| Author |
Message |
gaz_5_m 
|
|
|
Post subject: Another Insurance Question!
 Posted: Nov 16, 2011 - 10:48 AM
|
|
First post: Jan 20, 2010
Total posts: 270
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
|
|
Folks,
Asked this in another thread but think it got lost in there:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm trying to answer a question thats been raised elsewhere where I've recommended this policy. I've had a search through the forum and read the policy document and cant see anywhere where this specific question is covered off, so rather than start another Insurance thread thought I'd ask here as its a similar (off piste) theme.
In the policy, its states that you are covered off piste:
"with a qualified instructor or in a group of not less than 2 persons in possession of working communications or portable telephone. No cover for riding off-piste alone or winter sports activities against local authority advice."
And the question raised:
Local Authority Advice would generally state that to go off piste you should have a shovel, probe and transceiver. Thats fine and perfectly reasonable for what we'd all consider proper off piste.
Between runs (in the trees for example) is technically off piste (though in North America generally "in bounds").
Basically, does our policy expect you to have full avy kit if you break your leg in the 10 feet of "off piste" between runs if the local authority recommends it "off piste" and is that a get out for them? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
dunx
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: Another Insurance Question!
Posted: Nov 16, 2011 - 10:52 AM
|
|
First post: Oct 07, 2004
Total posts: 9314
Location: Herts, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
| "Local authority advice" means when a resort has roped off areas or said that areas are out of bounds or otherwise unsuitable for access. TBH if you're going in to places like that, then you need you head examined anyway. |
_________________
SCUK Editor • Me on Facebook • Neverland
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
cantridepete
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: Another Insurance Question!
Posted: Nov 16, 2011 - 11:07 AM
|
|
First post: Oct 28, 2008
Total posts: 2328
Location: Haute Savoie
Status: Offline
|
|
resorts dont bother roping off areas between runs without good reason, so i'd agree with dunx RE the head examination.
whether you can get your head examined under the policy as some sort of preventative measure might be a valid question though  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
dunx
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: Another Insurance Question!
Posted: Nov 16, 2011 - 11:13 AM
|
|
First post: Oct 07, 2004
Total posts: 9314
Location: Herts, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
gaz_5_m
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: Another Insurance Question!
Posted: Nov 16, 2011 - 11:19 AM
|
|
First post: Jan 20, 2010
Total posts: 270
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
|
|
Agreed on both counts re: needing head examined (I wasn't advocating going into areas that are out of bounds or roped off.).
What I was more getting at is when an area is not roped off or designated out of bounds, but similarly not considered "piste" (certainly from an insurance company perspective). i.e not marked on the piste map and not pisted (trees for example).
I think you answered the question Dunx that it means "roped off" or marked "out of bounds or unsuitable". |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
dunx
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: Another Insurance Question!
Posted: Nov 16, 2011 - 11:27 AM
|
|
First post: Oct 07, 2004
Total posts: 9314
Location: Herts, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
If a resort is advising you shouldn't go in an area then you shouldn't go in an area. Of course, you can if you want, but you won't be covered by our insurance if you're injured.
You don't need full back-country gear to simply ride "off piste". |
_________________
SCUK Editor • Me on Facebook • Neverland
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
gaz_5_m
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: Another Insurance Question!
Posted: Nov 16, 2011 - 11:53 AM
|
|
First post: Jan 20, 2010
Total posts: 270
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
|
|
Cheers Dunx, that was what I was asking. Simply because most local advice (certainly that I've seen) does mention having the gear when going off piste.
Anyone sensible would realise what that actually means (and that simply leaving the piste is not it) but the insurance wording is "loose" enough that I did think it was a valid question when asked.
If you're 5 foot off the piste and hurt yourself and local signage says you should have avy gear for going off piste (even though 5 foot off the side is not what the intended meaning was) there may be some wriggle room there for the insurer.
If that makes sense.
I'm not knocking the policy by the way. I have had it 3 years and will renew next year, just thought it an interesting question (and one I hadn't thought of) when I was asked. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Snowboard Club 
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Maximize
RSS Feed
