THSCC Forums

Cline,

Also, what do you think this proposed insurance company pushed law would do to the rates of "sports car driver's rates"? Even those with multiple cars and clean driving records? Obviously the insurance companies say it would lower rates for most of us . . . which are already some of the lowest in the country. Really?

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/0 ... h-for.html

Thanks,

Dick
1997 Mustang GT
2012 Mustang GT
1988 Camper Van

_________________
Dick Rasmussen

FS 50 2018 Mustang GT

Interesting topic.

There's been a few quotes on what the Club's event insurance policy does and doesn't provide coverage for. I'd recommend current officers spend the time to go over this (lengthy document) with a fine toothed comb and extract the details, but I seem to recall that the club's liability protects the CLUB and it's officers ONLY, not participants in the event. Net Net (and I might be wrong on this or confusing policies again) - as participants we are protected only as much as the waiver you sign at the gate allows in court, and beyond that we're all on our own. If I haven't said it enough already, YMMV, check it out yourself, etc. etc. etc...

_________________
Dustin Fredrickson
-- I'm a nobody --

Novice coordinators are officers, right?

Interestingly, I can find no other reference to the verbage stated by Cline via the usual search process. I haven't gotten a notice from my insurer yet, either, regarding the new exclusions. Is this wording a done deal, (as it seems to be) or could it be part of the legislation pending that Dick referenced? Both angles seem to have the goal of increasing revenue to insurers while further limiting risk, (shocking, I know) so I wonder if they are tied together.

_________________
Steve Carter
1972 Datsun 240Z-- resto pics at http://picasaweb.google.com/srcartermd
2007 GPW Honda S2000-- STR 86

The clubs insurance only covers liability for the club and officers. The waivers explains this

_________________
2011/2012 Autox VP
2013/2014.5 President
2013 Top Gun

2015 Fit

22R-EC => 4G63 => D16Y7 + D16Y8 => EJ255 + K24Z2 => K20Z3 + K24Z2 => K24Z2 + M54 => L15B

DO NOT contact your insurer for clarity on this issue. You will most likely get cancelled almost immediately.


Way to scare the villagers Dr. Cline-n-stein...............

1) You need to assume your personal risk every time you participate in any speed related event.

2) You need to be more aware of potential risk in said events.

3) North Carolina was one the last few states that still didn't have the exclusion, now we are just like most of the rest of the country.

4) If you are AutoX'ing your car and you have an agent that is "enlightened" you probably have nothing to worry about. If you kill someone at an AutoX you probably deserve to be financially ruined.........

5) If you can't afford to walk away from your track car................

Breathe out ya'll................. collectively we know this isn't ideal but it ain't the end of the world.

_________________
BenchWarmer Motorsports

another one of those damn LeMons heads

just another Chump

we are an Autocross Club Dammit............

It might also be beneficial to understand how courts have interpreted these waivers. From what little (and I mean 10 minutes little) I've read, the waiver signing has been ruled to mean essentially nothing if an incident is deemed due to gross negligence in various courts (specifically I was reading in reference to a California Supreme court ruling). It will take an attorney with experience in this field to accurately answer all the details (including state specific rulings/precedents) I would imagine. In general I believe gross negligence would refer to a situation at an event that a participant, who signed the waiver, is not reasonably expected to experience within the context of that event.

One example might be something like on track where a worker, say emergency crew, left behind a large, heavy item on track, and then on the next session said item was hit by a participant resulting in a crash and injury. I'm just guessing here, but stuff like that might likely fall into gross negligence realm.

One can brainstorm many instances at an autox event where gross negligence could be found, and for the most part, long established methods of operation of an event greatly reduce the probabilities. I was trying to think back more than 25 years ago when I was chairman of the autox committee for BMWCCA National Capital chapter, and seriously, it's amazing what little was done back then compared to today. It was almost like a free for all in terms of safety -- if you were in the vicinity of the event or driving in it, you were responsible for yourself only. If something bad happened it was tough s**t for you for the most part. Sometime back I posted a link to my old Bavaria running at an SCCA event back then, and the end of the course pointed directly at the grid. The distance between the lights and the end of the stop box was maybe 4 car lengths, and then you would hit the cars and people behind there. I guess it took so many years of risks like these being realized to get to where we are today...

_________________
Current stable:
2019 BMW M2 Competition slicktop 6MT
2011 BMW M3 sedan slicktop 6MT
2007 BMW 328i wagon (slushbox for now)
1975 CanAm 125MX2

Wow, I have had some influence on you (you will be voting Republican in the next election), this is the advice I was getting on to give. I'll continue in a seperate post.

_________________
2002 MCS, 2003 MCS Track Rat, 2003 Generic White Yukon, 2003 BMWk1200rs, 1973 CB350F, 02 996. 08 Cayenne Turbo
http://www.clinehallagency.com

OK, sorry for the feces storm this has created. I just feel responsible to keep you guys updated on these issues.

Now that I have started it let me preach on it. Remember, this is friendly advice given by a friend (this means even though I insure a lot of you guys you can't sue me if it doesn't go this way).

Steve is right, we are just getting what everybody else has had for a long time. The other 48 or 49 states have dealt with this for a long time. If you a responsible for a Carrera GT situation (somebody google and put a link) then everybody gets sued.

