Trackday Claim for hitting another car

[Ph1 Tom]

Make it compulsory to have no insurance. Problem solved.

We all know driving at speed involves risk, we accept that but we shouldn't have to accept the insurance cretins chasing us down.

Last time I did Oulton I had a spin at Lodge. Car behind was quite close but I controlled it well and got out of the way. Had I not and he'd hit me then its my own fault for running out of talent first. I don't have an expensive track car for this reason.

However if you have an expensive car then I would expect it to be covered. The insurer has offered a premium based on the risk and the value of the car, you pay that and you're fully entitled to claim. The insurers should not be reclaiming the costs, it's unethical.

I really don't see how this is going to go. All the money grabbing insurers are going to be seeing pound signs and people will be put off costs and concerns over being sued.

 

[Adamm.]

It's all b****cks. If you decide to drive on track, then its your problem. If someone crashes into you, its your problem. If you don't like those rules, fcuk off and drive up and down the ring road.

Sounds fair to those with £60K+ race cars and sports cars costing over £50k. I see your point and its all well and good for those who have a little french tin that cost peanuts but if you had a Lamborghini I'm pretty sure you wouldn't take it on track uninsured.

There must be a better way round it than to ruin it for a certain category of people.

 

[Adam G]

Trackdays are there to push you and your car. The thought of this becoming the norm puts me right off. Whilst I take other drivers into consideration, I want to be on or near the limit most of the time. If I feel that I can't do that for the fear of being sued, then I can't see the point of paying to go on track. I have always accepted the risks of binning it or being driven in to. It WAS a gamble I was prepared to take. Not so sure now.

 

[Tony Hunter]

Very worrying indeed. Not read all the shiz, but did A damage his car before B hit him.

I dislike doing TD in the race car, because some numpty always like to sit on your bumper (usually Megans), thinking it's fun to chase a race car about, when all I'm thinking is, fk off toss pot as this could get expensive.

On a race day, well, that's what we are there for.

 

[Daniel]

Sounds fair to those with £60K+ race cars and sports cars costing over £50k. I see your point and its all well and good for those who have a little french tin that cost peanuts but if you had a Lamborghini I'm pretty sure you wouldn't take it on track uninsured.

There must be a better way round it than to ruin it for a certain category of people.

I'm of the opinion that if you can't afford to bin your car, don't take it on track.

This thread is pissing me off. I f**king hate insurance companies.

 

[Adamm.]

I'm of the opinion that if you can't afford to bin your car, don't take it on track.

This thread is pissing me off. I f**king hate insurance companies.

Lol I know but that's because the car you take on track is cheap, I'm sure if you owned a supercar of some sort then you're not exactly skint and you could probably afford to loose the car but for the sake of a couple hundred(?) you could potentially save a huge amount of money so would be silly not to insure.

You seem to be of the opinion that 'as long as I'm alright I don't care about everybody else'. I'm not just trying to debate I agree 100% this new insurance thing is f**king stupid but I don't think it's fair to penalise a huge category of people that will only go on track with insurance.

It's complicated but there must be a better way round it than to say everyone on track needs to be uninsured.

 

[Daniel]

Not fair? What about those of us who are on track in cars that we can afford to lose? Even when I took my M3 on, I was perfectly aware of the risk and was happy with it.

If I had to insure every time I went on track I'd probably give up doing it. It turns an already expensive hobby into an even more expensive one. Unnecessarily.

 

[mark123]

Lol I know but that's because the car you take on track is cheap, I'm sure if you owned a supercar of some sort then you're not exactly skint and you could probably afford to loose the car but for the sake of a couple hundred(?) you could potentially save a huge amount of money so would be silly not to insure.

You seem to be of the opinion that 'as long as I'm alright I don't care about everybody else'. I'm not just trying to debate I agree 100% this new insurance thing is f**king stupid but I don't think it's fair to penalise a huge category of people that will only go on track with insurance.

It's complicated but there must be a better way round it than to say everyone on track needs to be uninsured.

