An Insurance Hypothetical

Submitted: Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 15:28
ThreadID: 111317 Views:2956 Replies:17 FollowUps:26
This Thread has been Archived
Here is a question for insurance gurus and bush lawyers. If you as an individual invite a group of people along for a trip and something goes wrong resulting in damage or injury, can you become liable for damages. I dont have any specific situation in mind, its just something that I have occasionally wondered about.

Cheers,

Val.
J and V
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted."
- Albert Einstein

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

Back Expand Un-Read 1 Moderator

Reply By: pop2jocem - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 15:39

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 15:39
Hi Val,

While I probably need to brush up (no pun intended) on my bush lawyering skills I have always been under the impression that you had to be doing it for reward i.e. a tag along operator, or in a situation such as an incorporated 4WD club who would probably have their own insurance umbrella to cover any public liability issues.

Obviously I could have the whole thing backwards but my impression was that as long as you were just having a trip away with a bunch of mates it was each persons responsibility as an individual.

I shall now retire to chambers to consider my verdict, figuratively speaking.....LOL

Cheers
Pop
AnswerID: 546884

Reply By: Racey - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 15:54

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 15:54
It's probably more of a question to a lawyer rather than insurance. An insurance policy would come into operation only if there was a legal liability on the part of the "organiser".

If the invitation was along the line of " hey we're going fishing next week do you want to come", my gut feeling is there would not be any liability unless you personally caused the the damage or injury. If someone tripped and hurt themselves that would be their problem. On the other hand if your boat caught fire and injure occurred, there would be some liability involved.

If the invitation was a bit more formal and you were projecting yourself as an expert in the area you were travelling, there could be grounds for liability. In all cases everyone has a duty of care for themselves and can't simply blame others for their own misadventure.

Cheers
Jon

AnswerID: 546885

Follow Up By: pop2jocem - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 16:23

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 16:23
I guess this issue makes one think a bit more about certain situations.

Maybe some liability might arise if deliberate or negligent conduct could be proven.
Take for the example the subject as raised in the preceding thread about the use of shackles and snatch straps.
If a shackle was used inadvisedly and it turned into a missile that did someone serious or even fatal injuries, what then?
Probably no insurance issues but how about either criminal or civil proceedings?

Cheers
Pop
0
FollowupID: 834731

Reply By: rocco2010 - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 16:18

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 16:18
Gidday

Regardless of what we might think or believe the law to be, if somebody has a grievance they can usually find a lawyer who will take their case.

I imagine there wouldn't be an organisation anywhere these days, whether a business or some sort of club run by volunteers that would not operate under some sort of disclaimer.

And that doesn't stop people sueing.

personal responsibility is an alien concept to many.

Cheers
AnswerID: 546887

Reply By: Frank P (NSW) - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 17:01

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 17:01
Our Karavan owners club started out as just an email group of a few people swapping notes and occasionally someone would coordinate a camp. That was pretty much an invitational kind of thing, just a few mates getting together, and no-one thought about insurance.

The group grew to about 50 vans. At this stage someone sought advice from a lawyer in their family about risk, liability and insurance. The scenario presented to the Qualified One was

"If property is damaged or persons injured as a result of our activities at one of our informal, camps, who would be liable?"

The answer was that every attendee would be personally and collectively liable. The injured party could sue individuals, taking everything from everyone until their loss had been satisfied or the money run out. ie, bankruptcy of individuals was a possible outcome.

So that would be my answer to your question, Val.

We were advised to get public liability insurance as a group. To do that we had to incorporate as an association, which we did, and we are now insured through an umbrella association of similar clubs.

Cheers
FrankP

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message
Moderator

AnswerID: 546889

Follow Up By: pop2jocem - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 17:17

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 17:17
An interesting take Frank.

This "injured party", would that refer to a member of your group or someone outside the group that could propose that the whole group individually and severally were responsible?

Certainly make an "interesting" time in court if one of your number ran over farmer Brown's prize ram how the whole group is responsible and that the said ram was not partially or totally to blame by it's own actions.
Further that the damages to the front of the vehicle involved were the fault of aforesaid farmer Brown not taking sufficient care in ensuring that the aforesaid ram was suitably confined.

I could see some lawyers getting quite an income boost arguing that one out.

