Injured while on local sky ride
Comments
-
k3vinjam3s wrote:End of the day he is employed by sky, not a volunteer as he is paid to lead rides. I reckon British cycling will do all they can to help him as they value the ride leaders and wouldn't want to discourage other ride leaders from taking part in sky rides. I wish the op a speedy recovery and hope British cycling come through for him.
I with you there.. there really have been some unhelpful/ignorant remarks made. (people might say thats rich coming from me) .. I have only just looked into the background of Sky Ride leaders. doing a job it appears
If the OP can keep updating as to any outcome.0 -
It's a mad mad world.
.....I'm sorry but we've had to cancel Sky Rides due to execessive insurance premiums.0 -
It would be good to hear from the OP again, to whom best wishes for a speedy recovery.
The first post was ambiguous in its wording. It may by now have been edited.
My main concern is that there is someone 'leading' a Sky Ride (or 'helping the leader') who has a habit of slamming on the anchors in the middle of a bunch. This seems to my hazy mind to smack slightly of injudicious riding.
Riding in a group (or pack or chain gang or similar) is a learned thing. It requires a degree of restraint on the anchors and a huge amount of observation and anticipation.
This thread has sort of bimbled into a barrackroom law court of sorts, while the OP has remained absent.
OP, just as you ought to pay bleedin' attention to the riders in front of you on a group ride, so you ought also to come back into a thread you let off the leash and offer an update.
Carry on everyone....0 -
There's absolutely nothing wrong with using any loss of earnings insurance you may have to cover loss of earnings as a result of an injury, I don't understand why some people seem to be having an issue with this. That's why the employer pays the premiums, that's exactly what that sort of insurance is designed for.
Trying to sue sky for falling off your bike due to your own mistake is another matter though, but nothing in OP's post suggests that's what he wants to do particularly - he just wants to cover his loss of earnings (although he has not been very specific and I would have thought he would be on sick pay anyway).0 -
Dorset Boy wrote:And then everyone else has to pick up the tab for his incompetence.
How much of the price for car / house insurance is to pay for the false claims and the ambulance chasing scum?
shoot happens.
So you're saying that if you left your back door unlocked (your incompetence) and all your stuff got nicked you wouldn't claim on your insurance so as to keep the premiums down for everyone else? Yeah, thought not.0 -
bobmcstuff wrote:Dorset Boy wrote:And then everyone else has to pick up the tab for his incompetence.
How much of the price for car / house insurance is to pay for the false claims and the ambulance chasing scum?
shoot happens.
So you're saying that if you left your back door unlocked (your incompetence) and all your stuff got nicked you wouldn't claim on your insurance so as to keep the premiums down for everyone else? Yeah, thought not.
There is a slight difference though. If you are claiming on your own insurance it is you who has paid for it,not somebody else.0 -
If the OP has zero-hours contract or gets zero sick pay then it's down to him to insure himself against loss of earnings. He appears to be the at-fault party in terms of causing his own injury. I doubt he had a contract of employment with BC as he was a volunteer. But no, he wants to make a case of negligence against BC because of his numbty riding? $hit-happens in life - suck it up and move on.Make mine an Italian, with Campagnolo on the side..0
-
Monty Dog wrote:But no, he wants to make a case of negligence against BC because of his numbty riding? $hit-happens in life - suck it up and move on.
He didn't say that, read it properly... That idea was added by later posters...0 -
Monty Dog wrote:If the OP has zero-hours contract or gets zero sick pay then it's down to him to insure himself against loss of earnings. He appears to be the at-fault party in terms of causing his own injury. I doubt he had a contract of employment with BC as he was a volunteer. But no, he wants to make a case of negligence against BC because of his numbty riding? $hit-happens in life - suck it up and move on.
He does have a contract with sky/bc as he was employed and not a volunteer. I think the harsh comments on this whole thread are unfounded. No one knows the full details regarding the accident and put it down to his "numpty riding" or bad group riding because it's a sky ride. Its all rather negative and no wonder op hasn't responded.0 -
k3vinjam3s wrote:Monty Dog wrote:If the OP has zero-hours contract or gets zero sick pay then it's down to him to insure himself against loss of earnings. He appears to be the at-fault party in terms of causing his own injury. I doubt he had a contract of employment with BC as he was a volunteer. But no, he wants to make a case of negligence against BC because of his numbty riding? $hit-happens in life - suck it up and move on.
He does have a contract with sky/bc as he was employed and not a volunteer. I think the harsh comments on this whole thread are unfounded. No one knows the full details regarding the accident and put it down to his "numpty riding" or bad group riding because it's a sky ride. Its all rather negative and no wonder op hasn't responded.
Where does a contract get mentioned?0 -
thegreatdivide wrote:k3vinjam3s wrote:Monty Dog wrote:If the OP has zero-hours contract or gets zero sick pay then it's down to him to insure himself against loss of earnings. He appears to be the at-fault party in terms of causing his own injury. I doubt he had a contract of employment with BC as he was a volunteer. But no, he wants to make a case of negligence against BC because of his numbty riding? $hit-happens in life - suck it up and move on.
He does have a contract with sky/bc as he was employed and not a volunteer. I think the harsh comments on this whole thread are unfounded. No one knows the full details regarding the accident and put it down to his "numpty riding" or bad group riding because it's a sky ride. Its all rather negative and no wonder op hasn't responded.
Where does a contract get mentioned?
