O/T: LRM Magazine

[Guest dew110CSW]

I know theres a mag thread already, but I feel the need to let off a little steam.

You may remember the little incident my friend with the P38 had at billing this year, well up until now LRM have been more than co-operative in getting this sorted, but all of a sudden they've just turned round and down right refused to pay for anything even though the RaRo has damage totaling near £3000.

Basically for those who missed it, we were tackling the off road course and got the mud run. All of 5 meters in and it was stuck, so we were dragged out backwards then hooked up to some little hybrid 90 thingy that was going to tow us through a gate to safety. Notice I said through the gate, as it happened he towed us straight into the gatepost, traveling way too quick to give us time to react and creating more of a problem then there already was. We tried everything to get him to stop, brakes, horn, witnesses were shouting, but still he goes and straight pulls us into a solid metal post.

Then we get who appears to be in charge coming round to look, although before that a Disco was almost pulled into the exact same post. Now he starts going on about having a vehicle fit for the conditions, although it was wearing A/Ts at the time and the course should have been able to facilitate vehicles such as this. We never took any sections that we were advised not too and asked all the marshals at the start of sections whether they thought the P38 would make it through. Apparently a waiver was signed. Now this consisted of a box of signatures, no text to read or disclaimer, just literally a signature. How can they call that a waiver, surely by law you have to actually have it there to read before it can be officially classed.

It's not that so much that is really cheesing me off but the fact they wait till so long afterwards, whilst seeming to want to help, before shooting my mate down in flames. The RaRo was his dads, who is currently out in Canada, and he can barley afford to run it half the time, let alone shell out three thousand pounds to repair the mess that LRM's so called safety crew have caused to it.

[Tonk]

i dont know the legal implications but i'd start by asking to see the disclaimer/waiver that he signed and his signature underneath it.

sounds like a fob off.

whether they are liable or not i wouldn't have a clue.

[SteveG]

I'd say it's one of those things if you go-offroading and need to be recovered. If you expect marshalls to start having accident insurance and liability insurance for recovery work then there will soon be no play days or organised events.

As for your friend taking his dad's car off-road - if you can't afford to break it, don't take it. A Lesson learned (albeit expensive one) I would say.

Cheers

Steve

[dollythelw]

another lesson in life - dont sign until you've read and agreed to what you are signing for

[Hybrid_From_Hell]

Its a grey area.

They will have event insurance I am sure, as to if they will allow you to claim, or indeed even if you did as to if you would qulaify for a claim or get it is another matter entirely.

At events I am involved in yes there is a waiver, it has to be linmited, and therefore things like you describe above can and do happen, either by accident, bad luck, or as in this case a over zealous marshal.

As such I would say you will find the signature / waiver will have some link somewhere be in on the application on the ticket for the event or somewhere, and this is life.

As Steve Said above, things get bent, and thats the way it is, don't go off road unless you accept you can damage - via whatever reason.

Maybe yopu can claim on the RRs insurance, except their may be an exemption as you were off roading it ?...

Frankly if someone did that to my 90, and I thought it was deliberate / plain stupidity on their part they would have "Known About it" there and then, as I would know that other than retribution at that moment the chances of being reimbursed were prob zero.

Thats the way life is, all you are liable to do is get wound up and get knowwhere, shove it down to experience

Nige

[sgnas]

Sorry Steve I don't agree.

Damage due to your own ineptitude is one thing.

damage been recovered is the same.

This is a little greyer

Any waiver (most are useless in law) will not waive claims against negligence ore wrecklessness.

Visit a solicitor, take their advice and then pay them to write a letter on your behalf.

[FridgeFreezer]

Depends how good their waiver is, I thought these days the only thing that held any water in court was an acceptance of liability, not a disclaimer/waiver.

Although you do have a claim, if they have a very good waiver you may not get anywhere. However, many waivers/disclaimers are not worth the paper they're printed on and are just a bluff to discourage you from claiming.

If their marshal damaged your vehicle through poor technique then you do have a basis for some sort of claim. I would ask to see proof that the marshal had had some sort of recovery training such as LANTRA, if they don't have anything to prove he was competent then their case gets weaker.

Get a solicitor to write them a letter, if they cack themselves and settle up then you're doing well, if they fight back you have to ask yourself how worthwhile it would be to pursue the matter through the courts.

Oh and what does £3k of damage look like on a P38? You could buy another for that...

