RE: PH Blog: you bend you mend
Discussion
the gentlemans agreement, you bend it you own it, is how i and my friends and aquantences have always driven one anothers cars. obviously it only stands when you know the person is good for it otherwise its the owners look out. if a car of mine let go on someone i'd just be grateful it didnt spit them into the hospital. the accidental over-rev is a risk the owner takes imo. the only time a friend smashed one of my cars up he paid all he could afford to fix it; about 25%, c'est la vie. as pointed out; a gentlemens agreement is only good between gentlemen
If you're going to comment, at least skim-read the judgement first. It answers a lot of issues already raised, as does this thread:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
And this one:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
And this one:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
I think first of all, it's worth saying that there's no way that anyone with the reputation Mark has is going to ever want to knacker a 917 or any other car. Whatever happened in the cockpit aside, there was no malice in there. It was a freak accident, either driver error (it happens) or mechanical failure (s
t happens), and it's just a shame that it happened to be such an expensive one of whatever-it-was.
It's an awful shame for the car community as a whole for Mark to take such a financial hit (as well as the possibility of it becoming a slur against his name - I'd rather hope it wouldn't! - and knackering his future earnings somewhat. You quoted insurance prices for yourself, Chris, now imagine if you had in your history "1 917 lunching itself a bit"! Couple that with owners maybe (a bit misguidedly) thinking "hmm, could do with some insurance with this fellow" and... yikes!) because as a racing driver his insights into car performance are valuable (regardless of anything else) in this day and age, and this looming over him could really put a dampener on his future work yada yada all that stuff (not to mention time and stress of moving house should "paying for this" work out to that for him!)
So... is there a whip round? I can't spare more than a tenner but it doesn't sit too comfortably that a freak accident can push a guy out of their own home...
t happens), and it's just a shame that it happened to be such an expensive one of whatever-it-was.It's an awful shame for the car community as a whole for Mark to take such a financial hit (as well as the possibility of it becoming a slur against his name - I'd rather hope it wouldn't! - and knackering his future earnings somewhat. You quoted insurance prices for yourself, Chris, now imagine if you had in your history "1 917 lunching itself a bit"! Couple that with owners maybe (a bit misguidedly) thinking "hmm, could do with some insurance with this fellow" and... yikes!) because as a racing driver his insights into car performance are valuable (regardless of anything else) in this day and age, and this looming over him could really put a dampener on his future work yada yada all that stuff (not to mention time and stress of moving house should "paying for this" work out to that for him!)
So... is there a whip round? I can't spare more than a tenner but it doesn't sit too comfortably that a freak accident can push a guy out of their own home...
Agent Orange said:
I'm 42, enjoy motorsport and have followed F1 since about 8. My first vivid recollection is of Alan Jones driving like a hooligan. I have heard of Mark Hales - I've never heard of David Piper until now.
Piper drove race cars in competition for a long time and still does it in many classic car events (i've seen him with his P3 or his 250LM at Sport et Collection a few times) even if lost a leg while driving a 917 during the shooting of Steve McQueen's Le Mans (see on page 1 of the thread). I had massive respect for the guy, up until yesterday when i heard about this story.Great Pretender said:
It's a fascinating case by virtue of the precedence it sets for the future.
In purely legal terms, it doesn't really set any precedent. It was decided on its own facts and, as a first instance (as opposed to appeal) decision, it's not binding on any other court. I appreciate, however, that you probably mean precedent in the broader sense of its potential to impact on the testing of classics for mag pieces....
Maxio said:
Here's what the Press Association reported what the Judge said .. Its interesting how different a picture it paints.
The judge said Mr Piper, of London Road, Windlesham, Surrey was "certain, accurate and truthful" in his evidence.
He described 62-year-old Mr Hales, of Fen Lane, Conisholme, Lincs, as "a most unreliable witness whose evidence was creative, inconsistent, self-motivated and incredible".
That is just the most extraordinary thing...... lost for wordsThe judge said Mr Piper, of London Road, Windlesham, Surrey was "certain, accurate and truthful" in his evidence.
He described 62-year-old Mr Hales, of Fen Lane, Conisholme, Lincs, as "a most unreliable witness whose evidence was creative, inconsistent, self-motivated and incredible".
