Posts
Mutual Member Profile – Ourea Events – Running Events
When the Mutual first began, the profile of Members looked very differently, to how it looks today. We have seen a range of different activity providers emerge over the time we have been providing vital Public Liability cover to Members, Like any business we have embraced the diversity whilst always keeping at its heart to protect the Members who choose to take cover with us.
One area where we have seen an increase is the area of ‘running events’, (pardon the pun!) by this we mean organisers of trail runs and challenge events where the outdoors provides the exciting and often challenging backdrop to some incredible running events such as the Dragons Back Race. One such Member is Ourea Events who joined the Mutual in 2020 and were kind enough to share their story with us in our Newsletter from January 2023.
Loading...
Reload document 
Open in new tab Thanks to Tom Hecht, Business Operations Director at Ourea for this interview.
If you have a business that operates in this sector do contact us for a quotation for your business kit and equipment, Public & Employers Liability cover. We look forward to hearing from you.
Are you Covered?
As activity providers up and down the country prepare for a new season we wanted to remind Members that it is important to ensure all your equipment is covered and for the correct value and quantity.
Checklist
- This means checking all your equipment and stock inventories annually rather than relying on last years’ figures. Make sure you inform the AIM team of the correct new replacement values as undoubtedly the cost to replace these items will have risen.
- When looking at the figures remember that whilst you may be able to replace individual items with second hand ones, in the event of a total loss, the cost to replace the whole amount with new items is actually a considerably different financial outlay.
- Take a look at the number of kayaks, canoes, harnesses or helmets for example and ensure the number and value is correctly listed.
We have had occasions where cover was significantly underinsured and regrettably, we cannot pick up the shortfall for this. A theft of kayaks for example in the region of £21k, but listed as £3k would result in a shortfall being paid on any claim. Many providers would struggle with a loss of this value.
- As providers look at diversifying or changing what they offer, please let the team know if you are planning new or different activities to those which you specified when you first came on cover with this.
- Consider the Business Interruption and Employers Liability elements of your cover. How long would it take for you to begin trading again after a significant claim such as a fire or flood? Check if your BI Cover extends to the right amount of time. We can discuss this with you should you require it.
- If you employ staff or use volunteers it is a legal requirement to have Employers’ liability for them.
The AIM team are always on hand to talk to you about your figures so if you are not sure please call or drop as an email [email protected]
Offering Coasteering? – Getting the cover you need
Many providers of this popular activity struggle to find the right liability cover, either because their insurance provider doesn’t understand the activity or they consider it too risky and will not offer terms or a quotation.
We have had recent experience of providers looking for cover at the last minute because their insurance company changed its attitude to risk and pulled out of the market and we know this can be particularly frustrating.
As the temperature warms up, we know for many activity providers offering coasteering is a key part of your activity business, and you will be looking forward to delivering sessions again. You may even be looking to add coasteering to an already established activity schedule.
We can provide cover for your sessions with schools and families as well as adult groups from stag and hen weekends and corporate team building exercises.
Please be assured that Activities Industry Mutual (AIM ) underwriters are familiar with this particular activity when providing a quotation. We are an Associate Member of the National Coasteering Charter (NCC), and we keep up to date with their meetings and events. They promote best practice, provider and guide support in the sector, so if you are not a current Member of the NCC we encourage you to have a look at what they offer.
There is also a guide award that the NCC have introduced and the details can be found here https://www.nationalcoasteeringcharter.org.uk/coasteeringguideaward
NCC Guide award outline:
The guide award has been developed by a working group of NCC members, coasteering providers and guides from around the UK.
The award has been structured to allow new guides coming into the industry the opportunity to work through a structured scheme that allows them to gain a base line in standard coasteering guide practice by undertaking a 2-day training course, partaking in a consolidation period and then undergoing a formal assessment. Existing coasteering guides who already have experience and some formal training will be able to apply for the opportunity to APL the training elements of the award.
Photo Credit: TYF Adventure
Public Liability Claims – Defence success for Member
We think it is important to publish details of judgement’s in Public Liability trial cases so that the Mutual and Members can use this valuable lessons learned information. It also demonstrates that the Mutual will try to defend liability claims where it feels appropriate. The details below have been provided by our legal colleagues at Clyde & Co who successfully defended this case.
