Hope he took out good insurance! Difficult to tell from a typical Torygraph article but could of just been one of those accidents that happen or the instructor got bored - who knows? Will no doubt depend on collaborative evidence from other parties on the course.
The accident victim believed he had been instructed 'to descend the gully at speed and without braking', the court heard.
Hmmm 😕
I get he may have significant costs now hes paralysed and i do sympathise as it must be a terrible situation but it just sounds like an unfortunate accident to me
Instructor says he rode the wrong line twice, crashing on 2nd attempt so 1) he was clearly able w ride it, 2)the instructor could've done a better job of stopping him making the same mistake.
Seems like the instructors team name when racing was prophetic!
[url= https://www.rootsandrain.com/rider2014/leon-maclean/results/ ]Clicky[/url]
The "notorious Holmbury Hill"!
Sympathies to the guy injured but really the reporting is ridiculous - what is HH notorious for? Dogging? The gully on BKB?? I assume it was the drop near the top which was a little rougher 4 years ago than it is now, but not a gully.
Sad story all round. No winners likely either.
These kinds of things are really about securing long term medical support for someone who is now unable to carry out all the thing they used to be able to do.
Mr Ahmed, a mountain biker of 12 years' experience
his front wheel suddenly jammed on "what looked like a clumpy, grassy piece of ground"
Hmmm, what terrain exactly had Mr Ahmed being riding when "mountain biking" for 12 years?
These kinds of things are really about securing long term medical support for someone who is now unable to carry out all the thing they used to be able to do.
Fair enough if the instructor was culpable but all this does is increase the cost of biking for the rest of us. The guy admits to not being adventurous, he was not forced to ride the line twice, anyway lets see how it plays out.
Rights or wrongs not withstanding - his barrister needs to make up his mind...
, or;"A novice rider
He had been riding a mountain bike for several years
And
, or;Although experienced in cycling and mountain biking
he was a novice to "rough terrain" and "descents".
Something not adding up...
Fair enough if the instructor was culpable but all this does is increase the cost of biking for the rest of us.
Well, increase the cost of professional liability insurance for MTB instructors. The impact on the cost of biking is not going to be significant.
I've ridden the wrong line twice many times - target fixation usually. Can be hard to fix so I have some sympathy.
Mad. I feel sorry for the guy, but you've got to take responsibility for your own actions.
Jamj, I read that as "he's had a bike in the shed for 12 years, and had ridden it a few times around the park and then decided to give it another go. "
I read that as "he's had a bike in the shed for 12 years, and had ridden it a few times around the park and then decided to give it another go.
That actually sounds like quite a lot of riders around Surrey Hills on a weekend 😆
I have a huge amount of sympathy for him having been injured - but get the party line straight.
Yes, agreed CFH.
Mad. I feel sorry for the guy, but you've got to take responsibility for your own actions.
This.
Not knowing the ins and outs (or care to guess either way) but the instructor insurance is there exactly for such outcomes.
Why else would you have liability insurance? Ergo the bloke isn't in the wrong, is the lads insurer trying to lessen a payout though and 'why'?
That I don't agree with. He paid decent money for a service, a level of risk but also protection. The instructor can't watch and micro manage every rider so he must take a portion of the blame. For £80 on a 'new rider course' I'd expect 1-2-1.
For £80 on a 'new rider course' I'd expect 1-2-1.
On a 121 basis you wouldn't get much of a decent instructors time.
It's tricky, obviously the instructor has to minimise risks as much as possible bit there's no way to totally remove the chance of injury. While Barry's isn't exactly tricky a beginner could easily have a crash on it, equally they could trip over in the car park.
I can't help think this is the incident that happened well I guess 4 years ago where the rumour was that some guy had come off Barry's on the bomb hole and broke his neck... ever since then the bombshell was 'softened' out a bit.
Rather unfortunate and sad for both parties.
The reporting though leaves much to be desired.
No sympathy with the injured solicitor at all, scumbag chancer. Much sympathy with the poor instructor.