People who are saying 'this could have happened at any time' should read the court judgement. Mr Hales provided a statement to the insurance company saying, essentially, that it was driver error and he caused the damage.
It's harsh that he's got stuck with a massive bill but I don't see why Mr Piper should pay for it just because he's richer.
It's harsh that he's got stuck with a massive bill but I don't see why Mr Piper should pay for it just because he's richer.
Flatinfourth said:
IDrinkPetrol said:
So, what did David Piper have to pay when he did this?
- doesnthavealegtostandon
This is an utterly shameful situation. Well written article. To Mark, keep your chin up, you have a great deal of support
Maxio said:
Here's what the Press Association reported what the Judge said .. Its interesting how different a picture it paints.
The judge said Mr Piper, of London Road, Windlesham, Surrey was "certain, accurate and truthful" in his evidence.
He described 62-year-old Mr Hales, of Fen Lane, Conisholme, Lincs, as "a most unreliable witness whose evidence was creative, inconsistent, self-motivated and incredible".
Different to what? It accurately quotes the judgment handed down by HHJ Simon Brown QC.The judge said Mr Piper, of London Road, Windlesham, Surrey was "certain, accurate and truthful" in his evidence.
He described 62-year-old Mr Hales, of Fen Lane, Conisholme, Lincs, as "a most unreliable witness whose evidence was creative, inconsistent, self-motivated and incredible".
how dose £37,071 and 45p mean selling his house? I can't imagine Hales dosen't have a few bob stashed away? Reading between the lines, looking like he was told to take it easy with the gearbox, instead ragged it, blew it up. I would not be a happy owner either.
Edited by markbigears on Tuesday 22 January 14:08
Flatinfourth said:
That is just the most extraordinary thing...... lost for words
Read the judgment yourself and you'll understand why. There's a link to it in the original thread in General Gassing. It's hosted on the website of PHer AGTLaw.It's easy to see how the judge reached that conclusion based on the evidence in front of him.
EDIT: Here's a link - http://www.leeds-solicitors.com/piperhales.pdf
Edited by Lurking Lawyer on Tuesday 22 January 14:05
Terminator X said:
Quite frankly the litigation that goes on these days is an embarrassment whether it be this particular case or the cocks chasing piss easy £5k payouts for whiplash "injuries" (never understood what they're actually getting a payment for?). Change in the Law is required to stop it imho as it quite clearly will continue to get worse and worse ...
TX.
What would you suggest?TX.
Maxio said:
Here's what the Press Association reported what the Judge said .. Its interesting how different a picture it paints.
The judge said Mr Piper, of London Road, Windlesham, Surrey was "certain, accurate and truthful" in his evidence.
He described 62-year-old Mr Hales, of Fen Lane, Conisholme, Lincs, as "a most unreliable witness whose evidence was creative, inconsistent, self-motivated and incredible".
Presumably the Judge has extensive experience of driving a 917 on track.The judge said Mr Piper, of London Road, Windlesham, Surrey was "certain, accurate and truthful" in his evidence.
He described 62-year-old Mr Hales, of Fen Lane, Conisholme, Lincs, as "a most unreliable witness whose evidence was creative, inconsistent, self-motivated and incredible".
Piper does come across as a bit of an arse. If I let a "friend" drive my car on track, and they bust the engine I'd accept that either I should have chosen my friends better, or that it would have happened to me anyway.
I dont know the circumstances of the failure but as an Aircraft Engineer I know that failure does not always occur immediately. Faults can occur well in advance of the actual failure without any obvious signs, so who can say there was not a pre existing condition with the engine that had nothing to do with the journo!
[quote]Does this mean people like Hales, myself and the dozens of other lucky sods who do this for a living will no longer drive these spectacular cars? I don't think so.
[/quote]
I really hope you're right. Journalists in these cars are effectively living out peoples dreams, hopes and ambitions and if that gets hung up in red tape (along with far too much else these days) it paints a pretty poor picture of society.
Great read Chris and an interesting insight.
[/quote]
I really hope you're right. Journalists in these cars are effectively living out peoples dreams, hopes and ambitions and if that gets hung up in red tape (along with far too much else these days) it paints a pretty poor picture of society.
Great read Chris and an interesting insight.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff