Cycle Clubs and insurance

Anonymous

New to road cycling.....so please excuse the daft questions...

Is it worth joinning a club as a "beginner" ? I'm not into large group ride outs or competitive riding...

Do I need third party insurance ??

Many thanks

pilot_pete

I think all clubs insist on insurance either through the likes of BC or CTC or an equivalent.

As regards if it is worth it, well what do you want from a club? See if a club offers what you want and then only you can decide if the membership is worth it.

PP

imposter2.0

DALESMAN999 wrote:

New to road cycling.....so please excuse the daft questions...

Is it worth joinning a club as a "beginner" ? I'm not into large group ride outs or competitive riding...

Do I need third party insurance ??

Many thanks

Perhaps you should identify what it is you are into, and then see if any clubs locally can accommodate you. Either way, you do not personally need to take out any insurance.

Jerry185

Large group ride outs may be better for you - more chance of being with people your own ability, more people to chat to an get ideas from and more time to sit in the group and get tugged along in the slipstream.
Most clubs will offer different categories of rides; as said above, ask around

BrandonA

I think regardless of whether your club offers you insurance it is best to have your own anyway. This is because are bound to do some rides on your own or with friends which are not "club rides" so it makes sense to be insured all them.

As others have said British Cycling is a good one to have.

thebikeboy16

As above, I think all clubs insist on insurance, but there is usually some leeway on who it is through.

pilot_pete

Imposter wrote:

DALESMAN999 wrote:

New to road cycling.....so please excuse the daft questions...

Is it worth joinning a club as a "beginner" ? I'm not into large group ride outs or competitive riding...

Do I need third party insurance ??

Many thanks

Perhaps you should identify what it is you are into, and then see if any clubs locally can accommodate you. Either way, you do not personally need to take out any insurance.

I have just looked at half a dozen clubs and all of them insist on third party insurance to ride with them. My club insist on either BC or CTC insurance, others may differ but like I said, I didn't find one that said you didn't need insurance. They may allow you to ride with them a few times before they insist on you taking it out (usually when you apply for membership you need to provide evidence of it).

You can join BC or CTC and get cover at any time, obviously you are insuring yourself so your cover is not club specific so you could chop and change a few clubs finding which best suits you without having to change policies.

Why not get in touch with local clubs and arrange a ride with them?

PP

cycleclinic

I am on the commtee in the west suffolk wheelers. 500 members. While we suggest membership of BC or CTC and suggest insurance we certainly dont insist on it as it is not a legal requirement.

I think any club that insist on it is one to avoid. Cycling is not that hazzardous and in a club if a spill happens we should not be claiming of each other. You ride at your own risk. If you cant accept that dont ride in a group or that club.

Anonymous

Have we become a nation of where there is blame there is a claim ?

As I'm new to road cycling , the subject of insurance truly has me baffled. There is no legal requirement yet as a previous poster has stated - most clubs insist on it .

As my wife comments - " this cycling lark is getting expensive "! - just as I place yet another order with a well known on line retailer

pilot_pete

I think the club has liability insurance as well!

It is an interesting position to take suggesting that any club that requires you to be insured is worth avoiding. I can only assume you are implying that the insurance is to claim against fellow club members in the event of a 'spill' as you say.

I don't think the insurance is for cover against a fellow club member claiming in the event of a spill necessarily (although that could happen) * , it is more about third party claims. What if you cause an accident (through perhaps one moment's lapse in concentration) and a pedestrian is killed? Would you be happy fighting any claim against you in court?

I think it is more valid if you actually earn a half decent wage and could be viewed as worth suing. If you are potless then I guess you probably wouldn't care if a judgement was made against you. But would you be happy living with the fact that you had killed or caused life changing injuries to someone who would then suffer possible terrible hardship through no fault of their own?

Think about it like car insurance. If someone maimed a member of my family with their car and they were properly insured, at least there might be the chance of funding their costly care without our lives being completely ruined. I think taking out liability insurance is a responsible thing to do, not something to be derided. I suspect some clubs' attitude towards insurance cover may change if they sought legal advice as to potential liability. I don't know, but suspect there could be some liability for the club should someone (be it member or third party) is injured/ killed etc by a club member during a club organised activity. Possible food for thought.