Insurance isn't just there for anyone who has an accident. There has to be culpability. I feel for the bloke, but he's been riding mountain bikes for 12 years, there is always a personal responsibility for ones actions. Considering his frankly f***ing seriously impressive qualifications, he will always be earning a very good living. He may struggle to justify that £10m claim.
No sympathy with the injured solicitor at all
He'll never walk again. C'mon now.
We don't know do we - the instructor may be the chancer? Like the one I saw on the top of Grizedale with a bunch of school kids during very cold n wet weather, the kids had no waterproofs FFS! Gives us all a bad name!
[quote=bigjim ]No sympathy with the injured solicitor at all, scumbag chancer. Much sympathy with the poor instructor.
he wont walk again due to an injury when someone was instructing him to do something. I doubt he broke his neck as part of his scumbag chancer routine
I am sure the instructor has suffered also but i bet he rides a bike and his suffering was somewhat less life changing than the solicitors
I pray your post was a troll - save me the denial.
No sympathy with the injured solicitor at all, scumbag chancer.
Classy
My cousin was paralysed in a MTB accident and ended up at Dignitas. So while I don't agree with what the injured party is doing here, I also think that certain comments ^' are badly misguided. That's the polite version.
I have to say I agree, you're ultimately responsible for yourself, and have to act intelligently...
Analogy, it's quite possible you could go on a ski holiday, play a game of rugby, or any kind of sporty endeavour and end up with a broken neck, ok the instructor/guide has some responsibility not to take you out of your league, but then you have a responsibility not to blindly follow instructions if you are not sure of yourself.
Yes it's possible the instuctor had poor judgment, but you'd think the instructee would have said,you know what, this is a bit crazy, and find a new instructor.
Very unfortunate for all, but realistically you could fall of a bike at any time and do yourself a grave/serious injury.
As a mincing newbie, I went on an improvers weekend on the same ground a few years ago. My worst fall was practising cornering on a flat fire road. But more relevant, the instructor was deliberately pushing me beyond my comfort zone eg, the steep drops on Leith to the LHS of the v top section of Summer Lightening and (I did say I was mincing at the time) the bomb hole in Evian ( 😳 ).
If he hadn't pushed me, I would have got little out of the course. So no easy answer IMO.
A good coach will push you beyond your comfort zone but not beyond your level of skill.
The guy admits to not being adventurous, he was not forced to ride the line twice, anyway lets see how it plays out.
That's called 'sessioning' a section, it's how you teach people and correct their mistakes when coaching a rider.
Terrible for the solicitor, hard to call for the instructor without knowing the guy or the descent they were doing, but it doesn't seem likely he was in the wrong.
On actually reading the article, it does seem like rider error, we all do stupid school boy errors, it's just most times we get away with some cuts and bruises.
experienced in cycling and mountain biking, he was a novice to "rough terrain"
So, not experienced?
Thanks for clearing that up.
Are we sure it's not just the solicitors insurers suing the guides?
It may be he had no choice but to pursue it to get money from his own insurers.
There's some fairly judgemental comments above, I hope if I was in a wheelchair I'd get some sympathy and not just called a scumbag based on a poor newspaper report.
I'm not sure it falls under 'chancing'. If he felt hurried, pressed or pressured. Some might word that as encouraged and 'taken out of comfort zone'?
No winners in this and insurance should protect those if it's proven there's a legitimate basis.
It may be he had no choice but to pursue it to get money from his own insurers.
Indeed, that's usually how these things work.
The courts will decide if anyone was at fault, but perhaps this case will mean that instructors have to increase their levels of insurance? Feel bad for both parties, there is never a winner in these things.
How much liability insurance do independent MTB instructors generally carry ?
£10 million
Blimey
As a Solicitor he should know -[url= https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volenti_non_fit_injuria ]Violenti non fit injuria[/url]
Edit:
Such cases are not uncommon for many such incidents. It can sometimes be down to insurers having a 'you must try to sue before we pay' clause I am told.
