Helmets Mandated by Insurance Policies???
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 375
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Helmets Mandated by Insurance Policies???
Bike club people often cite the requirements of their insurance policies as the reason they require helmets on all riders for all their rides, despite the signing of a liability waiver. Can anybody prove it? Can, or will anybody post the pertinent section of such a policy?
#2
Senior Member
The liability waiver doesn't really free the club from liability. Clubs still get sued, and can still lose. Requiring helmets and other safer behaviors helps protect the club. But more importantly, it helps protect the cyclists in case of falls, which we do see every so often on group rides.
Sorry, but I don't have a copy of our club's insurance policy to share. I do believe the explicit helmet requirement is in there.
Sorry, but I don't have a copy of our club's insurance policy to share. I do believe the explicit helmet requirement is in there.
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Bay Area, Calif.
Posts: 7,239
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 659 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
6 Posts
I would also be interested in any properly documented confirmation of such a claim since I've heard it so frequently. The LAB coverage for clubs is offered through American Specialty Insurance and they do *not* have any such requirement for normal club rides, nor do they even mention helmets on their suggested waiver form:
https://www.amerspec.com/lab/waiver.pdf
Most clubs in our area do have a requirement for helmet use on regular club rides, but I don't think any of those rules came about because of pressure from insurance companies. And at least one local club that doesn't require helmet use is covered by insurance.
American Specialty does ask whether helmets are required when requesting insurance coverage for special events (i.e. where the public is invited to participate and event fees are charged), but it isn't clear for what types of events the helmet requirement would be regarded as necessary to get insurance coverage.
https://www.amerspec.com/lab/waiver.pdf
Most clubs in our area do have a requirement for helmet use on regular club rides, but I don't think any of those rules came about because of pressure from insurance companies. And at least one local club that doesn't require helmet use is covered by insurance.
American Specialty does ask whether helmets are required when requesting insurance coverage for special events (i.e. where the public is invited to participate and event fees are charged), but it isn't clear for what types of events the helmet requirement would be regarded as necessary to get insurance coverage.
#4
Senior Member
I've looked through those online resources from LAB and American Specialty and cannot find any explicit requirements for helmets either.
The insurance forms for special events and accident reporting that request information about helmet use have probably led the clubs to believe their insurance rates would be less if they require helmets.
The other factor is just risk mitigation on the clubs' part.
The insurance forms for special events and accident reporting that request information about helmet use have probably led the clubs to believe their insurance rates would be less if they require helmets.
The other factor is just risk mitigation on the clubs' part.
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Posts: 13,696
Bikes: who cares?
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
whatever happened to 'ride at your own risk'?
I've been on paid tours in nighttime Paris traffic where I was neither required to wear a helmet, use a light or sign a waiver.
I've been on paid tours in nighttime Paris traffic where I was neither required to wear a helmet, use a light or sign a waiver.
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: San Jose (Willow Glen) Ca
Posts: 9,842
Bikes: Kirk Custom JK Special, '84 Team Miyata,(dura ace old school) 80?? SR Semi-Pro 600 Arabesque
Mentioned: 106 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2337 Post(s)
Liked 2,821 Times
in
1,540 Posts
The mind set that if I get hurt someone else is responsible....so let's sue them. (at least in USA), as i understand it liabillity in europe is different (at least as explained in terms of skiing of piste....he no problem, but you will pay for your rescue)
__________________
Life is too short not to ride the best bike you have, as much as you can
(looking for Torpado Super light frame/fork or for Raleigh International frame fork 58cm)
Life is too short not to ride the best bike you have, as much as you can
(looking for Torpado Super light frame/fork or for Raleigh International frame fork 58cm)
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Bay Area, Calif.
Posts: 7,239
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 659 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
6 Posts
Frankly I suspect that the 'insurance company rule' is frequently claimed because it avoids any further debate on whether a helmet requirement is a good idea for the club.
#9
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,972
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,534 Times
in
1,044 Posts
Good for keeping the riff raff , i.e. cyclists who don't fit the club cyclist profile, away from rides, even rides allegedly open to the public.
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,267
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4252 Post(s)
Liked 1,352 Times
in
938 Posts
Some people might be saying it because they assume it's the case.
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,018
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I vaguely remember the 5 borough bike tour in NYC requiring helmets because the people who did not pay to take part, snuck in, raced, and hurt(killed) themselves typically did not have helmets. After the rule change those people were the ones wearing motorcycle helmets usually propped on top of their heads as they were too hot. I think now they hire professional security and have check points.
#12
Banned
My philosophy is not to get introduced to a doctor or have to retain a lawyer by that method at all cost. In all my years of riding a bike, I've done my utmost to avoid being hit by a motor vehicle, so far, everything is going to plan.