PP

* Oh and p.s. what if you caused a spill in a club group ride and heaven forbid your best buddy was killed? Think about the effect on their family if he/ she was the breadwinner. Wouldn't you want them to be able to claim on your insurance rather than suffer terrible hardship as well as the tragic loss?

cycleclinic

Looking at the spills on club rides they dont involves third parties. They involves riders only going down sometimes someone goes down with them. Fortunatley injuries are not common and we have a good orthopedic surgeon in the club who has opperated on a member or two over the years. All part of the membership you know.

So insurance to cover third party claims are red herring. Car owners have there own insurance to fall back on. The ammount of damage a cyclist can do to a car is limited. Cyclist pedestrian incidents could be an issue but best avoided by a club runs not going near cycle paths. What we worry about is claims on other members by members percievdd to be at fault for a spill. It has not happened yet. I hope it doesn't.

If a club makes group riding onerous then it stops being fun. We ride at our own risk at lets face in a spill we tend to hurt ourselves.

I have bc membership and jnsurance but only because i need a race licence. If i did not race i would not have it.

pilot_pete

That's all great, but you are missing the point. Car owners don't have their own insurance to 'fall back on', they have it as it is a legal requirement for driving on public roads, exactly for the reason's I mention.

Minor injuries are common in bike crashes, not uncommon. Bad injuries CAN occur, whilst rare. Insurance is about the unlikely happening and covering against it. Agreed the amount of damage a bike can do to a car is limited, but you are missing the point; it is the potential amount of damage you can do to a third party (who said they are all in cars?). A cyclist can potentially kill another cyclist or a pedestrian, or even a car driver if they have to take evasive action and hit something else.

I cannot for the life of me think why insurance to cover a third party is a red herring in your eyes. If you crash and hit/ injure/ kill someone that is a potential risk, albeit a small one. If you aren't covered by insurance it is possible you will be sued. That could cost you an awful lot. No red herrings, just fact.

Being insured does not make club rides onerous, any more than it makes my driving to work onerous, or driving to the shops, or on holiday, or even to a open TT event. It costs peanuts. If I fall off and hurt myself then fine; we know the risks. If I seriously damage someone else I have peace of mind. I hope you and your club mates are lucky enough, especially the ones that don't have insurance.

Funny how you have BC insurance as it is a requirement to race. Do you campaign against that as the likelyhood of injuring third parties badly is so limited in your eyes? Or do you just pay it so you can race? Do you therefore find racing onerous?

PP

DeVlaeminck

I've never heard of insurance via a BC or other membership being a requirement of joining a club - certainly ours doesn't -sounds from the above that some do but I doubt it's a majority.

andyh01

I don't have much interest in joining a club, best it got was a sky ride, but I'm a bit of an insurance geek, firstly as stated perceived as a low risk of serious/life changing injury on a bike compared to mechanical propelled vehicles. I have actually knocked a pedestrian over (stepped out in front of me on the brow of a hill, as I had head down) no where near ped crossing/lights, she fell to floor head came up then down on tarmac, sent me flying, as I lost control further down the hill. I actually wanted to sue the person for damage caused to my bike and injuries I sustained but I didn't, I could have been the one that came off worse due to my speed and being higher up from the ground further to fall, esp if I decided not to wear a helmet.

End of day comes down to duty of care to each other, (some more so due to their higher risk factor eg car on bike/person).
What about runners, bumping into other pedestraians, should they have insurance too?

Worse case, there is a free NHS service to help fix injuried party. If deemed to be RTA then there is also MIB fund of last resort paid into by all insurer to cover uninsured/un-traced drivers (not sure if cyclist could trigger an MIB payment as not under road traffic act as not mechanically propelled hence no legal requirement for TP insurance) In the event of an unsatisfied judgement against the cyclist and finally if not racing, if you have home insurance, esp with legal expense extension or inc as std then this may well also cover you, depending on wording and T&Cs of course, along with the actual circumstance of the accident (I guess same with bike specific insurance)

andyh01

Sorry I'd also add to that I'd expect part of my membership costs would go towards the "clubs" insurance giving say £2m or £5m public liability insurance to cover in the event of organised club ride something happening to an TP not part of the group as an result of club activity (I wouldn't expect this to cover rider v rider though and perhaps that's why some clubs may insist on own insurance?)

