Forum menu
Horrible accident with a bad injury ,be interesting to see if mtb training has a disclaimer on the form ,I have seen seriously injured people riding on flat sections,example , bounced on the smallest of roots broken femur to name but one ,it was stated the guy went the wrong way twice ? Haveing ridden bkb many times its not exactly a bomb hole if it's the part I am thinking of it's about 3 ft roll in roll out but if you cock it up as with anything there is a risk ,but if you don't like the look of something get of and walk , not sure if anyone has ridden Hadly Olympic track at one point the air ambulance was picking up people once a week .
I think if you turn up somewhere and put a helmet on it generally means that there is a certain amount of danger coming your way, full finger gloves, maybe even riding glasses or safety glasses.
Think Climbing Walls or these go ape activitys for instance, imagine falling out of a harness and dropping 30 Feet from a tree and them claiming that wasn't part of the plan? Of course it wasn't but there must be an element of responsibility from the person who is in control of the apparatus? In this instance the bike rider.
You would normally look at your bike and think everything looks fine, that forms part of your own risk assessment. You would asses the trail, the conditions etc again all part of your own assessments.
The instructor has his own criteria to fulfill before he is happy that the individual can progress. That looks like the most basic trail imaginable. Smooth no rocks no gap jumps no step downs and no gully at the top. No doubt he's come off there I'm. It disputing that but I just feel that we have a massive blame culture where an individual can get togged up in some safety equipment and then when something untoward happens say "I wasn't expecting that"
There is I feel a certain amount of fault on both parties behalf how much and what cost is up to a n other and I understand also that there's likely to be only losers, or
What about - an "accident"?
Why do you think he pushed him over the edge on purpose while he wasn't looking after tampering with his brakes?
was there a thread on here about the crash? i remember someone posting something about a bad crash way back
I think the guy suing is making the best of a thin case - he has to attack the instructors competence - its the only case he has.
[quote=xyeti ]Think Climbing Walls or these go ape activitys for instance, imagine falling out of a harness and dropping 30 Feet from a tree and them claiming that wasn't part of the plan? Of course it wasn't but there must be an element of responsibility from the person who is in control of the apparatus?
Good analogy. So you wouldn't think it reasonable to sue for compensation (to try and make your life more like it was before) if you're a novice and the instructor didn't fasten your harness correctly? OK, it's not that great an analogy, but on a mountain bike course somebody doing terrain they've not done before (so a novice at that) is relying on the instructor choosing suitable terrain for them, because the instructor is in a position to judge that, whilst the student isn't. I think what might be being missed here is that we have a bit of an unknown unknown, or a D-K situation - the novice rider doesn't know what he's capable of riding.
I don't know if it would help, but from all the available evidence it does seem unlikely to me the instructor was at fault - however I don't have all the evidence and it's not something I'm prepared to rule out.
Tjagain you are a master of reading into a small news article sir.
To be fair to TJ, there are many others here that seem to have enhanced skills in that area.
[i]Looking at the videos it looks like pretty flat single track[/i]
Yeah, some people said Brendog's crash at Rampage didn't look too bad... You can't judge from a video what a track is like. Not saying BKB is the most extreme track by any stretch. Just, you can't and shouldn't judge from a vid.
TJ's summary is dead right and agrees with what I said.
I think smell_it is reading hora's post as sarcastic, which I don't think it was 🙂
The thing is, the actual injury caused is due simple luck (or a lack of it). 9,999 times out of 10,000, falling off a mtb, at a relatively slow speed, causes between either no injury or a minor one (lets say from a bruise/scuff to a broken bone, as a range of typical injuries).
Anyone taking part in Mountain Biking, which is, lets be honest, classed as an "extreme sport" ie, there is a known, and significant probability that you could be injured taking part, has to know this risk.
So, if we accept that the paralysis, whilst of course possible, is actually highly improbable (i don't know the stats for people paralysed MTB each year, but i suspect it's actually pretty low) then the instructors negligence must be considered without the actual end-effect being taken into consideration.
ie; Did the instructor take all reasonable steps, which were necessary in his, and other similar instructional situation, to mitigate against clients falling off their bike, where it must be noted that it is IMPOSSIBLE to prevent every single person who rides a bike from ever falling off it, and hence to prevent them suffering potential life changing injuries....
I think reasonable steps i this case can be defined in a typical instructional situation, such as:
1) Riders told and reminded repeatedly not to ride anything they are not 100% confident of clearing
2) Riders reminded to stop, get off and look at anything they are un-sure off before riding it
3) All usual safety equipment checked (helmet, gloves, maybe pads etc, depending on level of terrain being ridden
4) Bike safety checked by instructor
5) Riders coached at a sensible level of progression after a basic assessment of their skill and aptitude
6) Riders stopped where it is OBVIOUS that they are riding beyond their ability (<< this is the tricky one, because it's' usually obvious AFTER they have fallen off, which is too late.....)