Overview
The claimant, aged 14, suffered from Laurence Moon Beidl Syndrome which affected his eyesight. He was registered partially blind. The claimant often attended Sheffield Royal Society for the Blind (“SRSB” – 1st defendant) for after school club and activities. SRSB took the claimant for a bouldering session at the premises of (“the Centre” – 2nd defendant).
Circumstances of Claim
Once at the Centre the claimant participated in warm up activities and then climbed one of the junior boulders. He did so with minimal assistance though he needed some help to get over the top of the wall. The wall had an enclosed chute/slide, which was popular with children, and which offered a means of descent. The chute was known to be fast. The claimant was instructed to slide down the chute and upon reaching the ground, he injured his ankle.
It was the claimant’s case that the enclosed chute was not safe for him, as his condition meant that his eyesight significantly worsened in dim conditions and that in going down the chute he had become disorientated.
Outcomes
It was accepted by all parties that the specifics of the claimant’s condition were not made known to the Centre staff, though the Centre knew he had a visual impairment. Visually impaired clients had used the chute in the past with no incidents, though the number was small.
The claimant alleged that the SRSB – 1st Defendant’s risk assessment in relation to the activity was inadequate and that a suitable assessment would have shown that the chute was not safe for this particular claimant. The Court agreed. Furthermore, the judge held that had the Centre instructors known that the chute was likely to disorientate the claimant, an alternative method of descent from the boulder wall could have been offered. The Court held that the Centre was not obliged by law to proactively enquire about the claimant’s condition and that it was entitled to rely on SRSB – 1st Defendant to draw any specific matters to the Centre’s attention.
The claimant was therefore successful in his claim against SRSB – 1st Defendant but unsuccessful against the Centre.
If you have any questions or queries about Public Liability cover and or the way the Mutual handles claims please get in touch.
Details of Clyde & Co : [email protected]
COVID 19 Update – AIM help for Members
This has been an extremely distressing and stressful time for us all and we are acutely aware of how severe the impact of this pandemic has been for all our Members. We have been working hard to be able to assist you and to answer your requests for payment holidays while many of you have businesses which have closed and all have cashflow problems.
AIM wants to do all we can to assist our Members.
Those who have paid their contribution in full as one payment are being contacted separately.
For those Members who make monthly payments, we are offering a 3 month holiday break from payments for the period 1st May to end July 2020. During this period, we will not expect you to make the usual monthly payment, and will allow until 30th September 2020 for these payments to be paid. Your cover will continue. If however you have any claims during this period (liability or property), we will need to receive payment in full for any missed months before being able to handle any claim for you. If you are unable to make the payments by the 30th September 2020, please contact us. If payments cannot be made up then we may have to cancel your cover. If you do not want to have the payment holiday, please let us know immediately, otherwise we will not take any monies for these three specified months.
Alternatively if you are not able to carry out any activities, and only have Public Liability cover, you may prefer to pause your cover for a 3 month period until 31st July 2020, or until you are able to resume activities if earlier or later. During this period, we would not seek any contributions from you if you have requested a pause in your cover but there would not be any cover in place during this time. You will need to advise us as soon as you are able to recommence activities so we can ensure you have the correct cover in place.
Property and Employers’ Liability covers continue and we recommend to Members that you keep these covers in place. These contributions will still be due, but are included in the payment holiday as above.
Business Interruption
In addition we wish to reassure Members that we have been in correspondence with the Mutual’s backing insurers regarding the Business Interruption wording and whether or not cover will be afforded by the insurer. Those discussions continue and whilst the current position remains that it is unlikely that cover will be available, we are reserving our position with them. We will update Members with any developments, albeit this may take some time.
Another Liability Claim Successfully Defended
Another liability claim successfully defended – but not without legal costs
This claim for damages arose from an accident which occurred during a coasteering activity on the Abereiddy Beach on the Pembrokeshire coast on 13 September 2008. The group members were invited to slide down a smooth two metre slab of rock, and it appeared that the claimant landed awkwardly and caught her foot on a projecting piece of rock at the foot of the slide, fracturing her right ankle in a shallow rock pool. Following a complaint by the injured party to the Licensing Authority on the appropriateness of the slide where she broke her ankle, the handling of the accident by the instructor and the after-incident care, an AALA complaint investigation inspection took place on 14th November. The report concluded that, whilst acknowledging that the 1-to-10 ratio had been exceeded (it was 1 to 12), the slab looked innocuous enough and the others in the group had completed the slide without incident, and that the immediate first aid and summoning of help was carried out adequately.
