Journalist sued after 917 engine explodes

[Pugsey]

shoestring7 said:

Well, the fallout from the case has already started; the days of 'gentleman's agreements' are well and truly behind us.

I'm about to lend a car to journalists from a magazine to test, and their legal people are making me sign a disclaimer: "I accept that my car will be covered by xxxxxxxxx's insurance for accidental damage only and accidental damage resulting from a mechanical failure.............. I accept that there is no cover for mechanical damage or mechanical failure, and that should either occur the resulting repairs will be entirely at my own personal cost, and that neither I nor my family will pursue any claims against xxxxxxxxxx or xxxxx xxxxx.

SS7

Great shame though isn't it? I've lent loads of cars to various mags over the years and only ever relied on a handshake. I'd like to think any future dealings with guys I know would continue in the same vein but - if a mag I'd not dealt with before was involved, or maybe a freelancer, then it might mean having something in writing will be necessary. The way of the world I suppose.

[Henry-F]

Nurburgsingh said:

Question and answer sessions from the passenger seat it is then!!

Do Le Mans race cars have a usable passenger seat?

H.

[domster]

At the 'lower end' of the scale a lot of cars are featured on behalf of owners or garages trying to sell them - i.e. a nice road test in a specialist mag gives the car great exposure and may help a sale. So the risk of the mechanicals letting go may be a low and acceptable risk given the benefit to the car's owner.

The Octane 'super classics' tests are obviously of a different nature, but owners are often compensated for the use of the vehicle and I imagine most tests take place without undue incident.

Manufacturer tests are obviously much more of a known quantity. I imagine a lot of engines have let go and the manufacturers just get on and repair them when it happens. Again, the PR value exceeds the cost or risk. Sometimes these are going to be hushed up due to a negative perception of unreliability - I'm sure the journo driving at the time would play ball rather than risk being accused of driving the car inappropriately and then getting involved in legal wrangling?

I suppose race car/'super classics' testing/reviewing is where the danger has always been.

[Pugsey]

Nurburgsingh said:

I have the solution....


If you own a rare or interesting vehicle... write your own story about it and submit it to the magazine... or is that just too daft?

I'd have thought you'd get a more passionate review of the car from the person that owns it rather than someone who's spent an hour/day or so with it.?

Trouble is would people want to read an article by a (maybe) 'unqualified' owner or by a known journo with recognised driving/analytical skills. With respect someone I've never heard of waxing lyrical about their own car may indeed be fun to read but if I want to learn more about a car I may never get to drive myself then I want to hear it from someone qualified to analyse it in depth.

[Buster73]

Henry-F said:

So if you go into a shop pissed out of your head and push a mate so he falls into a display and causes damage you should just be able to walk away without a care in the world ?

If the shop had minimised aisle sizes to the point where it was impossible to walk through the store without knocking something off a shelf then a different story. Hence the court case, was it a pre-existing problem or was it plain driver error.

Henry

I think you missed the word accidently.

I wonder if any of our legal lot on here could advise if it was legally enforcable to charge a customer for "accindental" damage ?

[will_]

Pugsey said:

Great shame though isn't it? I've lent loads of cars to various mags over the years and only ever relied on a handshake. I'd like to think any future dealings with guys I know would continue in the same vein but - if a mag I'd not dealt with before was involved, or maybe a freelancer, then it might mean having something in writing will be necessary. The way of the world I suppose.

What is truly surprising is that such an agreement wasn't the norm.

It looks like the motoring media industry have been very lucky not to have faced this sort of issue before.

There really is no harm, at all, in properly documenting the risk allocation before loaning or borrowing a valuable asset. Then the parties truly know where they stand and these sorts of disputes would very rarely occur.

[will_]

Buster73 said:

I think you missed the word accidently.

I wonder if any of our legal lot on here could advise if it was legally enforcable to charge a customer for "accindental" damage ?

Quite probably - why do you think they wouldn't?

[Pugsey]

will_ said:

Pugsey said:

Great shame though isn't it? I've lent loads of cars to various mags over the years and only ever relied on a handshake. I'd like to think any future dealings with guys I know would continue in the same vein but - if a mag I'd not dealt with before was involved, or maybe a freelancer, then it might mean having something in writing will be necessary. The way of the world I suppose.

What is truly surprising is that such an agreement wasn't the norm.

It looks like the motoring media industry have been very lucky not to have faced this sort of issue before.

There really is no harm, at all, in properly documenting the risk allocation before loaning or borrowing a valuable asset. Then the parties truly know where they stand and these sorts of disputes would very rarely occur.

Actually that's true.

Sometimes though I've been along on a group test/whatever driving my own car and a journo has asked if they can hop in and try the car. Very impromptu and would mean they'd need to carry appropriate docs for signing with them at all times. Because I've known them and their mag I've never had an issue with saying yes and just feel it would be a shame if things couldn't continue like that. I agree that a more formalised approach probably wouldn't hurt for any pre arranged tests though.