mamba80

PP..... how do these clubs that insist on 3rd party insurance enforce this rule? i ve also have never heard of it when joining a club. and in any case BC ins states you cannot claim against another BC member, i am covered under my house hold ins, would i need to bring the policy with me?

to get a BC racing licence, you need to be a BC member, which automatically gives insurance, its not an option.

i think your getting mixed up with insurance that club officials have.

fwiw having some sort of legal representation such as some household and BC membership gives is very worthwhile regardless of if your in a club or not.

pilot_pete

mamba80 wrote:

PP..... how do these clubs that insist on 3rd party insurance enforce this rule? i ve also have never heard of it when joining a club. and in any case BC ins states you cannot claim against another BC member, i am covered under my house hold ins, would i need to bring the policy with me?

to get a BC racing licence, you need to be a BC member, which automatically gives insurance, its not an option.

i think your getting mixed up with insurance that club officials have.

fwiw having some sort of legal representation such as some household and BC membership gives is very worthwhile regardless of if your in a club or not.

1. My club requires membership of BC or CTC (or another similar scheme) with 3rd party insurance cover. You have to provide them with membership details when you renew club membership.

2. If you thought your house insurance would cover you I guess you would have to provide details of that cover to the club and they would decide if it was sufficient/ acceptable. I don't know though, I am not on the committee and am only a member of one club.

3. I know full well that to get a race licence you need to be a BC member and automatically you get insured. I was making a point that thecycleclinic claimed that insisting on having insurance would make club runs onerous (his words) therefore he would advise avoiding such a club. It therefore follows that he deems racing to be onerous because he has to have insurance to do it. See my point?

4. You may think I am getting mixed up with insurance that club officials have, but you are incorrect in that assumption. Our club insures itself (I.e. liability cover for the club). They also require every member to have third party insurance if they wish to partake in any cycling activity that the club organises. Is that clear enough for you?

It is all well and good saying we have an NHS for if I run into a pedestrian, but that will treat the injuries, it will not provide the possibly quite significant costs of continuing specialist care or prevent hardship of the said individual if I have rendered them unable to work again etc. I can't quite see why anyone would think the peanuts that it costs should be avoided.

You can easily give examples of anything in life that has a small risk, such as being a pedestrian and say should they be insured as well. It all comes down to risk. In thirty years of driving I have never injured anyone but the potential to is still huge in my mind. When cycling the potential is much lower, but still quite possible. When walking along the street I think it really would be a complete freak accident if I were to bump into someone who subsequently suffered bad injury. I personally see the value in insuring myself when I ride a bike but not if I walk down the street. Each to their own.

PP

pilot_pete

Oh and mamba80, forgot to add regarding BC not allowing claims against another member...

From BC;

Important exclusions include:

One member against another in a cycling competition, race, time trial or timed event.

You will note it says during competitive events, not club runs or group rides or any other non-competitive club activity.

PP

bigmat

Yep, I have been claimed against by another member of British Cycling and left it for British Cycling to respond to the claim. Wasn't impressed by the guy that made the claim, but it wasn't me having to pay out so I just moved on. For the record my club requires all members to have BC membership. Not difficult to enforce and not exactly onerous as we all benefit from it. The 10% discount at Halfords pays for it most years anyway!

bobmcstuff

My club requires insurance because you have to join through BC and get BC membership at the same time. The other club I ride with requires you to have it but I'm not sure how they check as am not a member: http://www.hmiddletoncc.co.uk/membership

shimanobottombracket

You dont legally need insurance to cycle. So what would the reaction be if you just cycled along with a group of cyclist on a club run where they did insist on insurance? They cant stop you cycling with them on public roads can they?

pilot_pete

And you seriously could be arsed to do that week in week out? :roll:

PP

shimanobottombracket

Pilot Pete wrote:

And you seriously could be arsed to do that week in week out? :roll:

PP

Do what? Which post are you replying to?

Also when I check out the time of some posts (take my previous one as example) it uses the 24hour format but still uses pm. My previous post in this thread was at 15:55 pm. Wtf?

bobmcstuff

ShimanoBottomBracket wrote:

You dont legally need insurance to cycle. So what would the reaction be if you just cycled along with a group of cyclist on a club run where they did insist on insurance? They cant stop you cycling with them on public roads can they?