I don't know if you do track days Adam but everyone accepts there is no come back, they say it in the drivers briefing.

You could have track days that insist on insurance for those with cars they can't afford to take on track, and track days with no insurance. Although how you'd enforce no insurance I don't know.

 

[Adam G]

It's all very well saying "get insurance" but my understanding is that it wouldn't cover you for this.

 

[Adamm.]

Not fair? What about those of us who are on track in cars that we can afford to lose? Even when I took my M3 on, I was perfectly aware of the risk and was happy with it.

If I had to insure every time I went on track I'd probably give up doing it. It turns an already expensive hobby into an even more expensive one. Unnecessarily.

See I don't get this, you're happy to go on track faced with the fact you may loose your car but you don't want to spend a few ££ to insure.

If your faced with the high risk of loosing £10k I dont see why you wouldn't insure, just because you can afford to loose the money doesn't mean you want to for the sake of a few quid on insurance.

I guess it's just a matter of opinions, I have no experience of trackdays nor am I mates with people who go on track so my general knowledge of how trackdays work is slim, I don't know what most people do etc. I still think there must be a better way round it.

Also either way it's not fair on anyone, if people are insured then the uninsured have a risk of being took to the cleaners by there insurance company but if you want to go on track insured to cover your own ass you loose out if trackdays become uninsured only.

 

[Neil@greenlight]

You normally sign a waiver whenever you go on UK tracks. This basically declares you are unable to claim from anyone and you sign your rights away.

You can get trackday insurance but that is just to cover accidental damage to your own car (but wouldnt cover any Third Party Damage as they are on their and their own risk and its down to them to sort own insurance)

I think the only track that could be different is the Nurbugring as the Germans may class it as a public road. This is why a lot of UK insurers specifically exclude it from the policy cover.

Best Regards
Neil
greenlight

 

[Willo]

Make no insurance compulsary? If you cant afford to bin your car dont do track days? Why should people like me who take out insurance on every track day be penalised due to one incident (of which we dont know all the facts) where an insurance company have sued a participant.

Dont get me wrong I hate the way insurance companies conduct themselves and think the entire industry needs regulating very tightly but dont lose sight of peoples rights to insure/ protect what their hard earns bought them.

 

[mark123]

I haven't read the PH thread.

But if this was negligence (and I can see why driving through yellows at speed would be) then everyone having third party insurance against negligence would not cost anything like normal track day insurance. So it probably wouldn't cost much more. Not that I agree with it, but I expect the worst case is we all end up paying 20 quid or something for 3rd party negligence insurance.

 

[Adamm.]

I don't know if you do track days Adam but everyone accepts there is no come back, they say it in the drivers briefing.

You could have track days that insist on insurance for those with cars they can't afford to take on track, and track days with no insurance. Although how you'd enforce no insurance I don't know.

Okay lets put it like this.

Person A is in a £50k sports car and didn't take out insurance but is also rich so can afford to loose his car
Person B is in a little saxo vts uninsured and wiped out person B completely demolishing the car
Person A now looses £50K, all for what? The sake of a few quid insurance.

Just seems stupid to me to risk loosing that money even if you can afford to do so.

Anyway I'm out of the discussion for now, I simply and clearly don't know enough on the subject (see below) but will keep reading .

You can get trackday insurance but that is just to cover accidental damage to your own car (but wouldnt cover any Third Party Damage as they are on their and their own risk and its down to them to sort own insurance)

 

[Cub.]

You normally sign a waiver whenever you go on UK tracks. This basically declares you are unable to claim from anyone and you sign your rights away.

You can get trackday insurance but that is just to cover accidental damage to your own car.

I think the only track that could be different is the Nurbugring as the Germans may class it as a public road. This is why a lot of UK insurers specifically exclude it from the policy cover.

Best Regards
Neil
greenlight

This. A waiver signed should prevent this situation, which still makes me think something more has occurred in this 'incident'. Whilst others are happy having no insurance, I wouldn't be, but I would only want it to cover my car and would expect the insurance company to pay. Not pursue others for reimbursement if they did pay.

