• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Insurance fiasco

You guys need to go over to the AFM forums for these questions, please. One thing to note: USGPRU wasn't the issue at hand that drove a needing a new carrier. I dropped the link above.
 
that thread doesn't provide answers any more than this one does. I actually went there first; it is what led me to read through this one finally.
 
Still no real hard answers here or on the afm forum. Shawn said that Thill upped our insurance but as was mentioned we do not race there for a few months. I've heard from a few in the know that there was talk of an insurance increase but that it did not happen. I asked Shawn that very question and he said that Thill had in fact required us to increase our insurance so that we could allow minors to race there. I think we should get Thunder Hills side of the story. I know for a fact that the track day providers do not have to increase their insurance to let minors ride. We had a kid who was 13 riding at the last event. Some one just said that this had nothing to do with the usgpru. Shawn said on the afm forum that this had to do with minors racing with the AFM, and I quote

My question to Shawn was,

Are you saying that Thunder Hill has changed their policy towards minors 16 and younger?

Shawn our president answered,

"Under-16 minors - Yes. This pertained to organizers that purchased THill's insurance coverage. This according to e-mails on Jan 28 and Feb 10. "

My next question was,

If it has not changed why did we have to upgrade our insurance policy for minors?

Answer from the pres.

"We needed to start carrying our own GL to allow under-16 minors to race."

Berto, if it was not for the usgpru was it because we have so many minors in our club?

I am in the process of finding out what Thunder Hills stance is on this subject.

I think I would like to see this email where Thunder Hill demanded we up our insurance.

That shouldn't be too hard to prove. Maybe Shawn should post that particular email and then we will have our reason for this whole deal. I do not see where that email should be top secret!

Still this pile of shit continues to sit and stinks!!!!!!!

Pat
AFM #31
 
tracksidemoto said:
Still this pile of shit continues to sit and stinks!!!!!!!

Pat
AFM #31
Click to expand...


Excellent point Pat. On a similar point to back you up I have to say;

Okay folks, this is really getting very frustrating. On one hand we have Berto saying one thing and the AFM President saying another.

Berto you said

Holeshot said:
You guys need to go over to the AFM forums for these questions, please. One thing to note: USGPRU wasn't the issue at hand that drove a needing a new carrier. I dropped the link above.
Click to expand...

So with your advice I have been over to the AFM forum and found this from the President

Kneedrag(Shawn Reilly) said:
So to answer this question we didn’t start asking our old carrier until it became apparent we needed to carry our own GL to allow under-16 minors to ride in late Feb.
Click to expand...

What that means BERTO is that nothing was said to the insurance company until they found out that in order to host the USGPRU with under 16 year olds the insurance had to be changed. So, how can you sit there and say that the USGPRU wasn't the issue at hand that drove a needing a new carrier when your President says the exact opposite.

Who is lying here Berto, you or the President?

Don't worry I'm already banking on the fact that you'll dance around this question too saying something about how this is not the place for AFM stuff. If this is not the place then why is it that right under the "Racers Corner" is says;

"AFM, CCS, etc. A nook for those that risk their necks and plastics on the track."

You might want them to take out the AFM part because aparantly we don't count anymore.


:)
 
Last edited:
Ken, let me be crystal clear here: I know the entire story and all the facts. You do not want me to put those out here, on BARF, for all to see, because frankly Ken, I don't run a business within the AFM. Understand that I'm not placing a summary here, nor the AFM, because soon enough, it'll be a "he said/ she said", and I have access to all the backup I need. IOW, it's probably not something you'll want to push, IMO...at least here in public. That protects the AFM and the AFM's vendors. I won't violate that trust despite the fact that I would welcome the opportunity.

No one is "lying" here. If you read the explanation Pat put up, you should get from it that under 16 year old riders (and all AFM >16 years) were going to be a problem at Thill. However, upon that investigation with our own insurer, it was discovered that they would not match the track requirements for insured limits (in dollar figures), and thus, they were telling us "we don't' want to insure this activity anymore". The tracks have increased their liability limits for us, the AFM, and our previous insurer would not match those limits.

It's absolutely ridiculous that you drag me into this, Ken, by calling either Shawn or myself a "liar", when you're only half aware of the entire situation. As the AFM's preferred vendor, I'm quite surprised you weren't able to handle this in a more effective and professional manner. BARF? To solve your insurance problems with the AFM as the preferred AFM vendor? that's not how I handle our businesses problems. Ken, if you had a problem getting ahold of of Shawn or anyone, you can call ANY of your board reps. If you think we were not all plugged in and highly acute to the situation of Insurance, you're mistaken.

One last note which I stated above: I find it amazing that we're arguing not simply about the AFM's policy, but at it's core, we're arguing that vendors...bonafide businesses do not need to carry a GL policy!!!! We're arguing that it's ok to BE UNINSURED and be in business and that it is perfectly ok to let the organizer of an event, whom brings a vendor their customers on a platter, to soak up the entire liability of that vendor, despite the event organizer making ZERO PROFIT from the vendor.

As I sit reading the latest from a multi-named lawsuit against our corp, one that epitomizes this situation to the T (they named four companies and one person...on a suit that is complete crap), I can only think that so many are so far inexperienced in the world of liability and lawsuits. I myself, Ken, am not. In fact, I'm well versed as we defend against at least 1-2 a year. And as I sit, reading the billings from the attorneys, I feel it hard to back away from my position: that Vendors need insurance to protect the longevity of the AFM. When the AFM has to hire it's own attorneys to defend itself against a Vendor perpetrated suit, that costs the membership money...and for what?


