Legal/insurance implications of race interlopers

Lusk Doyle

Afternoon all,

I have a query on the legal/insurance implications of this....

...a person who has not signed on at the start of a race and is cycling in the opposite direction to said race encounters the race participants and decides to turn around and join in with the race group(s). When asked are they part of the race, and if they are not part of the race, to move out of the group they reply that they are insured to be there (note: this is the slimmed down version of what was actually said by the interloper and is minus the disgraceful language and personal insults that accompanied the statement).

It is my understanding that if you don't sign on you are not part of the race and are therefore not insured. This still applies even if you hold a cycling licence, etc.

Q1 - What happens to a race participant (legal/insurance - not injury wise) if they are involved in a crash with said interloper during the race?

Q2 - Same as above but applied in reverse. Legal/insurance implications to interloper?

Q3 - Are there are legal/insurance implications of same to the club?

oflahero

Yes, if you haven't signed on, and are involved in an accident, you are potentially voiding any claim on the specific race insurance cover.

Chips Lovell

You have to sign on. End of. If you're not, for insurance purposes, you're not regarded as a participant in that event.

I'm involved in race organisation and the guidance we've received is that riders who haven't signed on have their own insurance invalidated and will more than likely invalidate the insurance of anyone they are involved in an incident with.

If a legitimate participant is injured in an incident with an illegitimate particpant and finds themselves without insurance compensation, they could opt to sue the organising club for failing to police the race properly. How successful that would be is up to the courts I'm guessing.

If I found myself in the situation you described, I'd stop the race and not resume until the person concerned left it.

Lusk Doyle

Thought so. Anyone know of anywhere this is specifically written in an official document?

As opposed to a guideline as mentioned above.

Chips Lovell

We talking about open race or non-open race?

Beasty

Does the race insurance not cover those who have actually signed on in such circumstances? Clearly the interloper would be the first port of call, but I would have thought the insurance would ultimately cover any incidents caused by outside parties be they other cyclists, motorists or pedestrians where the person at fault has insufficient resources/insurance cover?

I suspect the person in question may want to argue they were "training" which is normally covered, but anyone with an appropriate licence would be expected to understand the difference between training and racing and I could not see this being accepted in any defence

Having said that, I think Vlad's suggestion of stopping the race is probably the official line, but in practice, particularly in a CP, I can't see it happening. Indeed most riders would not have a clue what to do in such circumstances

Sounds like I missed some "fun" last night Lusk Doyle!

Chips Lovell

Beasty wrote: »

Does the race insurance not cover those who have actually signed on in such circumstances?

That's what we were told by CI. Now whether that's been tested or not is another thing, but that was the read on the situation.

Beasty wrote: »

Having said that, I think Vlad's suggestion of stopping the race is probably the official line, but in practice, particularly in a CP, I can't see it happening. Indeed most riders would not have a clue what to do in such circumstances

I'd have no problem stopping a CP in those circumstances. For me a league race just isn't worth the risk of someone crashing and then finding themselves uninsured.

Beasty

Assuming this did happen at the Swords League last night, this is the second week in a row. I had a quiet word with one of the "interlopers" last week, and he dropped off. I guess next time I see it happen I for one will take a much sterner position and "encourage" those around me to do the same.

Of course, taking things into your own hands too literally could result in the worst of all worlds, and I would want to limit myself to telling them where and when to get off, but I wouldn't hesitate at stopping a race to deal with someone who would not follow such instructions if required

Chips Lovell

Is the interloper part of the league who just hadn't signed on or was he a total stranger?

kenmc

Yeah it's probably a very grey area - the roads are public and open after all. Many a time we've encountered random cyclists whilst racing, wheter it be a local lad out on his high nelly cycling down to get the milk and paper, or someone else from a club out on a training spin on their own. A couple of times even one of these lads out training sat in on our limit group or break or whatever, he said he wasn't in the race, but he was just getting a tow. Another time an "attack" went off and a couple of us chased him down only for him to tell us when we pulled him back that he wasn't in the race! Think this was early in the season though when there were a few more lads out without club kit.

So what would be the legal situation if a racing group were tootling along minding their own business and the ould fella on his way to the shops decides to swing a hard right across the road or something and takes down half the bunch? Or in the above scenario where the training lad sits on and rolls into the guy in front of him or whatever. I'd imagine that at least legally they have as much right to be there as we do since the roads are public.

Interested to see how this pans out. If there's some sort of decision made, it should probably be communicated to all racers that in this situation you must do and/or say X

Lusk Doyle

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Is the interloper part of the league who just hadn't signed on or was he a total stranger?

