The dangers of NOT having insurance

[Tim Mackey]

Long time members know that threads are closed, or posts deleted only in a few cases - and these usually involve personal comments against people and the like, or persitent bad language etc. Please dont intimate that we will close threads just because people wish to express an opinion - despite how much it may be contrary to our own.

You've made your position clear Aslan, and despite being close to a personal "attack" on certain people I havent deleted it have I ?

We just ask for mature yet polite responses, and so far people have obliged.

In case people have missed it, we have included a quick link to the forum code of conduct at the bottom of every posting page - been there while now actually.

Incidentally, I am not sure that anyone has actually stated that they dont have insurance

Edited By Tim Mackey - Administrator on 16/09/2010 23:29:20

[Ian Jones]

I'm with the don't fly without insurance team but I think something has been overlooked:

 

"Personal Accident Scheme

Members of the BMFA between the ages of 3 and 80 are covered by a standard personal accident policy whilst participating in Association activities which include the building and flying of model aircraft for sport and recreational purposes as well as travel to and from the flying site."

 

So there's a play on words with dangerous, foolhardy, moron etc  and an argument that the likelihood of a 3rd party claim in some circumstances could be nil. However in all circumstances everyone, moron or not, that takes part  in this sport/hobby/pastime (well people will split hairs) put themselves at risk. I doubt that there can be many that have not suffered some kind of self inflicted injury and probably relatively minor but in the event of a serious injury there's:

".... £5000 in respect of accidental death and up to £25000 for permanent disability (current as at 1st January 2007); however, the level of benefits payable may change from time to time. Reduced benefits are paid to members over the age of 65.."

 

So if you can't be sensible, be selfish and cover yourself.

 

 

 

 

Edited By Ian Jones on 17/09/2010 00:04:12

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

It also includes "Member to member" cover as well. So if a clubmate lands on your car your covered!

 

BEB

[John Privett]

But only if he was in some way at fault in doing so, BEB.  I guess nearly always he would be at fault,  but if for instance his plane hit a seagull and the debris damaged your car I wouldn't expect a payout from the insurers - unless it could be shown that your clubmate deliberately or negligently hit the seagull!

 

The point about "member to member" cover is that it's included whereas many other similar sporting insurance policies specifically exclude it.

[Erfolg]

We now seem to straying into what is covered by insurance and that , that is not.

 

Rather than argue hypothetical cases, can we not accept, that the circumstances under which an insurance company will not pay out, is essentially down to themselves and any 3rd party or legal representation of the 3rd party, possibly ultimately a court of law.

 

If an insurance company declines to pay out, that does not necessarily let the insured of the hook, even if this is not challenged by the 3rd party, a private action can be still taken out against the insured.

 

Having said all that, it is prudent to be insured, in my opinion, although it does not prevent or encourage dangerous or reckless acts in itself.

 

Although the title states the dangers of not having insurance, the text refers to it being dangerous to fly without insurance. I think we have debated both points adequately. Bye 

[001]

John, I assume you mean the seabird, not one of Mr. Seagulls excellent ARTF's?

 

(Leaving no Tern unstoned)

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Tim Mackey]

Posted by Richard Bond on 17/09/2010 11:46:02:

John, I assume you mean the seabird, not one of Mr. Seagulls excellent ARTF's?

 

(Leaving no Tern unstoned)

 Groan.... ( funny though Rich )

[Tim Mackey]

Eric said...

"If you are not insured, how big is the bill likely to be?"

 

Or indeed the bull..... LOL

[Tim Mackey]

I certainly wouldnt recommend anyone goes sloping without Insurance - especially if Iawnski and I are flying

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

" unless it could be shown that your clubmate deliberately or negligently hit the seagull!"

 

Ah - you've flown at our club then!

 

BEB

[Lee Smalley]

since my original quote was used to start this thread i will clarify what i ment

 

"dangerous"  was not the wrong word to use in the context of what we were talking about it is dangerous for you to fly without insurance as the impact of any litigation on you the flier could and prob will be enough to financially cripple you "the flier"

Think Not!  how much can be awarded if a person looses his thumb in an accident, he would not be able to work for a very long time if ever, and you will be sued to keep him and his family in the style they are accustomed to if you are found liable

 

"selfish" you have no regard to the impact such an incident will have on others and by not having insurance you are stating that!