Despite, doing all that, it's still possible for a rider to skid on say an innocuous pine cone, in the car park, 10 sec after getting on their bike and hit their head with enough force to give them permanent brain damage. Which an normal adult should file under "sh*t happens" and no go round suing people.........
I think smell_it is reading hora's post as sarcastic, which I don't think it was
I was 😳 but I had just drank two Six Point Resin's on an empty stomach, and it went straight to my head 😀 apols
I just hope that, following this, all MTB instructors get clients to sign a disclaimer before they allow them into their lessons.
Bike safety checked by instructor
They don't, they get the riders to check their own
A racer,No I don't think it's reasonable to sue for compensation, what I think is reasonable or acceptable is that the rider having donned a helmet and sought out a qualified instructor should have taken reasonable steps to safeguard himself against possible injury by insuring himself against such accidents.
buckster - Member
Was this it?18 and or 39 seconds...
...42 seconds?
Edited as original still is wrong I think
Forgotten it used to have more trees and was more of a sloppy surface. It's all smoothed out and "surfaced" now. It's like the motorways of Swinley now 😉
Anyway, yes, 39 and 42 in those mincing along videos (to be fair, videos did used to be more sedate affairs, plus the average Surrey Hills rider wasn't on a Strava run).
And yes, the videos flatten it out totally. It wasn't that much of a challenged to anyone experienced but for those new to it or a lot of weekend pootle riders it was a bit of a take a breath moment. Just one of those drops where it looked worse than it was. Though back with steeper head angles and less suspension it was more jarring.
Far more of a challenge was the old ending of Barry's. Didn't go down the breaking bump berms but went further along, and then straight down a muddy messy root infested slope. Best way to tackle it was as the instructor in this case said about the drop, off the brakes to the bottom. Was way more fun that ending, especially when wet 😀
Thing is, you can crash badly at any time. I went absolutely flying when riding along a flat dry part of the ridgeway. The stump of a tiny sapling was in the middle of the trail. Broke a rib and severely bruised myself.
If this guy hit an unseen rock at the wrong time - well, that could've happened to any of us.
[quote=DezB ]I just hope that, following this, all MTB instructors get clients to sign a disclaimer before they allow them into their lessons.
Not worth the paper they're written on. You can't sign away your rights if somebody is negligent - and if they're not then it's also useless.
[quote=xyeti ]A racer,No I don't think it's reasonable to sue for compensation
Not even if the instructor is negligent? If, as in your/my example you're a novice climber, don't know how to fasten your harness correctly yourself, the instructor doesn't do it properly and you fall?
From the article:
[I]He was injured when his front wheel suddenly jammed on "what looked like a clumpy, grassy piece of ground", the High Court heard[/I]
To me that sounds like something that could happen to any of us. Kind of thing where you could run the trail 1000 times and just that one time that little rut catches you for no good reason.
Was he riding with his eyes shut?
What's the instructor supposed to do if their client decides to not look where they're going?
[i]Not worth the paper they're written on[/i]
Hm, does that count for every disclaimer ever? Funny how they still exist really.
I think there is a clear case for negligence if an instructor fails to do something, that results in injury, that the client would not be reasonably expect to spot themselves. IE failing to do up a climbing harness correctly, wouldn't be expect by a novice, as they don't know how a climbing harness should be done up.
But for MTB instruction, if you don't know how to ride something you have two choices:
1) Stop, ask, or walk
2) ride it anyway and hope for the best.
When it comes to MTB features, it's rare for them to be un-obviously "dangerous" to a novice, usually, the opposite, where a "small" drop, root, or jump looks like a massive one to a novice!
Deadkenny exactly what I've been thinking. JRA can really bite. **** horrible luck
[quote=DezB ]Hm, does that count for every disclaimer ever?
No - you can deny responsibility for things outside your control, which is where they have a purpose. Whilst we're talking about climbing, if I go to the climbing wall for example I sign a disclaimer accepting that climbing is a dangerous sport, so if I injure myself from falling off and there is nothing wrong with the wall I can't sue them for my injuries (otherwise they would be open to me making a claim even if it was all my own fault). However if one of their top ropes failed such a disclaimer would have no value, because that's not an expected risk. I'm not entirely sure how a hold failing would be judged - I think the disclaimer would cover them for that as it's outside their control, provided that is they have a proper system of inspection.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfair_Contract_Terms_Act_1977#Terms_rendered_ineffective
Ah, systems of inspection, they're not worth the paper there written on.
I have some sympathy for the guy. I am in my fifties and rode BKB (and Surrey) for the first time last month
I have introduced quite a few roadies to MTBing over the years and I always take a few minutes teaching them to get their saddles down and get their arses onto the back wheel when descending.. Avoiding an OTB is never best learnt from personal experience
A few years back a guy I would regard as an expert rider both fast and technically proficient fell in that exact same place on barrys breaking his collar bone IIRC. It was just one of those things. Anyone can fall anywhere and in my view Barrys is as simple as trail as it's possible to ride barring towpaths. It's fun the faster you go but it is without a doubt within the capabilities of anyone who can ride a bicycle. What happened to this chap is truly tragic and absolutely shit luck but life happens and I can't see it being the instructors fault unless this guy was at "using stabilisers" level..