It doesn't but I'm more than sure he will of signed one when he became employed by sky/bc.0 -
dont the ride leaders/assistant leaders all sign up for British Cycling membership, so would automatically be covered by BCs member insurance wouldnt they ?
as long as theyve followed all the ride rules...at which point youd expect there is probably a rule about how closely to follow or lead a group of novice riders and to always have an exit strategy and not get boxed in...because I stopped doing those rides when I realised novice riders really dont think too much about how their actions impact on the group riding.
and no I dont think bus drivers get sick pay anymore0 -
Volunteers can be considered employees under the HASAW etc Act. Contracts do not have to be written down to be legally binding. Offering to be a ride leader and being given a vest would imply some form of contractual relationship, but not a binding one.
An employer can only be responsible for a loss from an accident if they were negligent. So employers liability insurance (or public liability insurance) is not designed as an automatic pay out. Given that falling off is an obviously foreseeable hazard in a bunch of mixed ability experience, then volenti non fit injuria will apply. The same principle that prevents you from suing a sports centre when you get injured during normal play.
There would be no negligence, no liability. and therefore no pay out.0 -
bobmcstuff wrote:Dorset Boy wrote:And then everyone else has to pick up the tab for his incompetence.
How much of the price for car / house insurance is to pay for the false claims and the ambulance chasing scum?
shoot happens.
So you're saying that if you left your back door unlocked (your incompetence) and all your stuff got nicked you wouldn't claim on your insurance so as to keep the premiums down for everyone else? Yeah, thought not.
If the insurance company discovered you had left the back door unlocked they probably wouldn't pay out.
Anyway, I hope the OP is healing quickly, and it would be good to have some clarification from him of his role on the day - was he being paid or was he a volunteer as it really isn't clear.0 -
yes he was paid. all skyride leaders are paid.0
-
k3vinjam3s wrote:yes he was paid. all skyride leaders are paid.
Nobody offered me any money when I was asked to be a ride leader for three days.0 -
thegreatdivide wrote:k3vinjam3s wrote:yes he was paid. all skyride leaders are paid.
Nobody offered me any money when I was asked to be a ride leader for three days.
Well sky ride leaders undertake a course from British cycling, sign a contract and are paid per ride. I don't know your situation but this is the norm.0 -
Dorset Boy wrote:bobmcstuff wrote:Dorset Boy wrote:And then everyone else has to pick up the tab for his incompetence.
How much of the price for car / house insurance is to pay for the false claims and the ambulance chasing scum?
shoot happens.
So you're saying that if you left your back door unlocked (your incompetence) and all your stuff got nicked you wouldn't claim on your insurance so as to keep the premiums down for everyone else? Yeah, thought not.
If the insurance company discovered you had left the back door unlocked they probably wouldn't pay out.
Anyway, I hope the OP is healing quickly, and it would be good to have some clarification from him of his role on the day - was he being paid or was he a volunteer as it really isn't clear.
Not necessarily, I'm covered for accidental damage and theft. Mainly cos it's quite likely I'll lose or drop my phone at some point, but based on the wording it should cover me in that case as long as I didn't leave the door open on purpose.
But anyway, if he had insurance which covers loss of earnings then I don't understand why he shouldn't claim on it0 -
There is so much BS being posting in this thread, its ridiculous.
1. Contracts can be both in writing and oral: Contracts consist of of an offer, consideration (some benefit/payment) & acceptance - it does not need to be written down to be binding, if evidence can show a contract existed.
2. Sick Pay - is a statutory right for all employees, some employers have occupational schemes which will also pay out. Unions often provide schemes too. Unless a bus driver earns less than £111 a week or has failed to follow the process he should qualify.
3. Employment - being paid to do something, is not the definition of being an Employee - it could easily be a contract to provide services - i.e self employed. Having said that there are various bits on the net which refer to the contract of employment for sky ride leaders, so if it had employment conditions, rights, responsibilities, duties etc then a ride leader could be an employee.
4. Insurance - I can insure myself against my liability to others, I can insure myself against my own losses from my own accidents and I can be covered by many other insurances. Just because the accident was my fault does not mean - I'm not insured.
5. Negligence - is fairly complex, but their must be a duty of care, a failure of that duty and some loss. In establishing duty there needs to be proximity (ability to have actually done or not done something), a reasonably foreseeable situation and test of fairness to impose that duty.0 -
diy has a a valid point in terms of negligence. We often hear people say "you can't do that, you're not insured". This is very misleading. When a company takes out Employee Liability insurance, it is not to cover the employee. It is to cover the employer against claims from employees so that, in the event of a valid claim against an employer, there is a third party to guarantee the payout. It is also a legal requirement for employers to have such insurance.
An employer cannot abrogate its liabilities for negligence against anyone, including employees. However, the important part from the point of view of the injured employee is, was there any negligence on the part of the employer. If not, then they are not liable.I have only two things to say to that; Bo***cks0 -
btw its Employers’ Liability Insurance which is compulsory - Employers’ Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969. I think you meant Employer when you said Employee.
public liability insurance isn't compulsory.0 -
diy wrote:4. Insurance - I can insure myself against my liability to others, I can insure myself against my own losses from my own accidents and I can be covered by many other insurances. Just because the accident was my fault does not mean - I'm not insured.
That's what I was trying to say, only you said it better.0 -
diy wrote:btw its Employers’ Liability Insurance which is compulsory - Employers’ Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969. I think you meant Employer when you said Employee.
public liability insurance isn't compulsory.
You are correct. Apologies for my typoI have only two things to say to that; Bo***cks0