Not sure. I've seen him twice in as many weeks all in black and both times riding against the flow of the race but then suddenly within the race.

Beasty

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Is the interloper part of the league who just hadn't signed on or was he a total stranger?

No idea about anything that happened last night, but last week we had one who is part of the league who shot past us all having started a lap down and presumably not signed on (but wearing a race number, which I think is quite important), who confused the hell out of us. Another (the one I had a quiet word with) was wearing Swords gear but no number. I didn't encounter the third one myself

Coming back to the number point - to me this distinguishes racers from non-racers, and I do think there's been a tendency to allow people to race without them (I've seen it both in the Swords League and vets races). Maybe this is something organisers need to look to (and perhaps racers should be telling anyone who they're up against without one where to go)

kenmc

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

I'd have no problem stopping a CP in those circumstances. For me a league race just isn't worth the risk of someone crashing and then finding themselves uninsured.

Fine in theory but how would one go about stopping a race when it happens? At what point does it no longer become "a race" and what happens if riders are still "racing" and something then happens?

Beasty

Lusk Doyle wrote: »

Not sure. I've seen him twice in as many weeks all in black and both times riding against the flow of the race but then suddenly within the race.

The "third man" from last week then - sounds like he's stalking you Lusk Doyle

That was the last proper race last night (only the hill climb left), so hopefully we will never see him again, but it does seem like he was deliberately targetting the league races maybe to get his training in.

kenmc

Beasty wrote: »

Coming back to the number point - to me this distinguishes racers from non-racers, and I do think there's been a tendency to allow people to race without them (I've seen it both in the Swords League and vets races). Maybe this is something organisers need to look to (and perhaps racers should be telling anyone who they're up against without one where to go)

Numbers would be a good idea; we don't have them in the Orwell/Lucan/Tiernans/UCD/IRC league. Are they issued for the year or on a per-race basis? I can imagine that the only way it would work is if you get a number for every race when you sign on for that one. But then someone either has to collect the numbers every week and make sure they're all accounted for, or have a different colour number set for every race, which creates it's own headache.

Beasty

kenmc wrote: »

Numbers would be a good idea; we don't have them in the Orwell/Lucan/Tiernans/UCD/IRC league. Are they issued for the year or on a per-race basis? I can imagine that the only way it would work is if you get a number for every race when you sign on for that one. But then someone either has to collect the numbers every week and make sure they're all accounted for, or have a different colour number set for every race, which creates it's own headache.

In the Swords League we get our numbers at the start of the season and keep them. The vets are similar, although you will be given a new number if you change ability groups (they are colour-coded)

I would add though that if an "interloper" has a number it will be easy to track him/her down and do whatever is necessary to prevent a recurrence

Chips Lovell

kenmc wrote: »

So what would be the legal situation if a racing group were tootling along minding their own business and the ould fella on his way to the shops decides to swing a hard right across the road or something and takes down half the bunch? Or in the above scenario where the training lad sits on and rolls into the guy in front of him or whatever. I'd imagine that at least legally they have as much right to be there as we do since the roads are public.

There's a difference between ordinary traffic like other cars and bikes and someone who actively tries to participate in an event.

Lusk Doyle wrote: »

Not sure. I've seen him twice in as many weeks all in black and both times riding against the flow of the race but then suddenly within the race.

Report him to the race organisers for a start. The regs are very clear that you have to sign on. For example, club league regs are here and say:
"All participants must sign-on using the standard Cycling Ireland sign-on sheet available from HERE; All sign-on sheets must be retained by the host club for at least five years"

kenmc wrote: »

Fine in theory but how would one go about stopping a race when it happens? At what point does it no longer become "a race" and what happens if riders are still "racing" and something then happens?

For the record, there's no official guidelines and what to do, I'm just saying what I'd do. I'd ask the guy to leave the group first and explain politely why he can't be there. If he gets thick, I'd move to the front and flag the group down. Say we're not moving off again until he agrees to leave.

BTW, someone was suspended from our own league for the rest of the year for not signing on a few weeks ago.

kenmc

Beasty wrote: »

In the Swords League we get our numbers at the start of the season and keep them. The vets are similar, although you will be given a new number if you change ability groups (they are colour-coded)

I would add though that if an "interloper" has a number it will be easy to track him/her down and do whatever is necessary to prevent a recurrence

Yeah but that still leaves the possibility of someone who hasn't signed on for a race arriving late, rushing to put the bike together incorrectly or whatever heading out and causing a pileup when his front wheel seperates from the bike; even though he was wearing numbers, so no-one would be any the wiser and tell him to get out.

kenmc

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

BTW, someone was suspended from our own league for the rest of the year for not signing on a few weeks ago.