 

[mark123]

The problem is that A has agreed to accept that risk, it will have been said in the briefing. They are very clear about it.

 

[Willo]

This. A waiver signed should prevent this situation, which still makes me think something more has occurred in this 'incident'. Whilst others are happy having no insurance, I wouldn't be, but I would only want it to cover my car and would expect the insurance company to pay. Not pursue others for reimbursement if they did pay.

Completely agree

 

[...]

I remember back to the days when a road policy company was taken to court and paid out the car ran out of brakes and hit a tyre wal ..... that was circa 96/97

Insurance issues on track days have long been issues for tdo's and users .... total minefield and being honest I would need to read the full court report with all facts to see why this went this way.

 

[2Damnsly Andy]

Has anyone actually read the whole thread on PH? There's some very valid points made by legal experts and an ARDS instructor. It's almost impossible to tell what the wider effects of this case are until the written judgement is made public.
What is possible to tell is that an expert in the form of an ARDS instructor who teaches at that particular track, has said that the crash was caused by inexperience - it was a novice trackday afterall - yet a judge has found that the guy in the civic was negligent. We need to know what evidence has lead to the judge making that call.

Yes there is some very interesting reading in that thread. The write up from the ARDS instructor for one and the posts from the legal experts. I'm not sure that if Owen didn't go back to court and challenge tjis ruling that he wouldn't win, it certainly seems that based on where the crash happened and the fact that as stated the moment you enter a circuit your taking a risk more so than driving on a road that there could easily be a different outcome. It seems more so that Owen got screwed over by representing himself (a very bad idea if going to court) and I believe that had this not happened and a proper solicitor had defended him the outcome would have been null and void as 'motorsport is dangerous'. It's not about wavers but more about standard rules of the road and insurancew president being invalid once on track. For starters you don't drive at the speed limits on the track, people are all circulatng the same way, as someone remarked a new driver to a circuit wouldn't know how to combat liftoff oversteer hence causing him to spin when he did lift after seeing the other accident. There are more factors to take into consideration in this argument that the fact that he was negligent, indeed the fact that the first driver spun himself would prove his onw negligence and inability. Personally I believe that Owen needs to seek proper legal advice and go back to court and have this ruling quashed. The Insurance company have had his pants down.

 

[Neil@greenlight]

I have been on track myself numerous times and i have been there when accidents have occured. I was on brands when two Peugeots collided. The person who was at fault apologised but neither had their own insurance....Thats the risk you take when you go on track.

If i was on track and someone smacked into the back of me while i was slowing down for a corner (clearly the other persons fault)....Regardless if the person behind had paid to cover his own car i wouldnt expect to be able to claim my damage back from him/her. If i want my car covered for any mishaps on track its down to me to pay for my own cover.

It is not a legal requirement to have insurance for trackdays.

Im guessing the situation above that Mr A admitted fault on track and person B is trying their luck in claiming off the cover.

I doubt any of the UK tracks will start asking for insurance as it will mean a lot of people wont bother going to that track....Especially with trackspec cars that often turn up on trailers they would be difficult to insure.

Just my two-peneth

Neil
Greenlight
01277 376000

 

[Adamm.]

Would you still be able to claim off your own insurance if it wasn't your fault though Neil?

So say
Person A insured
Person B uninsured
Person B crashed into A
Person A claims off their own insurance and tells them no one was to blame other than themselves (A)
Person B goes on his own way and never needs to worry about being stung as persons A insurance doesn't know he was involved.

Would work surely? lol.

 

[Neil@greenlight]

Would you still be able to claim off your own insurance if it wasn't your fault though Neil?

So say
Person A insured
Person B uninsured
Person B crashed into A
Person A claims off their own insurance and tells them no one was to blame other than themselves (A)
Person B goes on his own way and never needs to worry about being stung as persons A insurance doesn't know he was involved.

Would work surely? lol.