[istruggle2gate11]

It all depends on how the waiver/disclaimer is written, i.e. the order of words, etc, Our rules were prepared by a solicitor (who happens to be a director of Korc )

A sample of KORC rules:

1) Drivers are solely responsible for judging the capability of their vehicles and their own driving skills and experience. Drivers should not attempt to drive any part of the site which is or may be beyond the capabilities of themselves and/or of their vehicles. Inspection of the terrain on foot before driving and/or the use of a “spotter” (an assistant guiding) is considered good practice. If in any doubt, don’t go there is the rule, even if others have gone before you.

2) Marshals may give advice or guidance on various aspects of driving or winching on the site, but any liability for any injury to person or damage to vehicles arising out of such advice or guidance is expressly excluded

3) If requested, marshals will endeavour to extricate a vehicle which is stuck, but any liability for injury to persons or damage to vehicles or property on any marshal so advising is expressly excluded.

We took advice off a senior solicitor who's ultimate closing gambit was, it would take a lot of money and years of court hearing for any claim to be succesful against this, if at all - but only if the customer has signed it!

So as Jez has mentioned, becareful what you sign without understanding the consequences.

Regardsless of how weak any disclaimer may be, it will take time and money to fight against it.

[Steve King]

Waivers can be (and often are) thrown out of court as unfair contracts.

It depends on reasonable risk. At such an event reasonable risk would mean that you wouldn't claim for a few scrapes, knackered diff or busted cv joint etc as these things happen regularly on offroad courses.

Being towed at an unduly fast speed into a metal post is not reasonable aand is not an incident that you could be expected to have forseen.

I'd certainly speak to a solicitor about it.

[101nut]

Waivers can be (and often are) thrown out of court as unfair contracts.

And as far as I am aware no waiver can cover unreasonable or incompetent behaviour. If the problem was a result of irresponsible or reckless actions you have a case, however if the marshall was taking reasonable and justifiable action for the situation then there is no claim.

AndyG

[Phoenix_chris]

Sorry to hear about your problem mate, i was on the LRW marshal team myself, we did have proper printed T&C form but it was so wet by the end of friday morning we gave up, but, they should have got one printed again...

did you speak to Charlie t about what happend as he was the course manager...?

i think that they should cover you tho, obviously the marshal wasnt fulfilling his job, i was surprised that no training was given prior to the event, weve always trained our marshals for our off road site, and i must say even tho i was driving a transit all weekend there was some 'interesting driving' over that weekend...

I think all the marshals did a great job in very difficult conditions but i really think LRM should pay out for this.. Good luck

Chris

[missingsid]

Hmmm,

Sorry to hear about your friends problem (oo er).

My first thought was "Its an off road course, stuff gets damaged" but then again you paid an entrance fee to use the course and they provided Offical Marshals which were the only choice you had, so surely they must take responsibilty?

If the Marshal was driving irresponcibly then he could be guilty of a driving offence since the law now covers private property.

You would think that the company would have concerns over the safe opperation of the course, if spectators were shouting and you were sounding your horn it could have been because of a life or death situation had a kid/adult been between you and the post!!

This is a tuff call, no one wants insurance or leagal worries to stop off road sites but how far do you go?

Good Luck

[dollythelw]

playing devils advocate I think the driving offence wouldnt stand up in court, I would also suggest that providing the marshall wasnt driving like a tit (big proviso) then taking it to court only further fuels the litigation culture (only my opinion). the best way of avoiding taking a hit is simply not to be there... dads car, I dont have the money to fix it would say to me - dont drive it somewhere that risks damage.

[Hybrid_From_Hell]

Yep

You can hear the prosecution

"He damaged my motor pulled me into a post damaged my Dads RR etc etc and I wnat to claim"

And the defence.

"Thats interesting, on what basis can you prove he was say reckless, photograhic evedence, witness statements from people who understand these things and not just "their opinion", you signed a waiver and understood as with off Of Road activity there is risk of damage - my clients were there so you could enjoy yoursel you got stuck and needed recovery, whilst there is obvioulsy no doubt on the issue of damage I would propose this is an unfortunate and rare occurance and my clients waiver means you can whistle for compensation cos we will fight you and have money to do it and we know it so run along and swivel...."