However, the claimant’s solicitors, MWR Solicitors of Preston, couldn’t wait for the AALA report and issued a letter of claim on 2nd December 2008 alleging that, inter alia, the provider exposed their client to a foreseeable risk of injury and failed to provide an experienced instructor. And they continued to press their case subsequent to the AALA report.
The wheels of justice turn slowly and in this case very slowly. Proceedings were issued in September 2011, four days before the three year limitation (or deadline date) and served in January 2012, seven days inside the further four month extension deadline and the case finally made it to the Southend County Court for the hearing on the 6th and 7th February 2014, before being adjourned to 23rd May for the judge to consider further written submissions.
Eventually, five years and two hundred and sixty nine days after the accident, the Circuit Judge ruled that the claimant’s injury was “a true and unavoidable accident for which the defendant should not be found liable”, a judgment pretty much consistent with the conclusions of the original AALA Complaint Report of some five and a half years earlier.
Although, subsequent to the ruling, AIM was entitled to recover its full legal costs from the losing claimant, as ever recovery didn’t turn out to be straightforward. So, following the “bird in the hand” principle, we accepted their offer of part payment to close the account, unfortunately leaving AIM some £22,500 out of pocket.
As a post script, following the Jackson reforms (see AIM Newsletter 2013), introduced last year to curb legal costs, we, as defendants, have forfeited our ability to recover any of our costs from the losing claimant’s side. In exchange for that, the claimant’s solicitors are no longer able to double their charges as “success” fees and bill us, and are no longer able to recover the cost of their ATE (after the event) insurance which covers their costs in the event that they lose.
Lessons Learned – Common Sense Prevails
Common sense prevails in Court following a slip in a mining museum
Judge rejects claimant’s premise that because he slipped and sustained an injury on a visit to a heritage site, the site owner is to blame, and that it must have been due to “an act or omission by the defendant which it should reasonably have remedied”.
Clearwell Caves, a long standing member of the mutual, is a natural cave system which has been extensively mined for iron ore and operates now primarily as a mining museum, also providing caving activities. The caves are part of a Natural England designated Site of Special Scientific Interest.
This was a case brought by a retired publican who had slipped or stumbled and fallen whilst on a family visit to see the cave’s Christmas Fantasy Display. Although the claimant’s injury seemed slight at the time, it subsequently transpired that he had sustained a broken right ankle, from which he has made a more or less full recovery after 12 weeks in plaster.
The accident occurred in an underground passageway on a slight incline. Taking into account the damp conditions, the surface was covered by compacted ragstone gravel, recently replenished, providing a suitable non slip surface with drainage channels down each side. As is required by the Mines Inspectorate, there are recorded inspections of the mine’s walkways at least three times each day at no more than four hourly intervals.
The claimant’s expert, a Mr Petherick, argued that the mine, which is subject to Health and Safety at Mines Regulations 1993 and 1999, should also be subject to the Building Regulations and legislation covering buildings and constructed public places, such as sports stadiums and supermarkets.
The judge ruled that it was incorrect to equate a mine, with its inherent and unique character, with a supermarket or an office and that building regulations do not apply. He found that the ragstone gravel did indeed provide a suitable non-slip surface for the walkway in dry or wet conditions and that the mine’s recorded inspection and maintenance regime was systematic, regulations compliant and effective.
Comment
Common sense prevailed here in Court. Even in a case of little apparent merit, documented records evidencing risk assessment, good management and a regular inspection and maintenance regime are required to counter a claimant’s argument that because there’s an injury, the facility is to blame and compensation is due.
Latest News
Mountain Biking – Wye MTB: Olympic Feature10th July 2024 - 2:55 pm- Occupiers Liability – Duty to Trespassers9th July 2024 - 11:11 am
Surfing & Watersports : Coast to Coast Surf School – Olympic Feature4th July 2024 - 11:49 am
Covid-19 Updates
COVID 19 Update – NYA – Managing youth sector activities and spaces24th June 2021 - 2:40 pm
