Jay
If he's a member of NAMSA, he should be covered. He probably indicated that SCCA was looking for coverage. Remember, the key is "WHO" is putting the regatta on.
When they were Hobie Fleet 45, it was the same deal...
Again, we'll know more when we get the policy. I am not entirely sure the agents who got us the policy know it as well as they should... After all, they don't have a copy of it either....
Jay
Sorry I didn't get back online in time to read your post, Rick. It's been busy between hurricanes lately. Needless to say, this would be considered "busy" time for insurance agents (for claims handling). And then I look up to find Frances on her way. Joy...
I'll try to write something creative about the insurance. Right now it looks like a standard policy covering NAMSA for their operations as they pertain to racing organization and RC duties. I'll look for more specifics as they apply to other organizations and the parts they play in regattas with NAMSA.
Most importantly, we should review the sanctioning requirements with the other clubs PRIOR to setting up a regatta to ensure that the proper loss control activities are in place to reduce the chance of a claim ever happening.
From another site, we've been discussing the RC's duty to maintain a keen eye on weather developments and warning sailors to take appropriate action.
Since the RC can utilize more technology to determine if the weather will turn ugly (I can't recall anyone making waterproof laptops with wireless internet to download the weather, but I do know that most RCs can keep in cell phone contact with someone on land who does have access to weather data), they must be willing to look like a party-poop by postponing or cancelling a race. Sure, most sailors understand the "race at your own risk" aspect of the regatta, but that doesn't relieve the RC of due diligence.
In my mind, a good example of this was the America's Cup. There were postponments when the wind was up. The AC RC put up the "box rule" for wind, and cancelled racing when the wind exceed their guidelines. Part of that was due to the RC realizing that if they sanctioned races in conditions that "could reasonably and forseeably result" in damage or injury, they expose themselves to negligence lawsuit. There was a lot of money at stake and if all the NZ breakage happened when the wind was up, I'm sure some enterprizing attorney team would be in court the next day suing the AC committee for causing NZ to lose by racing in conditions that would destroy the boat.
In the actual race of course, NZ came apart anyway, but I don't think anyone could fault the RC, since both teams assisted in determining the "box rule".
Yes, sailing (or racing) in general poses certain risks. Those risks are contemplated in the sailor's decision to sail/race. Presenting competitors with conditions (weather, course, hazards, sharks with laser beams, etc.) that would significantly increase those risks could expose the RC to negligence suits.
Negligence, by its definition, is considered an intentional act (by comission or omission) and therefore excluded under most insurance policies.
Food for thought....
Jay
With all this hurricane stuff (and claims handling), I have no time to draft an article this month. Feel free to edit what I have posted if you think that would work. I'm just back from Palm Beach, and Tampa the day before. Will probably be evacuating soon for Ivan, so who knows when I'll be back online.
When things settle next week, I'll try to work on something for insomniac readers...
Jay
- 57 Forums
- 31.6 K Topics
- 345.9 K Posts
- 4,427 Online
- 31.1 K Members