[i]if I go to the climbing wall for example I sign a disclaimer accepting that climbing is a dangerous sport, so if I injure myself from falling off and there is nothing wrong with the wall I can't sue them for my injuries.
However if one of their top ropes failed such a disclaimer would have no value, because that's not an expected risk.[/i]
Not sure of the comparison between this and a skills course where the participant wants to ride challenging and technical tracks. As I said earlier, you can't learn this without doing it.
[i]Barrys is as simple as trail as it's possible to ride barring towpaths[/i]
You'd really say that? I've only ridden it years ago, before it was changed, but there are tons of trails, even in the Surrey Hills that are simpler than BKB, yet not as simple as towpaths. Can't believe it's changed that much.
Totally agree with it being shit luck though.
buckster - Member
Was this it?18 and or 39 seconds...
...42 seconds?
Edited as original still is wrong I think
10 years ago I remember seeing a very good rider go OTB on that gully at 18 secs above. He was fine and we had a laugh about it. But that - along with loads of other offs over the years - highlight how easy it is to get it wrong, even on the insignificant stuff.
Modern BKB on a Boris Bike 😉
http://www.pinkbike.com/video/419489/
(BKB from about 3mins)
I notice the infamous roll/drop in question is edited out.
[quote=DezB ]Not sure of the comparison between this and a skills course where the participant wants to ride challenging and technical tracks.
I wasn't - I was simply using it to illustrate the point of having a disclaimer as it's a bit simpler.
Have mixed views on this having been a claims manager back in the 90s just as ambulance chasing began to take off here on the mainland.
I'm struggling to see from the reports we have seen that the instructor was negligent. Someone fluffs a line once, you tell them what to do, they do it again - fixating on the wrong thing probably - then you step in. Only it was already too late in this case.
It's years since I worked in that field, but I'm assuming the defence of "volenti" still applies? You do something with risk you accept the risks.
Tragic for the claimant, obviously. Could have real repercussions for the outdoor activity industry if the standard of care required is raised too high if the claimant wins - from the facts that I have seen, anyway.
Big implications for those who instruct youngsters as well. I've got friends who run the county Scout cycling group, one of whom is about to set up his own business doing training and kids cycling holiday clubs.
Been out of the loop for a while. Any updates on this?
That might upset the outdoor industry...
If you're a mtb instructor expect a huge hike in your premiums 😯 . I would have thought £3,000,000+ is more than insurer's have ever taken in premiums since mtb instruction started.
ooft!
Given his reasons/ruling I would think more 50/50 or 60/40 - not sure how much of this proportioning actually translates into damages though.
More concerning given the high profile of BKB & this kind of ruling in the sport. What is there to stop people now from riding S.Hills and the like and suing the LO? Does it get even more complicated for official trails in areas like this thinking more S Lightning in Leith?
So the court finds negligence on two counts
1) that the instructor did not find out the trainees level of skill beforehand. seem negligent to me. I would expect and instructor to do so both by asking and by assessing folk over simple obstacles first
2) that he encouraged him to ride it a second time at speed. More dubious this one. going faster is often safer and not braking on the downslope of a bombhole is the right thing to do usually. this one is more arguable.
Nothing in this judgement changes anything. YOu have a right to expect your instructor is competent and the court found this one wasn't
tuskaloosa - very different with the landowner. Does a duty of care exist - perhaps yes but the whole legal relationships are very different and much harder to make a case. ONly if the landowner knew there was something dangerous on the land and did nothing about it and the danger was unavoidable by landusers.
some [i]reasonable[/i] definitions and explanation of negligence for anyone interested.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/negligence
Sad accident and story with no winners. Still find the whole story incongruous frankly.
Total farce. Poor instructor. Don't have the words for the money grabber.
Just a point on disclaimers - you can't be asked to sign away your legal rights to recover losses due to someone else's negligence.
break a nail or get a harness wedgie from a small fall at a climbing wall - difficult to complain if you've signed to say you understand it can be dangerous.
If you fall, the rope breaks and you get badly injured because they set up the top rope with hairy string instead of climbing rope, they've been negligent, they're liable for your injuries, and you should get a recovery from them, disclaimer or not.
Same thing with "at owners risk" in car parks - open town centre car park, someone keys your car, your problem. The "at owners' risk" sign falls and scrapes your paint because someone's used blu-tac instead of screws - they'll be paying.
Another point is your held to different standards depending on the level of skill you claim to have. For example as a nurse if I render first aid to someone I am expected to be more skilled than a person with no training. An A&E consultant would be held to a higher level. So I could do something when rendering first aid and if I make a blunder I could be sued but a layperson making the same blunder would not.
In this case the instructor is held to a higher standard than a layperson would be.
Could be the end of mtb instruction ? If they can't get liability insurance at a reasonable cost the sector will be die.