Cheers
Pop
0
FollowupID: 834738

Follow Up By: Dave(NSW) - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 17:30

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 17:30
Frank,
Would that also include explorOz trips and gatherings
GU RULES!!

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 834739

Follow Up By: Frank P (NSW) - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 17:51

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 17:51
Pop,

The "injured party" we are most concerned about is the one outside the group. Our third party insurance covers them. It also covers members within the group, but only if injured by "the group".

A member of another club at one of their club rallies (nothing to do with us and none of our members were there) tripped on a power lead and suffered serious injury. She submitted a claim under the same insurance we use (ie, same umbrella organisation) but it was denied because the power lead was owned by an individual, not the club that organised the gathering. Therefore the injury was not caused by club property and therefore the event was not covered.

Dave,

Based on the advice we received, I believe it does.

In our club, we have an on-line "trip register". Any member can organise a trip or camp, but to get club insurance it must be organised via our website and members must register to attend. If it is not done that way it becomes a private affair and individuals carry the risk.

Cheers

Frank
FrankP

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message
Moderator

0
FollowupID: 834741

Follow Up By: pop2jocem - Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 14:42

Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 14:42
Never actually been in that situation Frank so just trying to get my head around this.

OK, so what you are concerned with is what damage or injury could be inflicted on an outsider, or their property, by a club member.

How exactly does this differ to any individual being the alleged offender whether a club member or not?

Just a theoretical, which is what we are discussing here, suppose a club member goes on a trip either by himself or in company with another club member, or non club member for that matter. When does the club responsibility start or end?

Cheers
Pop


0
FollowupID: 834804

Follow Up By: Frank P (NSW) - Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 17:30

Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 17:30
Pop,
The advice we have been given is that if the gathering or event or camp or whatever was not organised on our website, then our club insurer is not liable. The two individuals in your scenario would be liable.

When the club IS liable, its association insurance protects club members, especially the committee people. I suppose if negligence was involved the club insurer might pursue the individuals involved, but its all getting too hard for me to answer.

Suffice to say we,ve taken legal advice, acted upon it. If the worst comes to the worst, the lawyers and the insurance company will sort it out. We hope.
FrankP

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message
Moderator

0
FollowupID: 834815

Reply By: Simon C - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 17:04

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 17:04
This same sort of issue has been raised on a Jet Ski Facebook page that I follow. They use to allow people to organise trips and you could join the "event" on the facebook page. However the moderators became a wear that if it was an organised "event" (even though no money changed hands)...the facebook page, moderators, and the event organisers could become liable if there was an accident. See following notice they now have on their page.

"Due to the HIGH RISK of litigation to the event organizer of any ride from this Facebook Page, there will be no permission granted to members to create events. Rides can only be organized between your personal friend's of your own Personal Facebook Page. You can talk about rides I just strongly suggest for your own protection do not gather/organize/create the event on this page."

There are people out there who are a lot smarter than me, and would be able to advise if this is fact or fiction. It is the world we live in....some one always looking for some one else to blame and make money from.
AnswerID: 546890

Follow Up By: Frank P (NSW) - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 17:39

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 17:39
Simon, that exactly the advice we received in my Reply #4 above.

Cheers

Frank
FrankP

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message
Moderator

0
FollowupID: 834740

Follow Up By: River Swaggie - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 20:34

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 20:34
Your spot on Simon, that's exactly my understanding of how it works, sad times huh....
0
FollowupID: 834766

Follow Up By: AlbyNSW - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 22:20

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 22:20
There is a case running now where premeditated murder was performed using an implement owned by a club
The president of the club is being dragged through the courts as an accessory to murder and the club is being sued by the family of the deceased for compensation, it was a family member who carried out the murder
No members of the club were present or knew the victim and yet still get embroiled in this mess and all are just volunteers in the sporting club

These types of issues will have a very negative effect on our society, who will volunteer to coach the local football team if little Johnnies parents can sue them for an accident or psychological damage as a result of being on the team
Who is going to lead the Scouts or Cubs etc? Why would anyone expose themselves to such a risk for volunteer community work

We have all gone mad with this stuff and it is the people of the communities that lose out
0
FollowupID: 834773

Follow Up By: pop2jocem - Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 14:33

Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 14:33
Going by the logic of that, if someone grabs my axe and attacks and kills someone else, I am an accessory to murder.