Now with the new policy you don't have that layer of protection, officially-more to follow. I can catagorically say there is probably no chance you will get your car paid for when involved in a track accident as some of you have had the benefit of in the past. As that person can testify, when they first called the company they said "No coverage you were at a track, oh wait a minute you are in NC there is coverage" Now just NO.

The more to follow- I do think it is wise to keep your track car insured and an Umbrella policy. Companies pay a lot of stuff they aren't technically liable for. Do you remember the high school football player that died after a football game a couple of years ago? Guess who helped pay for that? Yep, me. I insured The head the head coach and he got drug into the law suit, the company chipped in to settle the case. Lots of time that is less expensive than defending. The companies get pulled into the defense costs as they are protecting their interests even if they do not extend coverage as the courts may still tell them they need to pay.

Secondly, companies want to look benevolent. The we are only in business to help people crap. Just let some kid get run over at an AX or in the paddock of the track at an HPDE by your honda civic. Talk about a feces storm when they won't pay for such an innocent party. Now the Porshce instructor at CMP, I don't know about that.

Some have asked why are companies doing this. Simple, close a loop hole that might cost them money. 99% of insurance people have no idea what we do. A THSCC event is safer than the parking lot at Wal-mart BUT the ricer events aren't so we get lumped in with them.

This is not part of the pending legislation, that is a totally different issue HOuse bill 154 if you want to google.
This new exclusion should be a stuffer in your new declaration after 10/1/12 and a line on your delaration page like this:
ALL AUTOS - NC0330 06/03*, NC0001 06/05*, APNA02 05/06*, NC0013 04/12*.

NC0013 04/12* is the culprit.




I'm still having trouble

_________________
2002 MCS, 2003 MCS Track Rat, 2003 Generic White Yukon, 2003 BMWk1200rs, 1973 CB350F, 02 996. 08 Cayenne Turbo
http://www.clinehallagency.com

Cline, thank you for bringing this to our attention, as well as your continued evaluation of the matter. Regardless of whether we like the outcome, it's good to be informed!

_________________
Dustin Fredrickson
-- I'm a nobody --

Thank you.

_________________
Richard Casto
1972 Porsche 914
2013 Honda Fit Sport
2015 Honda Fit EX
http://motorsport.zyyz.com
Money can't buy happiness, but somehow it's more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than a Kia.

Okay, if nobody else will, I'll do it...why you gotta be a putz?

This *is* a big change. There have been folks we know who have lost cars at DE type events and had them covered. It's been generally known that this was something you could get done here, so I think there were a good many folks doing DEs in cars that, while they might be able to afford to walk away from it, didn't want that risk.

Now the situation has changed and it's very good to know about it. Cline let us know. Some people are throwing up their hands, and it's because they now have to make a major re-evaluation of what they do. Just because YOU aren't one of them doesn't mean it's not a big deal. Jeez.

Thanks, Cline.


--Donnie

_________________
My Blog

As a somewhat unrelated aside...how is "fault" apportioned in NC?

I'm Still stuck on the car vs. person liability scenario, obviously. Is the driver "always" deemed at fault? I know that is not always the case on NC roads, but our sites are not actually public roads, so is there a difference?

Why don't we have a club attorney who can give us hypothetical opinions about hypothetical situations?

_________________
Steve Carter
1972 Datsun 240Z-- resto pics at http://picasaweb.google.com/srcartermd
2007 GPW Honda S2000-- STR 86

My wife is an attorney who does insurance defense litigation. What this means is that if you get in accident, create property damage, someone slips and falls in your place of business, etc. and someone tries to sue you, the insurance company will hire her firm to act as legal counsel on behalf of the insurance company (and the end customer being you). Thus, she is very risk adverse when it comes to this type of thing. Fortunately she has not seen risk of the hobbies I do as a problem. While this law really doesn't change that all that much, it certainly has me evaluating what I am comfortable with.

I will freely admit that this law could mean that I continue to do Lemons and buy a kart as the risk exposure is less. For me and some others on here, this change has nothing to do with property and is more in line with liability risk. I am also cognizant of the fact that some people are doing HPDE's in the daily drivers because there would be coverage if something really bad happened (property wise that is)... and the change may alter that plan.

While Cline's been my agent for a while now, I appreciate him bringing this to light for everyone as I'm sure none of us are searching for insurance law changes very often Thanks Cline. - AB

_________________
'14 Toyota Sequoia Platinum 4WD
Super Westerfield Bros - '93 Integra - LeChump Du Jour
STX 93 - Scion FR-S

NC is a contributory negligence state. Thus, if a person is only 1% at fault, they are just as at fault as someone who is 99% at fault. Doesn't matter if it is public roads, a parking lot or a private driveway IIRC. Insurance follows the vehicle, not the person too. - AB

_________________
'14 Toyota Sequoia Platinum 4WD
Super Westerfield Bros - '93 Integra - LeChump Du Jour
STX 93 - Scion FR-S

Lost that battle 10+ years ago in an accident where a girl pulled out in front of me. I was supposedly late to work and in a hurry (never mind I was a salaried employee). That was my 1% contribution.

I guess that is still better than a no-fault state.

_________________
02 Focus SVT
STF 9