[Henry-F]

Buster73 said:

Henry-F said:

So if you go into a shop pissed out of your head and push a mate so he falls into a display and causes damage you should just be able to walk away without a care in the world ?

If the shop had minimised aisle sizes to the point where it was impossible to walk through the store without knocking something off a shelf then a different story. Hence the court case, was it a pre-existing problem or was it plain driver error.

Henry

I think you missed the word accidently.

You can't push someone accidentally when you're drunk and pissing around unless you have a medical condition which causes severe involuntary arm movement in a pushing motion in which case you shouldn't be a) Drunk and b) In a shop with a load of mates.

My words were carefully chosen.

Henry

[freedman]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Certainly as much as you, it appears

There is this myth that all motorinng journalists are living on the breadline, and that publishers arent far behind

The initial bill was 40k, not 400k

Hales, for instance is a journalist, driver coach, racing driver and is senior partner in the track driver 'business'

It is utter nonsense to suggest they wouldnt have been be able to afford it

May not be loose change to most, but could they find the money if needed, of course they could

[will_]

Pugsey said:

will_ said:

Pugsey said:

Great shame though isn't it? I've lent loads of cars to various mags over the years and only ever relied on a handshake. I'd like to think any future dealings with guys I know would continue in the same vein but - if a mag I'd not dealt with before was involved, or maybe a freelancer, then it might mean having something in writing will be necessary. The way of the world I suppose.

What is truly surprising is that such an agreement wasn't the norm.

It looks like the motoring media industry have been very lucky not to have faced this sort of issue before.

There really is no harm, at all, in properly documenting the risk allocation before loaning or borrowing a valuable asset. Then the parties truly know where they stand and these sorts of disputes would very rarely occur.

Actually that's true.

Sometimes though I've been along on a group test/whatever driving my own car and a journo has asked if they can hop in and try the car. Very impromptu and would mean they'd need to carry appropriate docs for signing with them at all times. Because I've known them and their mag I've never had an issue with saying yes and just feel it would be a shame if things couldn't continue like that. I agree that a more formalised approach probably wouldn't hurt for any pre arranged tests though.

The documentation should simply be as much a part of the prep-work for such an article as booking the photographer or the test track. It really wouldn't need to be complex nor time consuming. As I say, I'm amazed it isn't usual practice, particularly given the value of some of these assets.

You still can just "say yes" if you're happy that, were an issue to occur, there is no guarantee that you wouldn't be left significantly out of pocket. But that has always been the case and presumably you've been happy with that risk to date.

[Pugsey]

will_ said:

Pugsey said:

will_ said:

Pugsey said:

Great shame though isn't it? I've lent loads of cars to various mags over the years and only ever relied on a handshake. I'd like to think any future dealings with guys I know would continue in the same vein but - if a mag I'd not dealt with before was involved, or maybe a freelancer, then it might mean having something in writing will be necessary. The way of the world I suppose.

What is truly surprising is that such an agreement wasn't the norm.

It looks like the motoring media industry have been very lucky not to have faced this sort of issue before.

There really is no harm, at all, in properly documenting the risk allocation before loaning or borrowing a valuable asset. Then the parties truly know where they stand and these sorts of disputes would very rarely occur.

Actually that's true.

Sometimes though I've been along on a group test/whatever driving my own car and a journo has asked if they can hop in and try the car. Very impromptu and would mean they'd need to carry appropriate docs for signing with them at all times. Because I've known them and their mag I've never had an issue with saying yes and just feel it would be a shame if things couldn't continue like that. I agree that a more formalised approach probably wouldn't hurt for any pre arranged tests though.

The documentation should simply be as much a part of the prep-work for such an article as booking the photographer or the test track. It really wouldn't need to be complex nor time consuming. As I say, I'm amazed it isn't usual practice, particularly given the value of some of these assets.

You still can just "say yes" if you're happy that, were an issue to occur, there is no guarantee that you wouldn't be left significantly out of pocket. But that has always been the case and presumably you've been happy with that risk to date.

I'm sure that will be the way of things for pre organised stuff from now on - and as you say, very simple to arrange. And yes, I'll continue to say "yes" whenever more informal/unplanned instances occur. IF I know and trust they guys involved.

[will_]

Pugsey said:

will_ said:

Pugsey said:

will_ said:

Pugsey said:

Great shame though isn't it? I've lent loads of cars to various mags over the years and only ever relied on a handshake. I'd like to think any future dealings with guys I know would continue in the same vein but - if a mag I'd not dealt with before was involved, or maybe a freelancer, then it might mean having something in writing will be necessary. The way of the world I suppose.

What is truly surprising is that such an agreement wasn't the norm.

It looks like the motoring media industry have been very lucky not to have faced this sort of issue before.

There really is no harm, at all, in properly documenting the risk allocation before loaning or borrowing a valuable asset. Then the parties truly know where they stand and these sorts of disputes would very rarely occur.

Actually that's true.