 

yes of course such incidents are rare that is why we only pay £29 a year! but if god forbid the accident does happen then you have help,

 

recently we had a fly away with a lightly loaded electric glider said aircraft eventually came through the pilots box at a great speed narrowly missing two young fliers and hitting a well built dad in the arm the bruising was extensive and very sore thankfully only the wing hit him and disintergrated on impact, just imagine if it was 10 foot teh other way and a child gets it in the face full bore ................is it worth you saving £29    if you think it is then i hope i never meet you

 

[Aslan]

What was stated Tim was that it was nobodies business,and it wasn't important if someone flew without insurance.... close enough. I intimated that the thread would be closed if it got into using words stronger than moron(so lets all say moron). I do not appreciate you being patronizing towards me either. I am well aware of the rules, and have seen threads closed for less, when really, imho the offending post should have been deleted and the topic carried on. This is  a very important topic which I do not want closed, and it would be if stronger words were used,but that's just my opinion. Also, as you say, nobody has stated that he/she flies without insurance so there is no being close to a personal attack.

[Tim Mackey]

"A well built dad"

LOL...now there's a new description for him - ( he told us the story at the NATS )

[Tim Mackey]

Posted by Aslan on 17/09/2010 12:27:43:
What was stated Tim was that it was nobodies business,and it wasn't important if someone flew without insurance.... close enough. I intimated that the thread would be closed if it got into using words stronger than moron(so lets all say moron). I do not appreciate you being patronizing towards me either. I am well aware of the rules, and have seen threads closed for less, when really, imho the offending post should have been deleted and the topic carried on. This is  a very important topic which I do not want closed, and it would be if stronger words were used,but that's just my opinion. Also, as you say, nobody has stated that he/she flies without insurance so there is no being close to a personal attack.

 

Not being patronizing at all Aslan.

[Lee Smalley]

Im sure all the fact and figures that people are generating about how rare serious incidents are, are a very real comfort to the parents who lost the children or the people serious injured in our wonderful pastime! yes they are rare but it does not mean it does not happen hands up people who have had radio failure in the last 12 months lots i would imagine, the fact you never hit anyone was it by luck!  or good judgement luck and some design i would say is it really worth £29 for your obstinance

[Lee Smalley]

Aslan i know you feel very strongly about this but i dont think Tim was being patronizing just light hearted, i agree with you almost compleatly mate and i admire your honesty but as you say we need the thread contining so i will not refer to them as morons but as selfish

[Aslan]

Point taken Lee and Tim. Cheers. I think I'd be better off making no more comments either,it really is winding me up for the sake of 29 quid....... breathe in.......... breathe out..... in..... and out...... There..... I'm calm....... Whew!! that was hard. On the lighter side, a newbie came to the patch,nice lad, eager, and his trainer went in. He then asked who to contact regarding claiming for the loss of his model. Got a good laugh out of too, when it was explained to him.

[Marc Humphries]

Don't know why people are getting so wound up here.  Here's my final post on this thread.

 

1. Model flying is a low risk activity

 

2. Flying without insurance does not increase the danger or risk

 

3. All sensible model flyers should fly with insurance

 

The debate and posts around items 1 and 2 should not have been confused with number 3.  That would just be moronic!

 

 

[David Turner 5]

Lee.

 

You state that it's dangerous because an accident might financially cripple the pilot. Well, if I choose to do that, what concern of yours is it?

 

 

Then, you go on to tell us of how awful it is to have your child killed by a model.

 

Clearly, you put a financial value on your child's life. Tell me, how much money will make it better for you?

 

 

[Aslan]

My final post also.

 

1. Agree..... So there is a risk. Cover it for 29 quid.

 

2. Agree..... But it's less risk to others.... if injured and bills need paying..... not to fly without                         insurance.

 

3. Agree...... But leave out "sensible" 

[Aslan]

David...... Are you serious?

[Tim Mackey]

Posted by David Turner 5 on 17/09/2010 15:27:12:

Lee.

 

You state that it's dangerous because an accident might financially cripple the pilot. Well, if I choose to do that, what concern of yours is it?

 

 

Then, you go on to tell us of how awful it is to have your child killed by a model.

 

Clearly, you put a financial value on your child's life. Tell me, how much money will make it better for you?

 

 

 

This is a provocative and somewhat selfish tone David. It may well be a concern of someone else - if it turns out that a pilot causes damage to property or people that they cannot personally afford to "make good" .

[David Davis]

Another point which posters might like to consider is inexperience.

 

At my club we have had only one incident where a model, an old 40-powered Precedent Hi-Boy, hit the treasurer's Volvo which was parked up in the pits and put a hole in the metal work. It was under the dubious control of a learner who went on to be the club's chairman. We had few buddy boxes in those days.

 

But even with buddy boxes, there comes a time when you have to allow the learner the chance to take off for the first time. I can recall two occasions when the learner took off with too little airspeed and froze with full up elevator, stalling the model big-time. On both occasions the models barely missed by-standers in the pits before the instructor regained control.

 

The models involved were a Radio Queen and a Unowot. If anyone had been hit by either model, a visit to the hospital would have been the least worst outcome.

 

That's why we're insured. 

[David Turner 5]

But, the insurance doesn't stop you going to hospital. Does it?