Whilst it may not be fair, or even TRUE ....

you will have to PROVE beyond resonable doubt with expert proof / testimony that they are culprulble,

and thats why they get away with it, .....as they WILL have evidence to defend a claim you can bet on that

you can give it a go, .....

frankly you'll most likley get nowhere, .....or just end up with costs and stress at best, as Jez said, above really

Chalk it down to experience,

I would be delighted to be proved wrong, but you have more chance of Will Ws motor being finished this year than winning

Its that far a long shot

Nige

[Guest WALFY]

I disagree. He paid for a service. ie drive the offroad course and recovery will be provided. If they can produce a disclaimer which I very much doubt or they would of started along this line straight away. A marshall has already said they were given no training. To that end how did the organisers validate the competency of their marshals or was it done by association. I've been offroading with him so he must be OK.

At the moment it seems that the injured party has the moral high ground, he just needs to turn that into facts. Did he get names, tel numbers of potential witnesses to back up his claim. Prob not. There must be someone out there who videoed the event. Normaly hundreds of cameras going.

But what was said between the marshall and the victim at the time of the recovery will have some bearing on the case. If he said I'm going to pull you into next week and not stop for anything or words to that effect then fair enough but I doubt it.

But at the end of the day I think that it's going to be hard going up against a mag with the money they have behind them.

[Hybrid_From_Hell]

I disagree.

But at the end of the day I think that it's going to be hard going up against a mag with the money they have behind them.

EH ?

I think we AGREE ?

Yup....its unfair whats happended but UNLIKELY to be an easy win

....unless they play fair ......and don't need to be dragged to courts.....when you may as well give up ?

However, surely a phone call with LRM will answer the above ?

If the answer is "NON" then you sort of have your answwer - then you have to decide if you have a flying figs chance of winning, being right about something doesn't always work out legally as it should do, the the difference been the Law & Justice ...

Nige

[Teebags]

Suggesting that the magazine "has loads of money" and therefore can afford to see this run through to the bitter end is a little narrow minded. The magazine is a business at the end of the day. They're in it to make a profit and nothing else. Tying up potentially tens of thousands of pounds in legal costs when there is no guarantee you're going to win would be an extremely foolish thing to do. For the sake of £3000 any solicitor worth his salt would simply advise them to either pay up in full or simply to offer a contribution towards the cost in exchange for a signed statement waiving their right to take further legal action.

On top of everything else this is also very bad publicity for LRM and any LRM organised events.

[Guest WALFY]

Nige

The way this thread was going I understood it that people were saying it's offroad so tuff. And I was saying as he had paid for a service so they must be accountable to some extent.

I should learn to spk the Queens English and learn to write it properly so that others can understand it

[SteveG]

The way this thread was going I understood it that people were saying it's offroad so tuff. And I was saying as he had paid for a service so they must be accountable to some extent.

They paid to use the off road course, not to be recovered by a marshal. Recovery was not a service offered by LRM as part of the off road course and therefore was not a service paid for.

If he accepted assistance from the marshal without any stipulations or agreement in place then the marshall can not be liable as a contract was not entered into. As this is the case you would then have to determine whether the Marshal or LRM are negligent under "Duty of Care".

They would have to prove beyond doubt that the marshal acted recklessly and this reckless action resulted in the damage to the Range Rover. In my view they would have a hard time to prove this. They were being towed on a tow rope/stop after all and therefore were also an active participant in the recovery, meaning the the marshal was not in sole control. They would have to prove that in offering assistance that the Marshal/LRM assumed Duty of Care and that they had the experience and circumstance to forsee the damage caused and did not take action to avoid it.

Irrespective of whether they could see the impending damage happening they would have to prove that the marshal should have been aware of this and that given his/her experience they should have avoided it. If they feel that the marshal was inexperienced for recovery work, they would then have to prove that LRM was at fault for not providing sufficient training. This would be hard to win as LRM would state that they were not offering a recovery service for the off road course.

Given this, I would be surprised if they could prove negligence and any legal action against LRM would be a waste of money in my personal opinion. This is not based on any legal expertise, I might add, and is just personal opinion.

Personally, I'm surprised at the amount of people that have said they are liable. Is this because it happened at Billing and it's a magazine involved. Would you be saying the same if it happened at a playday, winch challenge event or forum greenlane trip? If so it doesn't bode well for event organisers and marshals at events and in turn the future of off roading.

Cheers

Steve

[Hybrid_From_Hell]

Yep

I now have said to people who are really really stuck that I will only recover them if they accept 2Anything might happen", most if not all agree, by the stage I say this they wonder if they are ever coming out of what they are in.

I have (and am not proud of this) over the years.