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,267
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4252 Post(s)
Liked 1,352 Times
in
938 Posts
I vaguely remember the 5 borough bike tour in NYC requiring helmets because the people who did not pay to take part, snuck in, raced, and hurt(killed) themselves typically did not have helmets. After the rule change those people were the ones wearing motorcycle helmets usually propped on top of their heads as they were too hot. I think now they hire professional security and have check points.
People with helmets "snuck in" too. As far as I recall, very few people died and some of them where heart-attacks.
The reason they have checkpoints is to enforce payment. They finally realized that there were too many freeloaders they had to support (it can't be cheap to shut down the city for a good part of a day). There wasn't much of anything to encourage/force people to pay. That is, it's simple economics.
When I last did it (2005?), a couple of the marshals said the check points were to keep terrorists out!! As far as I recall, the only thing they were checking at the checkpoints was the presence of vests.
Last edited by njkayaker; 09-21-09 at 04:54 PM.
#14
the dream shall never die
I think this thread is a bit trollish. Think about it! Insurance companies want premium$$$. Insurance companies do not want to pay claim$$$. Insurance companies want profit$$$. Insurance companies do not want to pay claim$$$.
You ride, gloriously proclaiming your manliness by riding with "no helmet"! You have a head injury accident on the ride and file a claim with the club. The club turns to their liability insurance company. The insurance company claims that you and the club were negligent in not taking normal, reasonable cautions to avoid or minimize the possible severity of an injury, i.e. not wearing a helmet. Wearing a helmet is a normal, reasonable precaution. (Wearing a helmet while cycling is easily proven as "generally accepted safe behavior").
The case then becomes an effort to determine your, and the club's percentage of culpability due to your negligent contribution to the accident. This takes many, many months before a claim, if any, is paid. Insurance companies increase profit$$$ by investing premiums and delaying the payment of claims. They are in no hurry. They pay their lawyers well for delaying the payment of claim$$$. Think "time value of money" and "rate of return"
You are still "manly", but bankrupt, not to mention possibly in a vegetative state. The rest of us may get to cover your bills amortized into the cost of our health care. Thanks!
Geary
You ride, gloriously proclaiming your manliness by riding with "no helmet"! You have a head injury accident on the ride and file a claim with the club. The club turns to their liability insurance company. The insurance company claims that you and the club were negligent in not taking normal, reasonable cautions to avoid or minimize the possible severity of an injury, i.e. not wearing a helmet. Wearing a helmet is a normal, reasonable precaution. (Wearing a helmet while cycling is easily proven as "generally accepted safe behavior").
The case then becomes an effort to determine your, and the club's percentage of culpability due to your negligent contribution to the accident. This takes many, many months before a claim, if any, is paid. Insurance companies increase profit$$$ by investing premiums and delaying the payment of claims. They are in no hurry. They pay their lawyers well for delaying the payment of claim$$$. Think "time value of money" and "rate of return"
You are still "manly", but bankrupt, not to mention possibly in a vegetative state. The rest of us may get to cover your bills amortized into the cost of our health care. Thanks!
Geary
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Bay Area, Calif.
Posts: 7,239
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 659 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
6 Posts
I think this thread is a bit trollish. Think about it! Insurance companies want premium$$$. Insurance companies do not want to pay claim$$$. Insurance companies want profit$$$. Insurance companies do not want to pay claim$$$.
You ride, gloriously proclaiming your manliness by riding with "no helmet"! You have a head injury accident on the ride and file a claim with the club. The club turns to their liability insurance company. The insurance company claims that you and the club were negligent in not taking normal, reasonable cautions to avoid or minimize the possible severity of an injury, i.e. not wearing a helmet. Wearing a helmet is a normal, reasonable precaution. (Wearing a helmet while cycling is easily proven as "generally accepted safe behavior").
You ride, gloriously proclaiming your manliness by riding with "no helmet"! You have a head injury accident on the ride and file a claim with the club. The club turns to their liability insurance company. The insurance company claims that you and the club were negligent in not taking normal, reasonable cautions to avoid or minimize the possible severity of an injury, i.e. not wearing a helmet. Wearing a helmet is a normal, reasonable precaution. (Wearing a helmet while cycling is easily proven as "generally accepted safe behavior").
In any event, the insurance company would be on the hook for paying if the club were to be found negligent. So it might well be in their financial best interest to have the clubs require helmet use so that they could use any violation of that policy by a participant to be used as a defense in a lawsuit.
BTW, back in the "No Helmet Trend" thread you made the claim that:
" "They shun us in their clubs. What's the problem?" Legal liability and liability insurance requirements for club rides trump one's desire to participate in expressions of cranial disdain."
I asked there whether you had any evidence that liability insurance requirements had anything to do with clubs requiring their members to use helmets on regular club rides and saw no response. Do you have any such evidence?