It will be interesting to read the whole case and see what spin they put on things. One thing I read into it is where Mr Ahmed was allegedly told to ride down the slope at speed without brakes, I don't know the trail in question but isn't that what anyone would say on a short steep section like a bomb hole? I'd avoid anything remotely like that with a beginner but reading between the lines i don't think that's what Mr Ahmed was?
I can't help but think how easy it would be to make any instructor, myself included, look irresponsible or gung-ho.
Impossible to tell from the information in that article whether the instructor was at fault or not, so I'm not going to speculate at all on that. The suggestions that it's because of his own insurance that he's suing seem strange to me - I certainly don't have insurance which would pay out if I had an accident like that, is it a common thing to have? More likely that he thinks he has a case I presume and is hoping to win - which doesn't make him a scumbag at all, if the instructor was at fault and liable then it seems a perfectly reasonable thing to do.
As an aside I love the Cycling stats box in the middle of that article - there does seem to have been a real culture shift that we now get such things rather than something about cyclists being irresponsible.
Well general liability insurance for small business covers a lot, millions, for contractors etc. and not expensive, relatively speaking.
It looks like an interesting case, but in an office the risk is very low, if you're a ski coach or a rock climbing instructor.. who knows... The only certainty here is that a law firm will make a lot of money out of a freak accident.
[quote=mattyfez ]Well general liability insurance for small business covers a lot, millions, for contractors etc. and not expensive, relatively speaking.
You're suggesting if his employers have that it would cover him for a mountain biking accident in his leisure time?
I've never ridden the gnarrfest that is the surrey hills but, assuming it's a steepish shortish incline then (as lyrikal suggests) I'd be wanting to stay well off the brakes on the way down, lest my front wheel get caught up on some clumpy piece of ground
and I also imagine, "Will no doubt depend on corroborative evidence from other parties on the course"
No, I was referring to the instructors insurance situation
Are there even any hills in Surrey?
do you even uplift, bro ?
Ok bit harsh but an injury by his own hand taking part in a dangerous sport by his own choice and he's trying to blame and ruin someone else and cash in big time. I despise ambulance chasing and suing culture, it's just as low as you can go to me.
Surely this case is about establishing whether the Mtb coach has any culpability, and hence will his insurance be liable. My BC coaching qualification means I have cover provided I teach a BC approved session and do not deliver outside of my qualification. And I can produce my plan, risk assessment and post session assessment and accident report. That applies for their mountain bike coaching qualification too. Satisfy those conditions and I'm covered. I'm not an mtb coach btw, road and TT.
No winners here, I fear.
If you think my opinion is harsh don't look at the comments on social media or you'll get very upset
Ok bit harsh but an injury by his own hand taking part in a dangerous sport by his own choice and he's trying to blame and ruin someone else and cash in big time. I despise ambulance chasing and suing culture, it's just as low as you can go to me.
This really is the bottom line. Yes a man is paralysed and deserves everyone's support and sympathy. But he fell of his bike and hurt himself. It's very common for people who suffer life changing injuries to try and find blame in others. The only reason for this is for money. If I was in a wheelchair and thought an insurance company would payout perhaps I might do the same 🙁
The solicitor's in a wheelchair which is a terrible outcome. That being said he is clearly chancing his arm for a payday from the Instructors insurance company.
Victim must be legit as he's "educated and eloquent"
[quote=bigjim ]Ok bit harsh but an injury by his own hand taking part in a dangerous sport by his own choice and he's trying to blame and ruin someone else and cash in big time.
I don't suppose his intentions have anything to do with ruining somebody else. If the instructor wasn't negligent then clearly the court won't award any money. If the instructor was negligent then I don't see why he shouldn't get some compensation which will help make his life more normal (we don't do punitive damages here).
Sure it might be a "dangerous" sport, but injuries like that are incredibly rare. Would you suggest that a driver paralysed in a car crash shouldn't get compensation from another driver if they were negligent? Because driving is clearly a dangerous activity which people take part in by their own choice. It's not reasonable to expect to come out of a training day with injuries like that because your instructor has done something wrong if that is indeed what happened. How on earth do you know the instructor wasn't to blame?