With our trackday cover you are paying to cover just your own car for accidental damage on track so weather you spun into a barrier or a loon in a caterham hit you damage to your car would be covered

 

[Cup_Phil]

You normally sign a waiver whenever you go on UK tracks. This basically declares you are unable to claim from anyone and you sign your rights away.

You can get trackday insurance but that is just to cover accidental damage to your own car (but wouldnt cover any Third Party Damage as they are on their and their own risk and its down to them to sort own insurance)

I think the only track that could be different is the Nurbugring as the Germans may class it as a public road. This is why a lot of UK insurers specifically exclude it from the policy cover.

Best Regards
Neil
greenlight

This is what confuses me - Neil is absolutely right

Here's the paragraph from the waiver I signed at Cadwell with Javelin

Now I'm not legal expert but it certainly says you understand the risk and that you will be unlikely to claim from any 3rd parties. To me the court should have thrown it out with just that alone. Unless it was through a track day company that don't do proper waivers.

It's utter s**t - you bin it or hit someone on a track day you're fucked. That's why I never bother with track insurance tbh - we all know the risks

 

[Daniel]

See I don't get this, you're happy to go on track faced with the fact you may loose your car but you don't want to spend a few ££ to insure.

If your faced with the high risk of loosing £10k I dont see why you wouldn't insure, just because you can afford to loose the money doesn't mean you want to for the sake of a few quid on insurance.

I guess it's just a matter of opinions, I have no experience of trackdays nor am I mates with people who go on track so my general knowledge of how trackdays work is slim, I don't know what most people do etc. I still think there must be a better way round it.

Also either way it's not fair on anyone, if people are insured then the uninsured have a risk of being took to the cleaners by there insurance company but if you want to go on track insured to cover your own ass you loose out if trackdays become uninsured only.

So I've done in excess of 50 track days over the last ten years, all without Incident (*touches wood!*) As have the 5/6 people I normally go with. One of whom takes a £30k exige. You have never been and don't know anyone that's been, yet you're adamant your opinion is more correct than mine?

If someone is not comfortable with binning their car, or the risk of someone crashing into them, don't go on a track day. I'm really not sure what's so difficult to understand.

Fair enough someone wants to insure their expensive car I understand that, but for the insurance company to try and claim back their money is f**king disgusting.

Maybe at track days they can have a specific session where insured cars are only allowed out. I know that after this revelation, I'd not want to be on track with someone who's insured, for risk of getting sued. Again.

 

[Tony Hunter]

You're boring me now.

 

[mark123]

This is what confuses me - Neil is absolutely right

Here's the paragraph from the waiver I signed at Cadwell with Javelin

Now I'm not legal expert but it certainly says you understand the risk and that you will be unlikely to claim from any 3rd parties. To me the court should have thrown it out with just that alone. Unless it was through a track day company that don't do proper waivers.

It's utter s**t - you bin it or hit someone on a track day you're f**ked. That's why I never bother with track insurance tbh - we all know the risks

I think it is the negligence that changes things legally. I've always had in the back of my mind, don't know where from, that if you do something that is negligent then you could be held to account, although I'd never heard of it happening.

 

[Adam G]

This is what confuses me - Neil is absolutely right

Here's the paragraph from the waiver I signed at Cadwell with Javelin

Now I'm not legal expert but it certainly says you understand the risk and that you will be unlikely to claim from any 3rd parties. To me the court should have thrown it out with just that alone. Unless it was through a track day company that don't do proper waivers.

It's utter s**t - you bin it or hit someone on a track day you're f**ked. That's why I never bother with track insurance tbh - we all know the risks

Totally agree with that, especially the last sentence. I never bother getting insurance but that's my choice. It's a choice that I generally feel that I don't need.

Unfortunately Phil, I think the key word that maybe somebody has picked up on, if MSV's is the same is "unlikely".

 

[Adamm.]

So I've done in excess of 50 track days over the last ten years, all without Incident (*touches wood!*) As have the 5/6 people I normally go with. One of whom takes a £30k exige. You have never been and don't know anyone that's been, yet you're adamant your opinion is more correct than mine?

Um I don't think I said my opinion was more correct than yours so don't put words in my mouth thanks.