Oh I know, I was caught up in the crash and subsequently found out that they had turned up late for signon and just joined in.

Beasty

kenmc wrote: »

Yeah but that still leaves the possibility of someone who hasn't signed on for a race arriving late, rushing to put the bike together incorrectly or whatever heading out and causing a pileup when his front wheel seperates from the bike; even though he was wearing numbers, so no-one would be any the wiser and tell him to get out.

That's exactly what happened last week (apart from the pileup bit;)). We suspected he wasn't in the race, but as he was 100m up the road by then nothing happened (apart from the odd failed attempt to bridge!)

After the race I went to the organisers who confirmed he wasn't in the race, so went to have a word with him. But you're right, you can't have a cast-iron way of preventing something like this, but there are things that can be done to minimise the risks, including emphasising to all riders the rules and risks associated with not following them - I suspect most riders in our league would barely give a thought to some of the insurance limitations

Chips Lovell

If I sound a bit extreme about this, it's because once you've been involved in organising a league you realise how much crap the organising clubs could land themselves in if something goes wrong.

I also think that being firm about people jumping on means that word gets around very quickly that it isn't tolerated.

kenmc

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

If I sound a bit extreme about this, it's because once you've been involved in organising a league you realise how much crap the organising clubs could land themselves in if something goes wrong.

I also think that being firm about people jumping on means that word gets around very quickly that it isn't tolerated.

No I think you're dead right; we all pay for a racing licence in order to race, and insurance comes as part of that deal. If it subsequently transpires that we're racing uninsured because of someone turning up late and not signing on (that's bad enough cos they are supposed to know the rules) or worse still just jumping into a race whilst not being a paid up member, then it really has to be clamped down on. One thing we should *probably* do in the Orwell et al league is issue race numbers to at least identify folk who have paid their fees. At least then we could identify riders who "attack" and are not racing or tell them to get off if they sit on. It would also allow a sliver of a chance to identify signed up members who race on a day without signing on (e.g. photos along the way), and they could be reprimanded then.

Raam

The gentleman in question saw a guy he knew in the race, and turned around and followed it, whilst talking to this mate and sitting on at the back. I don't know if he moved up into the group at any point.

On another note, how does a rider stop the race?

Hungrycol

I think there weren't enough race numbers to go around which is why some don't/didn't wear any. I agree though, no number, no signature, no race. A topic for the next club AGM.

Beasty

Hungrycol wrote: »

I think there weren't enough race numbers to go around which is why some don't/didn't wear any. I agree though, no number, no signature, no race. A topic for the next club AGM.

There were definitely some spares available at the ladies race last week. I think we have numbers up to around 200, although some may have been lost and others were not returned after last season. We've had about 160-170 riders taking part in the league this year, so I would have thought we would still have some spares available

Either way, it's shouldn't be difficult to get some more printed up for next year if required. If they are putting an order in, I want to place a special request for number 666;)

Raam

As I understand it, the numbers were to help pick out winners at the end of a race. Any other benefits are incidental.

Edit: I'm just guessing though.

Idleater

Beasty wrote: »

I want to place a special request for number 666;)

I wonder is there an equivalent of Rule #13 for that: If you draw race number 13, turn it upside down.

Beasty

Raam wrote: »

As I understand it, the numbers were to help pick out winners at the end of a race. Any other benefits are incidental.

Edit: I'm just guessing though.

This was the original announcement on the club website:

This year SwordsCC will issue race numbers to all participants of the Club League. There will be a €5 refundable deposit to discourage riders from keeping the number as a souviner!.

When Signing on for each race, please make sure you are issued with a number and you must wear this number during the race.

At the end of each race, the first 8 finishers must make themselves known to the Chief/Marshal or Timekeeper so that points can be awarded.

It's not entirely clear whether the numbers were just to facilitate identifying those scoring points, although there is a clear statement that numbers must be worn

Maybe if you have a word with whoever's responsible for some of the racing pages on the website they could clarify;)?

Raam

Beasty wrote: »

It's not entirely clear whether the numbers were just to facilitate identifying those scoring points, although there is a clear statement that numbers must be worn

Maybe if you have a word with whoever's responsible for some of the racing pages on the website they could clarify;)?

The text was already there. I just moved stuff around the page a bit. :pac:

Lusk Doyle

Raam wrote: »

The gentleman in question saw a guy he knew in the race, and turned around and followed it, whilst talking to this mate and sitting on at the back. I don't know if he moved up into the group at any point.