Even if I am not at home at the time

When exactly did the lunatics actually take over the running of the asylum?

0
FollowupID: 834802

Follow Up By: AlbyNSW - Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 15:59

Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 15:59
Pop cannot disclose further detail as the case is still underway but yes it is along the same lines as you have suggested

Just ridiculous. The perpetrator gets off on grounds of mental health and others who are not even aware that the incident took place find themselves in court.
1
FollowupID: 834809

Reply By: Kenell - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 17:18

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 17:18
My understanding is that we all have responsibility at common law for the safety of our fellow man. Beyond that every circumstance depends entirely on its merit. If I invite people into my home I have a greater duty of care than perhaps if I invited them to dinner at the pub. From an insurance perspective most Home and Contents policies offer some level of liability cover both at and beyond the home. The concept of people bringing actions against others for seemingly frivolous events is largely urban myth now (in this country at least).
AnswerID: 546892

Reply By: Hairy (NT) - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 18:37

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 18:37
Gday Val,

Just deny inviting them and if they want to push the issue, have them charged with stalking! LOL

Cheers
AnswerID: 546901

Reply By: The Landy - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 18:42

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 18:42
There are three groups of people in the world;

1/ Us (anyone who is not an insurance company or lawyer),
2/ Insurance companies, and
3/ (Smart) Lawyers.

Now, I am not suggesting one group has it over the other, or is any better or worse. But rest assured when it comes to liability and insurance issues. Aggrieved parties will hire a smart lawyer to prosecute their case, and insurance companies will look for somebody to compensate them for any losses for its underwriting activities, sometimes successfully, other times not.

It’s a mine field!

Not that it answers your question, other than to say, tread cautiously and take advice, coincidently, from a lawyer. Who most likely will suggest liability insurance, coincidently, from an insurance company.

And there we have it, the three groups of people.

I can’t help but feel insurance companies and lawyers have a lot to answer for!

Cheers, Baz – The Landy (tongue-in-cheek, sort of)
AnswerID: 546903

Reply By: Honky - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 19:08

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 19:08
Not a Lawyer but a little bit involved in Insurance.
In all cases the party that suffered injury or property damage must prove negligence by the person or organisation that they consider caused the injury or property damage.
There is a lot of protection (in NSW at least) under the civil liability act that protects volunteers acting in good faith and within their scope of duties. Any gross or criminal negligence would more end up in the criminal courts not the civil courts and thus no insurance cover even if you did have an insurance policy.
Also there is a duty for the injured party for their own actions and if the cause was obvious than the injured party may be deemed responsible even if it was considered risky.
There is also a provision that you cannot sue if you where involved in a risky or sporting event and was injured.
In regards to the injury caused by the extension cord ( as long as it was considered a hidden danger ), I cannot see how they could blame the owner of the cord as I would see the "organiser" being at fault for not having risk management plan in place for the event.
Also the courts would consider the "duty of care" for a bunch of blokes having a "get-to-gether a lot less than someone organising the Royal Easter Show.

Honky
AnswerID: 546908

Follow Up By: Honky - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 19:12

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 19:12
I should also add that the above is not personal advise as i am not aware of your own personal needs and is of general nature and should not be acted open without first referring to your own insurance or legal advisor.

Honky
0
FollowupID: 834751

Follow Up By: Frank P (NSW) - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 19:42

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 19:42
Honky,

Re the injury caused by tripping on the cord, I think you missed part of my post.

The insurance did not blame the owner of the cord. They said that the cord was not club property and therefore the club insurance company was not liable. That is all. No blame apportioned or shifted, just "it's not our problem".

It is unknown whether or not the injured person pursued the owner of the cord for damages, but if they did, it was a private matter outside the club and its insurers.

Cheers

FrankP

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message
Moderator

0
FollowupID: 834754

Reply By: Member - Scott M (NSW) - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 20:33

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 20:33
This sort of thread got me thinking about my younger days when I used to go to motorbike rallies out in the boondooks. Most of these events were organised by a particular club or group of clubs with a special interest. There was hardly a rally where someone didn't get injured, either in the gymkhana events or drunken stupidity (and Jesus were there some clangers!!).

this was the 80's and I assume there was some form of public liability ?, however it would be a brave insurance broker or agent who would write one of these.... it was almost a given that someone would:

a) fall in a fire (drunk)
b) fall off a bike (drunk)
c) get into a fight (usually drunk)
d) run into someone else's bike
e) ruin a bike (burnouts / wheelies / donuts / etc) or
e) "hey watch this" - which would lead to one of the above...