"Winched" off a 90 rearcrossmember, this was new for its MOT 2 months prior - welding....ah yes and theres the problem, unfortunately his wiring loom didn't fair well as a KERR, ...Flat Bed Taxi Home

With the aid of another HBRO recovery Marshal, killed 3x Suzukis in a day, winched / pulled off al 3 bumpers / bullbars / winch bars. All laughed bar one who had the hump, again welding and poor mountuings

Enclosed "montage" by a club member of the "event" - I still owe him for this

Pulled the front quarter of chassis from a RR stuck, shere rust and rot, he was OK

Frankly I expect more to break damage sometimes getting some of them out, but I do my best, and am genuinely sorry if damage occurs, I did have one guy not happy at my "Anything may happen" so as he was stroppy I left him, nobody else could get him out 2 hours later he said 2Suppose you better then" and there was damage to bodywork as he was on stumps and rock on its side - he then moaned at me when I got him out and pointed to the damage, I think it was the crowd who then took the **** out of him that made the muppet suttle off.

Frankly I think its "one of those things" that accidental damage can occur, but if the marshal was a complete pratt and it was deleiberate / showing off to the crowd, then a good Kick in the **** would have prob been the best call at that time, as I will be amazed if you win this one.

I do all of the above EVEN THOUGH all have signed at the signing on as most do not read what they are signing and then bleat

Nige

[Guest dew110CSW]

I guess the hard part is proving the marshal was in the wrong, from our view it was clear he was going way to fast and not watching where our truck was going. Theres a big thread on LRA about it that I'll dig up the link for if I can find it.

[david.stanley]

Hi guys,

Me again. It's my car. After the incident we spoke the LRM's editor and he said "get a quote, it's what we pay insurance for". He's now saying they accept no responsibility for the incident but has sent me a letter asking me to confirm some details (ownership, me being legally allowed to drive it, road worthyness etc). I'm having the disclaimer looked over by my uncle (he's a solicitor) as from what I remember from my Law lectures at University you cannot exclude liability for negligence. I have photos of the damage, the recovering vehicle with so much mud on the back it is impossible to see out of it, some eye wtinesses have come forward on another forum (some with photos IIRC).

For the guy who asked what £3K's worth of damage to a P38 looks like, it looks like (all need replacing):

Front bumper

Bumper brackets

Bumper supports

Bumper seal

Grille

Right headlamp assembly

Right headlamp trim

Left front blanking cover

Right front blanking cover

Right front indicator

Right front wing

Left radiator seal

Right radiator seal

Lower airduct

Radiator

Oil cooler

Intercooler

Bonnet dent removal

Plus labour, paint shop charges for the bonnet, wing and trim panels then VAT on the lot too

[Guest WALFY]

Ownership shouldn't be part of it. Authority to drive, easy you have the owners permission. Roadworthyness is as simple as a valid MOT. Let's hope it all falls into place for you.

[Projectblue]

David, I completely agree that disclaimers cannot exclude liability for negligence and whilst the majority of us don't like the culture of 'fetch my lawyer, I'm gonna sue' the fact is we aren't looking at the wrong end of £3k to fix our motor.

However I'm a little confused as to why this thread is titled LRM magazine and what dew110csw motive is for the post? Surely if the organiser and legally responsible person for the show is failing to abide by their original offer of paying then it will become a civil matter and go to court to prove the negligence and recover the repair costs?

I think this may be the thin end of the wedge for marshalls because they will soon refuse to recover people as they could be personally liable for recoveries. Then organisers either have to get good insurance (put's the price up) or you recover yourself no matter what.

I can't see off road courses at Land Rover shows lasting much longer tbh.

And thats no reflection on David here, he's just the unfortunate one that possibly starts the ball rolling, because it was bound to happen sooner or later, it's just the way the world is going.

[Phoenix_chris]

just been talking to a freind, who's a solicitor, you do have a few problems...

As all the marshals were volunteers, thus 'unpaid' unfortunatly you dont have any foundation at all, you cannot sue a volunteer, and you cant sue LRM as they wernt employing them..

..and im sorry to say it BUT.. you were out in a vehicle that wasnt yours.. > So you were in a vehicle that was unfamiler to you ? > yes as it isnt yours > so you attempt a hard section of the course in a vehicle that isnt really suitable and your unfamiler with... And you were given a option to avoid it...

This is why more and more off road sites close in the Uk, because of daft arguments like this, in the end there was no one to blame except yourself, sorry to be harsh, and i dont want to offend you but this is the reality and how the courts will look at it.

Some of us work very hard to build and maintain places for YOU to go and enjoy yourself, we make no money at all, your quite happy to moan that you have no where to go, but will sue in a bat of a eyelash..