Most clubs let you go along for a few times before you join so I imagine it would be just like that...

I don't see why clubs insisting on insurance for members is such a big deal - the cost is incidental and it gives the club some protection as well.

My club operates it's membership subs etc through BC so you have to get BC membership to join, which makes it pretty much a non-issue. I didn't even think twice about it when I joined.

Anonymous

Why can't clubs set up a " club members insurance policy " ?

I am a member of two organisations that include liability insurance for their members - keeps costs down and the organisations get a commission each time a new member joins and pays their subs

pilot_pete

ShimanoBottomBracket wrote:

Pilot Pete wrote:

And you seriously could be arsed to do that week in week out? :roll:

PP

Do what? Which post are you replying to?

Also when I check out the time of some posts (take my previous one as example) it uses the 24hour format but still uses pm. My previous post in this thread was at 15:55 pm. Wtf?

The one directly above. So you would want to partake in what a club offers, but wouldn't want to actually join it? You'd have a great ride every week just tagging on behind. Do you think all the paid up members would be friendly and accommodating? What a rediculous idea.

PP

and by the way, p.s. you are quite correct, they could not stop you riding on public roads, but if ou keep following them week in week out they could probably get you done for stalking!

OnTheRopes

DALESMAN999 wrote:

Why can't clubs set up a " club members insurance policy " ?

I am a member of two organisations that include liability insurance for their members - keeps costs down and the organisations get a commission each time a new member joins and pays their subs

So if you are a member of two such clubs, does that mean you are paying twice for insurance?

trek_dan

I can't believe people complain about the cost of a basic BC membership. Happily spend £1000 on a bike and then moan about £22 a year to have appropriate legal cover. FYI if you've never been a member of a cycling club before BC offer your first year free when you join an affiliated club - https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/clubs/membership

fat daddy

With it not being a legal requirement for cyclists to be insured, I like that clubs force the issue, its a responsible thing to do. shame they have more balls than our government.

Its quite easy to hurt someone, damage property or require representation due to unplanned incidents, its common fcuking sense and a decent thing to do to be covered.

People wouldn't be happy knowing car drivers didn't have basic insurance, why should cycles not have the same legal requirement .... especially those that commute .... those fcukers should have to pay double (ps, I commute by bike)

slowbike

interestingly - reading the British Cycling 3rd party liability insurance - it may be that you're not covered if riding in a timed sportive

https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/thirdpartyliability
What is not covered?

Important exclusions include:

Business use (e.g. cycle courier) but commuting is covered.
Deliberate acts.
One member against another in a cycling competition, race, time trial or timed event (1).
Any liability directly or indirectly caused to a member’s immediate family arising from either social or competitive cycling events.
Claims against members who are not resident in Great Britain, Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man, or the Channel Islands (2).

(1) Typically, but not exclusively, a Sportive or other such organised mass participation event where times are recorded.

Also - exclusions are claims from an immediate family member.
So, better than nothing, but no good if you're riding a sportive with your family and wipe one of them out ...

shimanobottombracket

fat daddy wrote:

With it not being a legal requirement for cyclists to be insured, I like that clubs force the issue, its a responsible thing to do. shame they have more balls than our government.

Its quite easy to hurt someone, damage property or require representation due to unplanned incidents, its common fcuking sense and a decent thing to do to be covered.

People wouldn't be happy knowing car drivers didn't have basic insurance, why should cycles not have the same legal requirement .... especially those that commute .... those fcukers should have to pay double (ps, I commute by bike)

trek_dan wrote:

I can't believe people complain about the cost of a basic BC membership. Happily spend £1000 on a bike and then moan about £22 a year to have appropriate legal cover. FYI if you've never been a member of a cycling club before BC offer your first year free when you join an affiliated club - https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/clubs/membership

I dont think its a cost issue with cycling insurance itself. Its more to do with how much people hate insurance companies. You can get insurance for almost anything, and if you did that then the cost would be an issue as you would end up spending more on insurance than you would paying for something yourself. Even when you do make a claim, if there is something even slightly less than accurate in the information you provided to the insurance company, they will fail to pay out. They may also fail to pay out due to some obscure circumstances, plus those fudging clauses they always have. Basically they are c****. Nobody likes spending time or money on c****. At least there are other benefits with BC membership.