Let me say one thing in closing: this was a discovery that was found in the course of an issue with age limitations and policy liability limits. Had we stayed with the previous insurer, there was the same exposure: we just never had figured that part out. Certainly, uninsured vendors despite the insurer we chose, are a severe risk to the AFM. the board's job is to mitigate that risk and keep the AFM around for all us to race in 2010 and the long future.

I would love to keep all of our vendors in the paddock, but I won't vote to do so at the risk of the AFM. No way, no how. I'm sorry.
 
If it were my company doing business on the road not only would I need to add each jobsite location to my general liabilty as additionally insured, but also obtain a business licenses for said city as well... at least I'm supposed to :|

the big difference here is that there isn't really any money in the moto biz, most do it for the love of the sport. adding the cost of insurance to the overhead, will bring up the cost of the services and goods, and you all know racers have to get a good deal or they won't fork out the dough. :(

Insurance is just a part of doing business these days and the consumer pays for it in the long run, sucks but paying a little more is what it's going to take to keep business going. If companies don't have the proper coverages and don't make sure they pass on those costs, they don't make profit. Doing business for the sake of a practice is why companies don't last long.

long story short, hope all come back to do business, and hope people spend some money when they do :thumbup
 
so, is anybody that gives parts to other guys at track to fix their bikes after crash or mechanical problem Vendor?
I know I give shit load of parts and stuff to guys at track, work on their bikes...etc and I am not member. am I vendor?
 
TWF said:
so, is anybody that gives parts to other guys at track to fix their bikes after crash or mechanical problem Vendor?
I know I give shit load of parts and stuff to guys at track, work on their bikes...etc and I am not member. am I vendor?
Click to expand...
If you perform services or sell parts and collect money for said parts/services at AFM events then you are by definition a vendor.
 
Zoran only gives me parts for beer. Is that vending? Cheap beer, too.
 
Georgie said:
If you perform services or sell parts and collect money for said parts/services at AFM events then you are by definition a vendor.
Click to expand...
most of it is free but sometime I collect money for part since I paid for it, usually when part is brand new.
this than applies to anybody that gives part to anybody and gets his money for it.
I like this new policy, now I can just show up without tool box and bunch of parts with me. I can just drive in my little car instead bringing van :teeth
 
you are not a business zoran, and are not in the business of selling parts. you are not profiting from the transaction, nor attempting to. i think you need not worry about this
:0

also, every insurance ploicy i have ever read excludes acts of God, and in the racing community some construe Zoren as a God, so his acts may be exempted....
 
Last edited:
what he ment by cheap beer is that he never actually brings me that beer :)
it is only recorder on forum that I got beer for exchange but in reality I have to bring my own.
 
TWF said:
what he ment by cheap beer is that he never actually brings me that beer :)
it is only recorder on forum that I got beer for exchange but in reality I have to bring my own.
Click to expand...

I brought you a case of Old Milwaukee once.
 
hwy1&17 said:
If it were my company doing business on the road not only would I need to add each jobsite location to my general liabilty as additionally insured, but also obtain a business licenses for said city as well... at least I'm supposed to :|

the big difference here is that there isn't really any money in the moto biz, most do it for the love of the sport. adding the cost of insurance to the overhead, will bring up the cost of the services and goods, and you all know racers have to get a good deal or they won't fork out the dough. :(

Insurance is just a part of doing business these days and the consumer pays for it in the long run, sucks but paying a little more is what it's going to take to keep business going. If companies don't have the proper coverages and don't make sure they pass on those costs, they don't make profit. Doing business for the sake of a practice is why companies don't last long.

long story short, hope all come back to do business, and hope people spend some money when they do :thumbup
Click to expand...

Well, stated Eddie & Berto (previous page post). :thumbup

It seems that some are not seeing the big picture, regardless of how well it is explained here or on the AFM forum. That tells me that at least to some degree they may simply not “like” the answers that they are getting to their questions and so they continue to banter and conjecture in hopes of fueling more drama or angling (hoping) for something different (that isn’t realistic).

Or, they don't believe or want to believe the answers so they are teasing the minutia apart to no real end. I don't believe there are any hidden agendas or secret back room deals being cut. I’m guilty in that I do trust others. What we see depends mainly on what we look for. Knowing most of the people posting here and on the AFM site it’s pretty disappointing to see some suggest or imply that anyone is doing something that is outside the club’s best interests. Our candles don’t burn brighter…by blowing someone else’s out!

At this point, if you’ve followed both threads (AFM & BARF) pretty much every questioned has been answered satisfactorily even if it’s not the answers some few want.

I also think there are a good number of us that simply don't understand all the detail. Hell, I KNOW I don't understand it all and I don't even really want to. I'm not in the insurance business or legal profession and I don’t want to be. That's why others make that their full time occupation.

So, to continue the long story short. Let’s move on folks.
 
Yeah Berto's explanation cleared it up for me, pretty much. If you have a business and come to an AFM meet to conduct business, you need to have insurance. That is pretty simple. I had to have insurance the decades I did business, and never questioned it. One lawsuit without insurance and you are a goner.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top