As I said I can see why you have your opinion and it could be the only way to go with this new crap but it means that others who do like to insure will loose out and that's all I am getting at.

Fair enough someone wants to insure their expensive car I understand that, but for the insurance company to try and claim back their money is f**king disgusting.

I agree 100% its not fair on anybody, it means you as uninsured track day loose out if you hit an insured driver, but it also means if say things like uninsured days go on then people who like to cover there car and save the potential risk of loosing £1000's then they also loose out.

 

[Daniel]

You're boring me now.

Don't read it then.

 

[Adam G]

The insurance that's available is for damage to your own car Adamm, can't see why you think that's valid in this instance. If you're insured and your car get's smashed, you're covered. Doesn't matter if somebody else isn't insured.

 

[Slammed172]

Unfortunately it's this 'sueing' culture, we will be like the states soon, it's a joke.

EG,

Off duty doc see's someone hurt, does he help or ignore.

A) If he helps and gets it wrong and the person hurt can sue him.
B) If he chooses to ignore when he has a obligation to help out and gets found out, he gets sued for ignoring.

 

[...]

it can all go wrong so easilly and that disclaimer does not say there will be no claim , and in fact all parties that would have signed such form didn't claim , the insurance co did , its a bit similar to the ring issue you legally are covered for 3rd party , but your insurer will come after you.

As for how easy it can go wrong

add dropped coolant (slipperier than oil) and spa and you get a huge accident , i was driving the second car , and my data had me just under 110mph as i crested eau rouge , and braked instinctively after seeing tyre smoke

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQIhXrrk1_E

 

[Adamm.]

^^ Did you feel dizzy after that?

 

[Thrust-Rated]

Interesting thread. Not read the PH thread though.

Something to bear in mind in future now next time I consider booking a track day

 

[Nigel]

If you did drive into someone whilst on track and they wanted to try and claim against you, could just not give them your details? (Assuming you've removed your cars plates)

 

[...]

If you did drive into someone whilst on track and they wanted to try and claim against you, could just not give them your details? (Assuming you've removed your cars plates)

they would get your details i am sure .....

 

[...]

^^ Did you feel dizzy after that?

i was in the second car , not the third , ;~) there are 3 cars in that video .

 

[Westyfield2]

With our trackday cover you are paying to cover just your own car for accidental damage on track so weather you spun into a barrier or a loon in a caterham hit you damage to your car would be covered

That's all well and good... but in the "a loon hit you and damaged your car" situation, would Greenlight then go and chase the loon in the Courts to recover the cost Greenlight had in paying out for the damage the loon inflicted to my car? Or are Greenlight paying out to me from their own pocket without going and suing the loon?

If yes - Then that's exactly the same as Chaucer insurance in the Pistonheads thread going after Mr Civic for £21K.
If no - Boom, we have a solution. Track Day Organisers ban people from using Chaucer insurance and everyone uses Greenlight insurance instead.

 

[Adam G]

Or we continue as it has been for years and make a choice on whether to just insure our own for damage. If this is going to set a precedent, I can see it not only killing off trackdays but the tracks themselves too. I'm sure I'm not alone thinking that it would be a risk not worth taking anymore. Detest this blame culture we now live in. I had whiplash 20 odd years ago and just got on with it. Did not justify me getting 1500 odd quid at all.

 

[...]

That's all well and good... but in the "a loon hit you and damaged your car" situation, would Greenlight then go and chase the loon in the Courts to recover the cost Greenlight had in paying out for the damage the loon inflicted to my car? Or are Greenlight paying out to me from their own pocket without going and suing the loon?

If yes - Then that's exactly the same as Chaucer insurance in the Pistonheads thread going after Mr Civic for £21K.
If no - Boom, we have a solution. Track Day Organisers ban people from using Chaucer insurance and everyone uses Greenlight insurance instead.

for a start greenlight are not an insurance company , Chaucer are ...... pretty basic to understand the difference between a broker and an actual insurance company , unless Neil tells me differently