Help Save UK Motorsport!

[Bordtea]

Have seen this doing the rounds on social media - could well be of interest to many on here!

Help save UK Motorsport!

Following the landmark ‘Vnuk’ case, the European Court of Justice has ruled that national laws must be changed to ensure that all mechanically propelled vehicles are insured for third-party losses regardless of type of use, in all places, at any time. This applies to everything from Formula One racing cars, to mobility scooters, to antique trams and everything in-between. The UK Government opened a consultation on Wednesday 21st December, seeking views on two proposed ways forward. You can read more here: www.fightvnuk.co.uk.

So how can you help? We have started a petition asking that HM Government under no circumstances implements the 'Vnuk' judgement in a way that encompasses vehicles involved in motor and motorcycle sport activities.

Website: www.fightvnuk.co.uk
Petition: http://bit.ly/2i6Cgsf

Be sure to sign and share the petition!

[Hitch]

Why is it not reasonable that participants are insured? I'm not arguing for it, just uninformed

[meehaja]

Cost at a guess. Insurance companies hardly have a great reputation for fair and balanced pricing, also motorsports has a bit of a gentlemans agreement around crash damage as I understand it. If every rub becomes an insurance issue, the responsibility of the track owner to provide risk free racing with minimal chance of being implicated in a claim will lead to more tracks closing, Boeing tracks with Boeing racing and all but the very very wealthy priced out.

[Bordtea]

Hitch said:

Why is it not reasonable that participants are insured? I'm not arguing for it, just uninformed

I think there's two main aspects to it - the first purely being a 'freedom' thing, anyone who participates in motorsport understands the risks involved and currently has the option to take out insurance. The second is mainly to do with cost - these types of activities are extremely expensive to insure and the insurers aren't interested so you end up in a situation where either insurers aren't offering to provide insurance at all (which would effectively kill this type of activity), or the cost to legally insure yourself would make it prohibitive for the vast majority of participants.

When compulsory competitor-to-competitor third party liability insurance was introduced in Finland it effectively ended grassroots motorsport in the country because this cost became prohibitive for the amateur motorsport enthusiast... annual insurance premiums were around E5000 per driver.

[Bordtea]

meehaja said:

Cost at a guess. Insurance companies hardly have a great reputation for fair and balanced pricing, also motorsports has a bit of a gentlemans agreement around crash damage as I understand it. If every rub becomes an insurance issue, the responsibility of the track owner to provide risk free racing with minimal chance of being implicated in a claim will lead to more tracks closing, Boeing tracks with Boeing racing and all but the very very wealthy priced out.

Exactly. And that's not forgetting that it's not just motorsport that would be affected by this. Ride-on lawnmowers would technically have to be insured, for example. As, presumably, would elderly/disabled people's mobility scooters!

[motco]

Vote 'Leave'... Err, wait, err...

[krisdelta]

Genuine question, what is conceptually wrong with the idea of being insured for 3rd party losses?

What is driving the "prohibitively expensive" insurance? It will create a new market that will have to be competitive to survive - just like all other insurance.

[DCS01]

From what I have read, its the insurance companies, who are claiming any motor sports would be uninsurable. As they could not cover every eventuality and the costs to them would mean them into not offering any sort of cover.

[Riley Blue]

Page 34, Paragraph 4.11 implies that motorsport taking place on land to which the public has no access, e.g. a race track, might be exempt from the need for insurance though clarification is needed.

[krisdelta]

There are plenty of speciality risk insurers - there are people who cover satellite launches and oil tankers. You can insure anything and it's only going to cost "prohibitive amounts" if there are lots of insured incidents. I insured my car for @£300 for a weekend at the Nurburgring - hardly prohibitive?

[SlimJim16v]

motco said:

Vote 'Leave'... Err, wait, err...

Yes, we're leaving. Tell them to stick it up their arse.

[Slow]

Does this mean I need to insure a sit on lawn mower? A quadbike which never leaves my property? Mum has a jcb + dump truck which also never leave her land so guess they need insured.

Would be so expensive to insure everything that has as engine. Sounds stupid if its a blanket of ALL mechanically propelled vehicles.

[phil4]

Slow said:

Sounds stupid if its a blanket of ALL mechanically propelled vehicles.

I'm being a tad daft here, but does this not mean bicycles will also need insurance. They're propelled by mechanics (sprocket chain, wheel) in the same way a car is. Yes there's an engine in the car, which is powered not be mechanics as such, but ultimately by exploding fossil fuels. In much the same way a bicycle is propelled by muscle contractions.

If it required bicycles to be insured I'm pretty sure it'd never go any further.

[Slow]

phil4 said:

Slow said:

Sounds stupid if its a blanket of ALL mechanically propelled vehicles.

I'm being a tad daft here, but does this not mean bicycles will also need insurance. They're propelled by mechanics (sprocket chain, wheel) in the same way a car is. Yes there's an engine in the car, which is powered not be mechanics as such, but ultimately by exploding fossil fuels. In much the same way a bicycle is propelled by muscle contractions.

If it required bicycles to be insured I'm pretty sure it'd never go any further.

Skateboards? Wheels and a leg powering them. Rc cars your kids play with in the house? Those tracked wheel barrow things?

The list could go on and on of things this wouldnt work for I reckon.

[Bordtea]

phil4 said:

I'm being a tad daft here, but does this not mean bicycles will also need insurance. They're propelled by mechanics (sprocket chain, wheel) in the same way a car is. Yes there's an engine in the car, which is powered not be mechanics as such, but ultimately by exploding fossil fuels. In much the same way a bicycle is propelled by muscle contractions.

If it required bicycles to be insured I'm pretty sure it'd never go any further.

I think the wording is 'motorised vehicles' in which case bicycles would seem except - other than perhaps electrically assisted bicycles?

[Magic919]

phil4 said:

Slow said:

Sounds stupid if its a blanket of ALL mechanically propelled vehicles.

I'm being a tad daft here, but does this not mean bicycles will also need insurance.

No, just mechanically propelled vehicles. That usually means petrol, steam or electricity but includes diesel.

[caelite]

This is hilariously unworkable. Insurance executives must have a raging hard on right now.

[MrJingles705]

Hoping the MSA is on top of this..... pinged off an email.

In the meantime, based on the government proposal (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/579377/motor-insurance-vnuk-v-triglav.pdf) - the 'Amended Directive Option' seems to be the way to go, and the way they are leaning. Which would be basically OK.

[Kawasicki]

I still don't get third party insurance. If you are worried about the risks insure yourself.

[PhillipM]

krisdelta said:

There are plenty of speciality risk insurers - there are people who cover satellite launches and oil tankers. You can insure anything and it's only going to cost "prohibitive amounts" if there are lots of insured incidents. I insured my car for @£300 for a weekend at the Nurburgring - hardly prohibitive?

At all places, at any time.

So your £300 for a weekend multiplied by 4 years in a garage being build for our racer....ouch.