Any legal eagles out there?
 

If your insurance documents do not specifically exclude track days then are you covered.
I have a little disagreement with mine, they believe that they are covered by the "no racing" clause.
I remember last year in MCN a guy won a case because the judge agreed that in law racing is a legal definition and track days are therefore legally not racing.

Regards
keith

Especially as most Track day companies go out of their way to emphasise that the day is NOT about racing!

Not sure i'd like the risk of taking that to court and relying on the mood of the judge that day. Especially as most of them are old farts with no concept of what happens in the real world. Nae offence like.

Also if you've phoned them and queried it and they have confirmed that you are not covered and recorded the conversation.....

Not 100% sure on this one but I think keith has a point...
Obviously depends on the wording of individual policys but it wouldn't be difficult to argue that a track day is the "pleasure" part of SDP. You're not racing, not testing, not pace making, you're just taking your bike off the public roads purely for pleasure.
If a test case can be presented such as the one mentioned in MCN then the judge would have a hard time turning down your claim. And having your insurance company tell you you're not covered for track days doesn't mean sqaut unless you agree to it - cos if it's not already in the contract then it would have to be agreed as a contractual amendment before it can be enforced.

But saying all that..... I wouldn't be too impressed with anyone making a claim after binning it on a track day because it just contributes to increased premiums. If you take your wheels on a track day there's a hugely increased chance of crashing, and that I feel should be the risk of the individual not the insurers and other policy holders.

i would argue that i am less likely to have a crash ( especially an expensive 3rd party crash) on a track than the roads. If my policy does not exclude it then i expect to be covered for it.
My broker and insurer have recorded the conversations i have had with them. They therefore have on record my view that they do not specifically exclude track days, works both ways. The fact that they think a phrase means one thing does not make it so. In law you have to be specific.

Anyway the point i was trying to make is that i know that there has been a test case, reported in MCN and does any one have any more details on it. There was a rush by insurers after to state "trackdays" as excluded.
Who has a specific exclusion on their policy?
Regards
keith

I think your best argument will be to dig up the details on the case cited in MCN. I remember it too.

You have to be careful as part of the contract between you and the insurer requires you to furnish " all relevant information " to the insurer about the use of the bike.
This is defined as any information which may have a bearing on the issuing or not of a policy to you.
The fact that you may consider the use of the bike on a track could be construed to be relevant to the premium quoted or indeed whether they offer you insurance at all.
I understand your argument about the lower third party aspect, but you are preaching to the converted here.
An easy counter argument to that statement is that we ride much harder on a track than the road and therefore are closer to the bike & riders limits therefore the risk of binning it and making a claim could be that much more likely.
When it comes down to it, insurance companies are bookies and they want the odds as long as possible in their favour.
You pays your money...........
Andy ;)

[Edited on 14-5-2004 by Rushjob]

Make your complaint to the Ombudsman first. That might resolve it quicker/cheaper.

At the moment its not a complaint, i have not had a cash at a trackday, however i believe i am covered if i do.

Rushjob: works both ways, if i don't feel that use at a track is a problem then its not a material fact that i need to disclose. If in law its no different to use on the road then also there is no problem and no failing if i don't specifically mention it.
I have gone out of my way to ask them for the full list of exclusions on the policy they issued to me ( and were happy to take my money for).
They have told me that the exclusions printed on the policy are the total list of said exclusions.
It still stands therefore that if Trackday use is legally not racing then i am in fact covered. I have asked them to demonstrate otherwise, told them what i might use my bike for and still they have a defective argument.

Don't want to put this to the test though! Would be nice to hear what others have on their policies.
keith

Just wonder then why some companies offer specific trackday insurance for road bikes?