A couple of times the Ambulance had to come into some remote spot to haul someone out..

Noone thought of public liability much in those days, probably couldn't organise half the stuff these days......
AnswerID: 546917

Reply By: Rob J8 - Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 22:50

Tuesday, Mar 03, 2015 at 22:50
Back in the old days before all this insurance do-do, our caravan club used to run a safari every year for a couple of weeks in late Sept Oct wandering around W A.
We loved it.
Now days you tell your mates you are going away for a couple of weeks and if you happen to follow us that's ok.
It has made it hard for the newer members.
rob J
AnswerID: 546991

Reply By: Bazooka - Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 00:47

Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 00:47
Really haven't got a clue about liability because there are far too many possible scenarios and my knowledge of the law and negligence/responsibility in such cases is minimal. Undoutedly there are many scenarios which could conceivably involve a level of liability, particularly where a debilitating injury is involved.

This is relevant though. "Under Australian Tort law damages for negligence may be sought from those at fault, providing that:
A duty of care must be found to exist.
The duty of care must be breached.
Damage or injury, not too remote, must result from the breach."

This could easily apply when you are assisting another 4WDer out of a bog for example.

A recent cycling incident might be of interest. It involved insurance. Cyclist sues friend

Far be it from me to suggest that where insurance is involved the likelihood of legal action increases, although anecdotally I suspect this is probably true.

I guess the best we can do is operate in good faith and take due care. Until we have an affordable, universal no-fault insurance scheme to take care of seriously injured people like our mates across the 'dtch' then the law will continue to be the only recourse in some circumstances.
AnswerID: 546997

Reply By: Member - John and Val - Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 08:30

Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 08:30
Some interesting issues raised, thank you all. The scenario where a small group of friends grows into a bigger group and eventually becomes an incorporated body is a familiar one. In that situation legal advice and insurance are easily arranged as there are many precedents to follow. There is also the time factor; as group members get to know each other they can collectively make rules to guide the group, and individuals can do their own risk assessment to decide who they feel comfortable associating/travelling/doing anything with - and who might be trustworthy in the event of things going pearshaped (though judgements in that area could be full of surprises).

However with rapidly changing technology, in particular social media like Facebook, groups can form (and implement actions) very quickly. Even this site offers a facility for arranging trips with others who often would be total strangers. Where an event is arranged online or "remotely" participants have little chance of assessing other participants or likely prevailing circumstances and hence little chance to do their own risk assessment let alone get legal or insurance advice. A familiar variant of this scenario would be when solo travellers meet with others on the road and decide to travel together for a few days, perhaps to do some more difficult or remote tracks.

In some ways its a pity that these types of issues need to be canvassed, but then life is never risk free. But it could be useful to be aware of risks that can come from unexpected quarters.

Cheers,

Val.
J and V
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted."
- Albert Einstein

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 549407

Follow Up By: AlbyNSW - Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 09:58

Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 09:58
Val I am getting a mental image of a group of travellers meeting up on the side of the road getting all of their legal documentation proformas out, confirming who invited who to come along so as to establish the chain of responsibility should litigation be required, some may even bring their lawyers along to oversee the documentation process or include them via a video link if there is reception to ensure the documentation is correctly executed.
And then pulling out all of your accreditation documents that are a prerequisite for travelling with us including:
-Senior first aid documentation
-completing stage IV advanced recovery course
-bush mechanics competency course
-checking the condition of your recovery gear
-doctors certificate to verify that you are a fit and healthy person including disclosure of any existing ailments
-references from fellow travellers for previous trips you have done

Tongue in cheek ( I hope)
3
FollowupID: 834783

Follow Up By: Member - John and Val - Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 10:14

Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 10:14
Good one Alby - lets hope it never gets anywhere near that! Maybe what we need is commonsense?

Cheers,

Val.
J and V
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted."
- Albert Einstein

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

1
FollowupID: 834784

Follow Up By: AlbyNSW - Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 10:41

Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 10:41
I do believe in this day and age it is called uncommonsense
0
FollowupID: 834786

Follow Up By: The Landy - Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 11:36

Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 11:36
Hi Val

I was being somewhat tongue-in-cheek with my earlier comment. In some respects it is closer to the truth.