As for comments being worse on social media - I'm sure they are, which is why I avoid such places. That isn't an excuse to try and drag here down to their level.
I certainly don't have insurance which would pay out if I had an accident like that, is it a common thing to have?
I do. I suspect both my health insurance and my critical illness/injury cover (both of which would be hit hard if I ended up in a wheelchair) would be interested in recovering from the instructor's insurer if they could.
😐
Bigjim get a grip. How is it trying to ruin anyone? Insurance is held for a reason. Stop looking at job titles and reading alot more into a media report with limited information.
That being said he is clearly chancing his arm for a payday from the Instructors insurance company.
Not a bit.
This looks like two insurance companies banging heads. No reason for all the personal spite and ignorant judging above.
This looks like two insurance companies banging heads.
If that is the case perhaps the insurance companies should make sure it stays out of the media, particularly with reporting as in the link in the op which allows for personal judgements to be made.
We have a free press. How on earth can the insurance companies keep it out of the media?
The only person able to keep it out of the press would be the judge and they'd need some very good reasons to do that.
If that is the case perhaps the insurance companies should make sure it stays out of the media,
If agreement can't be reached and it goes to court, as in this case, a media blackout ceases to be an option.
Let's all wait for the judgement - there are some pretty awful comments further up this thread.
tuskaloosa - Member
I can't help think this is the incident that happened well I guess 4 years ago where the rumour was that some guy had come off Barry's on the bomb hole and broke his neck... ever since then the bombshell was 'softened' out a bit.
Yes, that's the one. Unless there's been another. Was there on that day. Got up to Barry's and paramedics were waiting at the start for the crew from the air ambulance that was trying to land. Rumour was going round that the guy couldn't feel his legs. Hadn't heard anything about it since then until this in the news.
Tragic case. Having come close to a similar injury by landing on my head I have a lot of sympathy and interest in spinal injuries. That said in my case the only blame was myself. However I wasn't under instruction. I'd still struggle with suing the instructor though.
matt_outandabout - Member
Such cases are not uncommon for many such incidents. It can sometimes be down to insurers having a 'you must try to sue before we pay' clause I am told.
You make a very good point. If for example you have your own injury insurance for MTB accidents, it makes sense that the insurer will insist on suing someone/anyone first before making a pay out at their own cost. That's just the way of insurance.
This is the gully/bombhole from what I can make of it from the article. Not my video but shows it quite well. Watch from about 27 seconds in.
Looks quite innocuous from that video! "accidents happen" sums it up I think!
particularly with reporting as in the link in the op which allows for personal judgements to be made.
There is always the option of not making such judgements, it's not compulsory, nor the fault of the insurance companies, judge or journalist, all of whom are just doing their jobs.
this seems a bit like trying to sue a bike company for selling you a bike capable of riding offroad on, which then made you fall off and hurt yourself, even though you made the decision to buy and ride the bike yourself............if you get what I mean. 😕
accidents happen" sums it up I think!
How on earth do you know? Where you there, or in court?
@ton, it could be like suing a bike company which sold you a bike which failed causing you to crash, but we don't really know.
I think that is it really. It is quite possibly that the guy was told to do something that he wasn't ready for. That's quite different from making a decision to try something you don't have skills for while out yourself. When you are on a course with a trainer the responsibility moves a bit. It's interesting but in the end probably comes down to the quality of the lawyers rather than what is just 🙁How on earth do you know? Where you there, or in court?
[quote=acidtest ]This is the gully/bombhole from what I can make of it from the article. Not my video but shows it quite well. Watch from about 27 seconds in.
I've seen hillier snooker tables 😕
cyclelife - Member
Looks quite innocuous from that video! "accidents happen" sums it up I think!
It was smoothed out a lot since the accident.
It used to be a sharp drop. Still rollable, but not something you'd expect beginners to try.