Sometimes though I've been along on a group test/whatever driving my own car and a journo has asked if they can hop in and try the car. Very impromptu and would mean they'd need to carry appropriate docs for signing with them at all times. Because I've known them and their mag I've never had an issue with saying yes and just feel it would be a shame if things couldn't continue like that. I agree that a more formalised approach probably wouldn't hurt for any pre arranged tests though.

The documentation should simply be as much a part of the prep-work for such an article as booking the photographer or the test track. It really wouldn't need to be complex nor time consuming. As I say, I'm amazed it isn't usual practice, particularly given the value of some of these assets.

You still can just "say yes" if you're happy that, were an issue to occur, there is no guarantee that you wouldn't be left significantly out of pocket. But that has always been the case and presumably you've been happy with that risk to date.

I'm sure that will be the way of things for pre organised stuff from now on - and as you say, very simple to arrange. And yes, I'll continue to say "yes" whenever more informal/unplanned instances occur. IF I know and trust they guys involved.

Which means this case has had, hopefully, zero impact on you. It's certainly set no legal precedents per se.

However if it prevents another journo finding that his house is at risk because something has gone wrong and nothing was agreed in writing then it can only be a good thing. If it stops an owner lending his car and suddenly being left seriously out of pocket because he didn't understand the risk allocation then again, that's a good thing.

[Pugsey]

will_ said:

Pugsey said:

will_ said:

Pugsey said:

will_ said:

Pugsey said:

Great shame though isn't it? I've lent loads of cars to various mags over the years and only ever relied on a handshake. I'd like to think any future dealings with guys I know would continue in the same vein but - if a mag I'd not dealt with before was involved, or maybe a freelancer, then it might mean having something in writing will be necessary. The way of the world I suppose.

What is truly surprising is that such an agreement wasn't the norm.

It looks like the motoring media industry have been very lucky not to have faced this sort of issue before.

There really is no harm, at all, in properly documenting the risk allocation before loaning or borrowing a valuable asset. Then the parties truly know where they stand and these sorts of disputes would very rarely occur.

Actually that's true.

Sometimes though I've been along on a group test/whatever driving my own car and a journo has asked if they can hop in and try the car. Very impromptu and would mean they'd need to carry appropriate docs for signing with them at all times. Because I've known them and their mag I've never had an issue with saying yes and just feel it would be a shame if things couldn't continue like that. I agree that a more formalised approach probably wouldn't hurt for any pre arranged tests though.

The documentation should simply be as much a part of the prep-work for such an article as booking the photographer or the test track. It really wouldn't need to be complex nor time consuming. As I say, I'm amazed it isn't usual practice, particularly given the value of some of these assets.

You still can just "say yes" if you're happy that, were an issue to occur, there is no guarantee that you wouldn't be left significantly out of pocket. But that has always been the case and presumably you've been happy with that risk to date.

I'm sure that will be the way of things for pre organised stuff from now on - and as you say, very simple to arrange. And yes, I'll continue to say "yes" whenever more informal/unplanned instances occur. IF I know and trust they guys involved.

Which means this case has had, hopefully, zero impact on you. It's certainly set no legal precedents per se.

However if it prevents another journo finding that his house is at risk because something has gone wrong and nothing was agreed in writing then it can only be a good thing. If it stops an owner lending his car and suddenly being left seriously out of pocket because he didn't understand the risk allocation then again, that's a good thing.

Agreed. I guess I was regretting and passing general comment on what appears to be the passing of a more gentlemanly era! Mind you that still requires BOTH parties to be gentlemen I guess....................

[Buster73]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Let me be first to guess ........£250

[drpep]

Buster73 said:

Let me be first to guess ........£250

I reckon £1-3k depending on the rarity/exclusivity/desirability of the subject being reported on, and on the journo's name/standing.

[C36 Nico]

freedman said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Certainly as much as you, it appears

There is this myth that all motorinng journalists are living on the breadline, and that publishers arent far behind

The initial bill was 40k, not 400k

Hales, for instance is a journalist, driver coach, racing driver and is senior partner in the track driver 'business'

It is utter nonsense to suggest they wouldnt have been be able to afford it

May not be loose change to most, but could they find the money if needed, of course they could

And what the fk do you know about it?
Most car journos could find 40 grand if needed without too much difficulty, of cource they could?

Bawlocks and frankly offensive that you suggest they could handle such sums without much worry at all.

Edited by C36 Nico on Saturday 9th February 10:18

[cardigankid]

Rico said:

David Piper allowed Mark Hales, an experienced racing driver and freelance writer, to take his treasured Porsche 917 for a spin on a test track

QED. Plead insanity.

[C2'S'man]

drpep said:

I reckon £1-3k depending on the rarity/exclusivity/desirability of the subject being reported on, and on the journo's name/standing.

My car was featured in a well known Porsche mag last year, three page spread, good write up( 1000 words i think) and several picis by well known journo who spent the best part of a day doing it.

He told me he was being paid £500, which by the time his expenses etc had been deducted, time spent putting the write up together wasn't a massive amount IMO. Having said that my car wasent in the same ballpark as the Piper car.....unfortunately

g