He did move up because I was not quite at the back when he came in front of me. No problem with someone sitting at the very back and not interfering but getting involved in the group in not right. It upsets the riders and as we have learned today, is also not covered by the insurance and puts the club at risk.

Lusk Doyle

Beasty wrote: »

Having said that, I think Vlad's suggestion of stopping the race is probably the official line, but in practice, particularly in a CP, I can't see it happening. Indeed most riders would not have a clue what to do in such circumstances

Beasty wrote: »

I wouldn't hesitate at stopping a race to deal with someone who would not follow such instructions if required

kenmc wrote: »

Fine in theory but how would one go about stopping a race when it happens?

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

I'd move to the front and flag the group down. Say we're not moving off again until he agrees to leave.

Easier said than done when, like me you are hanging on for dear life at the back when the race is averaging 40kph!

Oh - and I got insulted for riding in the gutter sheltering by said person during our brief little exchange! I'm no angel but that's just plain rudeness :mad:

Raam

Let's be honest, no one is going to bother stopping just because some rider has a problem with an interloper and then tries to flag the whole group down. All that would happen is that you get dropped from the group you tried to stop and then the faster groups will drop you as they catch on.

kenmc

Raam wrote: »

Let's be honest, no one is going to bother stopping just because some rider has a problem with an interloper and then tries to flag the whole group down. All that would happen is that you get dropped from the group you tried to stop and then the faster groups will drop you as they catch on.

That's true. It appears that the only feasible solution involves the application of frame pump to spokes*.
(*not really)

Beasty

Raam wrote: »

Let's be honest, no one is going to bother stopping just because some rider has a problem with an interloper and then tries to flag the whole group down. All that would happen is that you get dropped from the group you tried to stop and then the faster groups will drop you as they catch on.

You may well be right, but perhaps if someone was prepared to make it clear to everyone in the group that the "interloper" was probably negating their insurance, I'm sure they would soon get the message across. As Vlad has already pointed we are talking lclub league here - do most of the riders really want to increase the risk just to humour someone who is spoiling their race (although I've seen myself the risks that a small proportion riders seem prepared to take on occasions)? I suspect the individual in question would not wish to face the wrath of perhaps a dozen angry racers who've just had their race spoiled by the interloper. The real problem is when riders just meekly allow it to happen because they are oblivious to the potential consequences

Raam

I reckon the older riders would care more that the younger lads who would not be aware of the implications, or even if they are aware probably would not care a damn. Thinking of my younger 20 year old self, I wouldn't have cared less if some randomer jumped in.

boege

As I understand it you are insured if you have signed on as you are training. Insurance covers personal accident and third party (and PI).

If you bring down interloper and he seeks damages then your third party cover should apply as it does not have to be another insured rider. However if interloper brings you down he is not insured. You must take civil action to recover costs.

Interloper is taking huge risks and he is personally financially exposed to civil action for damages where he is deemed at fault. You are also taking risk, since interloper has no insuirance for you to claim against and you are left with potential large medical bill for own injuries.

See cycling ireland FAQ for summary of cover, IMHO personal accident (own injuries) cover is pretty slim. What you are really relying on is third party cover and this also applies to another rider that might cause you an injury.
http://www.cyclingireland.ie/getattachment/256ef80b-6653-4b3c-a386-086e724547a4/InsuranceFAQ_Final_v1.aspx

RobFowl

Suppose it depends on who it is.
Stephen Roche famously tagged onto the 1988 RAS as it went over Sally gap....
The comms/marshals initially tried to pull him out then realised who it was. He chatted for a while at the back then turned off.
I know the rider who is being discussed and he is a sound guy, good rider and would not interfere in the racing or be a danger .
Technically he shouldn't be there that is true but he's well known to the club and has raced extensively in the league as well as marshalled at club champs. Often seen cheering at the roadside on the Ardcath circuit especially.

Beasty

The vets insurance covers you whenever you are on a bike, not just when training or racing. It's limitations are generally more generous also ...



... although it is a pre-condition that you must be wearing an approved helmet otherwise any claim is invalidated

Lusk Doyle

RobFowl wrote: »

Suppose it depends on who it is.
Stephen Roche famously tagged onto the 1988 RAS as it went over Sally gap....
The comms/marshals initially tried to pull him out then realised who it was. He chatted for a while at the back then turned off.
I know the rider who is being discussed and he is a sound guy, good rider and would not interfere in the racing or be a danger .
Technically he shouldn't be there that is true but he's well known to the club and has raced extensively in the league as well as marshalled at club champs. Often seen cheering at the roadside on the Ardcath circuit especially.

Well then he should know better and not be so rude.