Anyway the report says he hit a rut or something and the wheel stopped and OTB, which suggests this may have even been just a freak accident. We've all had moments like that I'm sure.
If that is the case perhaps the insurance companies should make sure it stays out of the media,If agreement can't be reached and it goes to court, as in this case, a media blackout ceases to be an option.
Let's all wait for the judgement - there are some pretty awful comments further up this thread.
It has got to court, the report sounds like it is of the first day of the trial. That is why it is being reported. Still a chance of a settlement, but probably odds-on it will go to a judgment having got this far.
Some court documents will have been public since the claim was started.
My grandparents had to sue their nephew (my dad's cousin) after a car crash they were in when he was driving. The treatment they needed to get a full-ish recovery required private care (well, not required, if they were happy to wait a year for the initial appointment) and their insurer was happy to cover it; providing the insurer could sue the driver's insurers for the costs.
There was a big family hoo-ha about my grandparents suing their family until it was pointed out by many cooler heads that it was an insurer suing another insurer in their names. The insurers settled before it got to court and everyone went away as friends but it was a fundamental misunderstanding at the start and genuinely threatened to split the entire family apart.
Back to the OP's post; the roll in as it was on BKB years ago was a bit daunting for new riders (I recall one forum member's wife ended up in tears when she saw it) and I have to admit to walking it the first couple of times but I've seen experienced riders crash on it by taking a poor line through it so it's hardly a definite indication of poor coaching. That said, it's also impossible to say from what's in the article whether or not the instructor was negligent.
If we can move on from being judgemental and allocating blame based on a limited newspaper report - and I'm not allocating blame at all - I wonder if his profession will count against him, as he's expected to be able to make his own decisions.
I've seen hillier snooker tables
Maybe it looks steeper when you are 'hurtling', to use the inflamatory language of the article.
I wonder if his profession will count against him, as he's expected to be able to make his own decisions.
Only in his field of expertise. I doubt he'll be asked to second guess his medical team because he does a bit of light conveyancing during the week.
The bit in question and in acids video has been smoothed after the accident. It used to have a few rocks on the lip and was a bit steeper. Fine as long as you just let go and rode it but the kind of thing that would catch less confident riders*.It a classic spot were someone would tell a less confident person to let go of the brakes, relax, correct body position and GFI. You were most likely to come to mischief if you were nervous, braking and trying to slip (can't think of a better word) down it.
* I remember coming across it for the first time as a newbie 😉
How on earth do you know? Where you there, or in court?
Chill out - it's all speculation, like most threads on this site. Just saying that looking at the video, the terrain is not exactly challenging especially for someone who claims to have ridden MTB's
Although experienced in cycling and mountain biking, he was a novice to "rough terrain" and "descents".
This statement is contradictory and not particularly astute for someone of his level of intellect.
Chill out - it's all speculation, like most threads on this site. Just saying that looking at the video, the terrain is not exactly challenging especially for someone who claims to have ridden MTB's
As has been pointed out, the 2016 version is pretty innocuous (quite possibly as a result of this and other crashes). The 2012 version was certainly a "feature" that you had to really slow down for and earlier than that, if you dropped it too quickly you'd land on the upslope so you had to roll into it carefully. Nothing challenging once you've done it but for learners not ideal. The thing is, the whole trail OTHER than this bit was good for novices (still probably is looking at it, not ridden it for 5 years) as it has things that would be challenging but not dangerous and they could build speed with confidence.
Is this the real reason why so many skills instructors use video now?
[quote=cyclelife ]Chill out - it's all speculation, like most threads on this site.
There's some pretty unpleasant and unnecessary speculation on this thread - your comment was pretty innocuous, but I'm really not sure what the point is.
This statement is contradictory and not particularly astute for someone of his level of intellect.Although experienced in cycling and mountain biking, he was a novice to "rough terrain" and "descents".
Not necessarily - it's just that we have a somewhat skewed idea of what "mountain biking" is on here compared to what most people see it as who claim to do it.
