10 by the involvement of a 3rd party on a trackday who's only interest is profit.

Also had he not been insured, perhaps the caterham driver would have been driving within the limits of his car/ability and kept it on track and prevent the chain of events which led to the crash.

I am insured and drive no differently to if I weren't. I have to pay the first £1000 of any claim. I too have done a lift off oversteer spin when the car in front had a spin. I swore I would never do that, but you get distracted. I didn't hit him, but we both breathed a sigh of relief

[JayK12]

Dakkon said:

whipround said:

Neither MSV nor any other Relevant Person shall be liable for any loss, damage, claims, costs, expenses, injury or demands suffered directly or indirectly by
me as a consequence of my attendance at or participation in this Activity provided that nothing in this form shall exclude any Relevant Person’s liability for
personal injury or death caused by its negligence. I shall reimburse MSV and other Relevant Persons against any loss or liability suffered by them as a result
of my error, default, act or omission.


I shall reimburse MSV and other Relevant Persons against any loss or liability suffered by them as a result
of my error, default, act or omission.

Has been sneaked in - imvho. Basically if I make a mistake I am liable for it. No more MSV for me.

Yup, same here, will not use them ever again now.

Same here, was going to take my brother to a Novice day at Snett, myself, my brother, and my track day friends will not be using MSV any longer.

[JayK12]

LBduck said:

Surely we need to know who the track day insurer is and avoid them like the plague. This is not the conduct of a company looking out for our interests.

Chaucer Insurance

www.chaucer-insurance.co.uk

[Herman Toothrot]

Never been on an MSV days, what do they say in the briefing? MSE and Bookatrack state clearly in the briefing you cannot claim from anyone else if an accident happens, if you are not happy with that don't go on track.

[selym]

Well, I have toyed with the idea of partaking in a trackday but with the judicial decision against the OPs friend reverberating through my brain, I wont now.

I'd imagine this would make a lot of track day virgins think at least twice.

[FlyingTrotter]

Folks as others who appear to also have some knowledge of English Law have indicated this isn't anything new or revelatory

The chances of a claim being brought as a result of damage caused by car on car contact is low but it is a risk of undertaking a track day

If this thread indicates anything it's the apparent lack of awareness of the risks being taken when folk take their cars on track exhibited by those posting

TDOs have insurance and a condition of their cover is the disclaimer - that is a doc that may impact each driver and passengers legal position with the TDO (depending on terms and facts of the incident) and some circuit operators require that you sign docs which may impact your legal position with them

It's a scary world out there - I repeat your chances of being involved in a incident that leads on to a claim from another driver ( or a subrogated claim from his insurer) are low but if the worst happens claims are a risk you take - a Judge could on the basis of certain evidence determine that the facts support a finding of negligence

£20k may seem a lot of money but claims at that level are heard at the lower levels of the judicial system and some might conclude that at that level (at which lawyers are not always involved, the evidence submitted is not always as fulsome as in larger cases and the scrutiny of that evidence more limited) the outcomes are more uncertain

I guess a reference to this exposure (remote as it may be) in the written materials issued before the event or in the oral briefing would be need a change of approach by the TDOs but if there are several reported incidents in the course of a short period perhaps that is what we will see

In the words of Sarge' from Hill Street Blues "......lets be careful out there"

[QBee]

Its not the insurer's fault.
The Honda driver got out of his car, apologised to the Caterham guy for hitting him.
The Caterham guy filled in a claim form. He presumably wrote down what was said.
The Honda driver admitted it was his mistake.
On the road the insurer in these circumstances would pursue the other party, hence his insurer, for their costs.
So they did the same on track.

The thing to learn here is NEVER ADMIT LIABILITY, NEVER APOLOGISE.

[aizvara]

FlyingTrotter said:

If this thread indicates anything it's the apparent lack of awareness of the risks being taken when folk take their cars on track exhibited by those posting

I certainly suffered from that lack of awareness regarding this sort of incident, until now. And some of the insurers I've looked at appear to share my lack of awareness, so it is probably quite widespread.

For instance, from an online insurer:

Insurer said:

Will you pay for any damages caused to another vehicle that I make contact with on the track?

Your track day insurance policy will only cover damage to your own vehicle. Track day participants are liable for damage to their own cars (regardless of fault) and sign disclaimers to this effect before going onto the circuit. Participants go on track at their own risk and standard motor insurance conditions do not apply.

Quotes like the above are fairly widespread amongst track day insurers.