We have a whole industry that has sprung out of the “no- fee legal compensation Law Firms” who drive aggressively the concept of “someone should pay” if something goes wrong. And that isn’t to say that people should not be held accountable financially, but you can see where this has headed, totally overboard, and is the reason we have ended up with a situation where everyone needs to exercise caution.

One of the reasons we have security camera everywhere these days isn’t for “security” it is to record what really happened and to protect against potential compensation claims.

It will only get worse…

Cheers, Baz
1
FollowupID: 834789

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Sunday, Mar 08, 2015 at 00:26

Sunday, Mar 08, 2015 at 00:26
A very funny scenario you've painted there Alby. Pythonesque, or should that be Micallefesque these days? Luckily everyone would have their head-mounted GoPros to record the whole pre-event in case there's a need to prove who said what.
0
FollowupID: 834983

Reply By: Alan S (WA) - Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 15:00

Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 15:00
John

One of the issues with insurance is that it gives some one to sue that is able to pay up. In some of the cases set out here if i was to sue some one who i felt had breach their duty of care, if successful it would not matter what the financial outcome as they probably would not be able to pay up. In fact they would probably declare bankruptcy and i would get very little.

But if that same person is insured, the insurer is taking the financial liability, now it is worthwhile suing as the insurance company has huge finacial resources. But importantly they often dont view the case as right vs wrong, but as a financial transaction, i.e it is going to cost x amount to fight and we may still loose, so lets just pay out y amount and settle.

So while insuring may mitigate liability I think it has also increased the amount of litigation as it is more finacilaly worthwhile than suing you or me.

Alan
AnswerID: 549416

Follow Up By: Honky - Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 21:11

Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 21:11
You are being sued, not the insurance company. The insurance company just takes over on your behalf.
If you do not have insurance than you assets are on the line.
The sole purpose of being sued is to be compensated ( get money ).
Lawyers use the "shot Gun" effect and drag everyone in hoping some one has deep pockets ( or insurance). You have to than go to court to get excused from the action.
It should be noted that you can take action to recover against the lawyer to recover your costs if the lawyers case is frivolous. That is the lawyer pays not the person they are acting for.
And don't forget that someone sitting in the court with a broken back is going to get a lot of sympathy from the Judge and he/she will look for anything/anyone to pin the blame on so they can get their $6,000,000 for lifetime of care.

Honky
1
FollowupID: 834823

Follow Up By: AlbyNSW - Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 21:40

Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 21:40
I have been sued and wanted to fight the case as it was fraudulent, the guy went to one of those no win no pay lawyers who soon dropped the case as they saw there was no merit in his claim

This happened with three different ambulance chaser law firms over a period of five years who all dropped the case. The guy ended up trying again and represented himself in court which was a mess as he had no idea what he was doing and wasted a lot of everyone's time
My insurer gave him $10,000 to go away as it was costing them too much in wasted legal costs.

As the insured I have no say or rights in the matter, it becomes a matter for the insurance company and they deal with it how they please

They payed him out much to my disgust and increased my premiums to recover the costs
0
FollowupID: 834824

Follow Up By: Alan S (WA) - Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 22:09

Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 22:09
Honky

The only thing I think you are wrong with is if the case is frivolous, the person bringing it is liable for costs, not the lawyer.
0
FollowupID: 834827

Follow Up By: Honky - Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 23:18

Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 23:18
Tried to find the section in the NSW civil liability act but it is there somewhere.
Here is part of the ACT act which is very similar
"Costs order against lawyer acting without reasonable prospects of success"

There is a lot in the NSW act in regards to "recreational activities" and being "Intoxicated" which would probably cover most of the members on this site. LOL

Honky
0
FollowupID: 834828

Follow Up By: Alan S (WA) - Thursday, Mar 05, 2015 at 10:28

Thursday, Mar 05, 2015 at 10:28
Honky

If that is correct that is one of the best legal reforms i have ever seen and i hope the concept makes it accross to the west.
I have oftne found that although lawyers should act on behalf of their clients, their business model relies on selling hours, which often isn't in their clients interests.


alan
1
FollowupID: 834836

Follow Up By: pop2jocem - Thursday, Mar 05, 2015 at 12:05

Thursday, Mar 05, 2015 at 12:05
Alan,
I think your last bit about "their business model relies on selling hours" puts it pretty much in a nutshell. Maybe in addition to "selling hours" I get the feeling their immortal soul gets thrown in as well.
I guess what we have to keep in mind is that law firms, like insurance companies or any other business, are in business for just one reason, to make money.
All that varies is the product.