Note that there's a club that runs lots of rides in your neighborhood and carries liability insurance yet does not require helmet use on many of their rides.
Last edited by prathmann; 09-21-09 at 05:16 PM.
#16
Membership Not Required
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: On the road-USA
Posts: 16,855
Bikes: Giant Excursion, Raleigh Sports, Raleigh R.S.W. Compact, Motobecane? and about 20 more! OMG
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 15 Times
in
14 Posts
I think this thread is a bit trollish. Think about it! Insurance companies want premium$$$. Insurance companies do not want to pay claim$$$. Insurance companies want profit$$$. Insurance companies do not want to pay claim$$$.
You ride, gloriously proclaiming your manliness by riding with "no helmet"! You have a head injury accident on the ride and file a claim with the club. The club turns to their liability insurance company. The insurance company claims that you and the club were negligent in not taking normal, reasonable cautions to avoid or minimize the possible severity of an injury, i.e. not wearing a helmet. Wearing a helmet is a normal, reasonable precaution. (Wearing a helmet while cycling is easily proven as "generally accepted safe behavior").
The case then becomes an effort to determine your, and the club's percentage of culpability due to your negligent contribution to the accident. This takes many, many months before a claim, if any, is paid. Insurance companies increase profit$$$ by investing premiums and delaying the payment of claims. They are in no hurry. They pay their lawyers well for delaying the payment of claim$$$. Think "time value of money" and "rate of return"
You are still "manly", but bankrupt, not to mention possibly in a vegetative state. The rest of us may get to cover your bills amortized into the cost of our health care. Thanks!
Geary
You ride, gloriously proclaiming your manliness by riding with "no helmet"! You have a head injury accident on the ride and file a claim with the club. The club turns to their liability insurance company. The insurance company claims that you and the club were negligent in not taking normal, reasonable cautions to avoid or minimize the possible severity of an injury, i.e. not wearing a helmet. Wearing a helmet is a normal, reasonable precaution. (Wearing a helmet while cycling is easily proven as "generally accepted safe behavior").
The case then becomes an effort to determine your, and the club's percentage of culpability due to your negligent contribution to the accident. This takes many, many months before a claim, if any, is paid. Insurance companies increase profit$$$ by investing premiums and delaying the payment of claims. They are in no hurry. They pay their lawyers well for delaying the payment of claim$$$. Think "time value of money" and "rate of return"
You are still "manly", but bankrupt, not to mention possibly in a vegetative state. The rest of us may get to cover your bills amortized into the cost of our health care. Thanks!
Geary
If the clubs REALLY want to protect themselves they need to see proof of medical and liability insurance from the participants. Helmet isn't going to make much difference in a lawsuit.
Aaron
__________________
Webshots is bailing out, if you find any of my posts with corrupt picture files and want to see them corrected please let me know. :(
ISO: A late 1980's Giant Iguana MTB frameset (or complete bike) 23" Red with yellow graphics.
"Cycling should be a way of life, not a hobby.
RIDE, YOU FOOL, RIDE!"_Nicodemus
"Steel: nearly a thousand years of metallurgical development
Aluminum: barely a hundred
Which one would you rather have under your butt at 30mph?"_krazygluon
Webshots is bailing out, if you find any of my posts with corrupt picture files and want to see them corrected please let me know. :(
ISO: A late 1980's Giant Iguana MTB frameset (or complete bike) 23" Red with yellow graphics.
"Cycling should be a way of life, not a hobby.
RIDE, YOU FOOL, RIDE!"_Nicodemus
"Steel: nearly a thousand years of metallurgical development
Aluminum: barely a hundred
Which one would you rather have under your butt at 30mph?"_krazygluon
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Posts: 13,696
Bikes: who cares?
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I survived riding in Paris w/o one, btw
#18
the dream shall never die
In any event, the insurance company would be on the hook for paying if the club were to be found negligent. So it might well be in their financial best interest to have the clubs require helmet use so that they could use any violation of that policy by a participant to be used as a defense in a lawsuit.
BTW, back in the "No Helmet Trend" thread you made the claim that:
" "They shun us in their clubs. What's the problem?" Legal liability and liability insurance requirements for club rides trump one's desire to participate in expressions of cranial disdain."
I asked there whether you had any evidence that liability insurance requirements had anything to do with clubs requiring their members to use helmets on regular club rides and saw no response. Do you have any such evidence?
Note that there's a club that runs lots of rides in your neighborhood and carries liability insurance yet does not require helmet use on many of their rides.
" "They shun us in their clubs. What's the problem?" Legal liability and liability insurance requirements for club rides trump one's desire to participate in expressions of cranial disdain."
I asked there whether you had any evidence that liability insurance requirements had anything to do with clubs requiring their members to use helmets on regular club rides and saw no response. Do you have any such evidence?