They ain't in business for our benefit.

Cheers
Pop
0
FollowupID: 834838

Follow Up By: Alan S (WA) - Thursday, Mar 05, 2015 at 15:41

Thursday, Mar 05, 2015 at 15:41
Pop

It gets worse when there is a third party picking up the bill, such as legal aid. Legal aid will pick up the case if it meets initial criteria, however the continued funding is dependant not on the person, but on discussions between the lawyer and legal aid.
It is an even better business model having the service providor dependant on their income from some one else other than the person they are providing the service. Forget about servicing the customer.


Alan
0
FollowupID: 834851

Reply By: disco driver - Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 15:51

Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 15:51
It's a bit like that "not funny now" Carlton Mid ad where all the footy players and their wives/partners all arrive at the same resort (allegedly independently).
What a coincidence that they all chose the same place at the same time.
Perhaps that is the way to beat the insurance issues.

Here's how it works.
Bloke A says to bloke B that he's going to Place 1 for the period x to y.
Bloke B says not a bad idea, I'll do the same trip at the same time but does not tell bloke A that he's doing it, he tells bloke C and so it goes on.
Eventually you have Blokes A to Z all going to the same place at the same time but if there's no joint planning there is no collusion or organised planning, it is not a group excursion.

The fact that they all arrived at the same place at the same time is purely coincidental.

Try telling that to the Insurance mobs and see how you get on.

Disco.
AnswerID: 549420

Follow Up By: pop2jocem - Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 16:51

Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 16:51
OK, maybe a bit ridiculous but just to expand on that.

If a mob of caravanners pull into a camp spot, legitimately not knowing each other, is that now considered a gathering who are responsible for each others conduct?

Lawyers, ya gotta luv 'em.

Don't ya?????????????

Cheers
Pop

0
FollowupID: 834813

Reply By: Gronk - Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 21:01

Wednesday, Mar 04, 2015 at 21:01
So, does the Exploroz annual gathering have insurance ??

What is the difference between having a camping weekend with 6 friends or 40 friends ?

If 30 people just happen to turn up to the same place for a weekend, it's OK, but if they communicate that via a website, it's an organised gathering and someone could be held accountable for an accident ??

If people think of these sort of things, we'll play it safe and sit at home of a weekend and watch tellie !!

AnswerID: 549432

Reply By: Robin Miller - Thursday, Mar 05, 2015 at 11:33

Thursday, Mar 05, 2015 at 11:33
Its been an upsetting question for a long time Val , and the answer is essentially no , but anythings possible - despite having the best lawyers create an unbustable contract there are teams right now trying to do just that in the case of Victorias East/West link road contract as they smell the potential 1 billion compensation.

For various reasons I keep good records and on the 4wd_Out_of _Melbourne site on may 25 2002 at 9:05 this question was raised and I believe contributed to a significant lost of site support as for a while trips were effectively banned from being discussed because of an over the top response to liability issues.

I am currently organizing 3 trips but I won't spend much time here on the actual subject as its now history , but its a reason though why sites like this and many other areas have disclaimers and "I accept " buttons etc.

At that time no single case was shown to exist, and fortunately we have moved on to have "good Samaritan legislation" which makes it less likely again.
If your getting paid , tour operator , in a comp event or you act in a manner to the effect of saying "Do it my way, or get lost" then of course that changes things.

Your question made by check my response in 2002 and it looks like I haven't changed my position.
My reponse then was approximately as below .

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The first thing and insurance salesman does when he sees you is to tell you about the house that burned down just a few streets way.

But today there is a chance that ->

1/ I will win Tatts
2/ Die in car accident
3/ Will be sued for a trip I organize
4/ Trade my Patrol for a Toyota.

There always a remote possibility of the above happening , but I don't think I will re-organize my life accordingly.












Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

AnswerID: 549451

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (13)