Note that there's a club that runs lots of rides in your neighborhood and carries liability insurance yet does not require helmet use on many of their rides.
I used to drive competitive speed events. The club requirements were for helmets that, at a minimum, met recent Snell certification. "No helmet, no run" was rarely challenged and in the rare event of a challenge the answer was simple "No helmet, no run", that's the rule.
I simply fail to see why folks have an issue with club helmet rules, or the lack thereof. Don't want to wear a helmet on a club ride that requires the wearing a helmet? Don't, just ride elsewhere.
Cheers,
Geary
#19
Senior Member
Our club also has a special sub-group called the "Slow Spokes" to encourage more casual, slower cyclists on its own rides and routes.
#20
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,972
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,534 Times
in
1,044 Posts
Oh, puh-lease! Our club delights in getting a diversity of cyclists turning out for rides. We get lots of families on tandems, parents with little kids in child seats, college students on MTBs, older cyclists on hybrids, and whatnot at our rally events. We mark and support multiple routes including short rides for the same day to encourage beginners. I often volunteer sweep so I can help out beginners and make sure they feel comfortable no matter how long it takes them to finish the ride. I've helped tired families draft me to the end of century rides. I've also changed a lot of flats for those not confident to do it themselves, teaching them in the process.
Our club also has a special sub-group called the "Slow Spokes" to encourage more casual, slower cyclists on its own rides and routes.
Our club also has a special sub-group called the "Slow Spokes" to encourage more casual, slower cyclists on its own rides and routes.
#21
call me T.J.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 361
Bikes: trek 820
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Well, I'll agree that there are clubs that use the "no helmet" rule to keep the "riff-raff" away, since that's what I was told when I was asked not to come back. I was specifically told (because I asked) that they didn't care how safely you rode, how well you followed the law, how much respect you showed your fellow riders -- if you weren't wearing a helmet, they weren't interested in having you ride with them. The dozens of cyclists riding around our city helmetless are not wanted.
I was also specifically told (again, because I specifically asked) that the reason for this is that, although running a stop sign or cutting off a driver may be unsafe, it's not very visible; only that driver sees the bad behavior. Wearing a helmet provides the appearance of safety to ALL drivers.
Yes, read that again: I was specifically told, by the leader of our local group, that he prefers the appearance of safety over actually riding safely.
I was also specifically told (again, because I specifically asked) that the reason for this is that, although running a stop sign or cutting off a driver may be unsafe, it's not very visible; only that driver sees the bad behavior. Wearing a helmet provides the appearance of safety to ALL drivers.
Yes, read that again: I was specifically told, by the leader of our local group, that he prefers the appearance of safety over actually riding safely.
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Bay Area, Calif.
Posts: 7,239
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 659 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
6 Posts
I think the defend "requirement" a bit contentious. Common sense and prudence are a "requirement" in all behavior, even more so in our litigious society. Since I try to consistently exhibit such behavior, I have never felt the need to read the policies.
I used to drive competitive speed events. The club requirements were for helmets that, at a minimum, met recent Snell certification. "No helmet, no run" was rarely challenged and in the rare event of a challenge the answer was simple "No helmet, no run", that's the rule.
I simply fail to see why folks have an issue with club helmet rules, or the lack thereof. Don't want to wear a helmet on a club ride that requires the wearing a helmet? Don't, just ride elsewhere.
I used to drive competitive speed events. The club requirements were for helmets that, at a minimum, met recent Snell certification. "No helmet, no run" was rarely challenged and in the rare event of a challenge the answer was simple "No helmet, no run", that's the rule.
I simply fail to see why folks have an issue with club helmet rules, or the lack thereof. Don't want to wear a helmet on a club ride that requires the wearing a helmet? Don't, just ride elsewhere.
In the earlier thread you, specifically, were one who made that claim. Yet now you state that it:
"Makes no sense for insurance companies to detail 'requirements'." So do you or don't you think that companies that insure bike clubs have a requirement for a mandatory helmet policy?
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352
Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
Here's a good question, considering that group rides take place on public roads. Can a club that requires helmets, actually stop a cyclist from following along on their rides?
Last edited by Digital_Cowboy; 09-21-09 at 07:11 PM.
#24
call me T.J.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 361
Bikes: trek 820
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Since the thread deals specifically with insurance, I'll add that their initial argument for me to wear a helmet was due to "liability". When I reminded them that their membership form required me to waive all liability, they changed their story to "riding safely". When I stated that I didn't think that illegally running stop signs was safe, they admitted they were more interested in the appearance of safety than in actual safety.
#25
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Bay Area, Calif.
Posts: 7,239
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 659 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
6 Posts
But I doubt that it becomes an issue very often since few people would choose to ride in the midst of a group where they felt unwelcome.