Not registered? Then you're not seeing all there is to see. Do you want to contribute? Register now by clicking HERE!
 
  Forums  
 
Advertise with us
Advertise with us
 
 All Forums
 Classic, Historic & Post Classic Motorcycling
 General Comments
 Riding with no insurance
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly
Previous Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 2

john feakes
Advanced Member

Victoria


791 Posts

Posted - 21 Sep 2007 :  11:34:44 AM  Show Profile Send john feakes a Private Message  

 
It seems to me that the only safe way is to have M.A. insurance as the basic requirement and take out extra insurance if you think it necessary. I absolutely agree with OldKwak regarding the lack of information given to support the M.A. finding. As it stands we do not know what was wrong with the insurance presented, other than it not being M.A. insurance. Would this attitude be contrary to the Restrictive Trade Practices act? The short term outcome is that the Large boys will be back on track, welcome back boys. The long term outcome is that we don't know what they did wrong and this is the bit that worries me. Why do I feel like a mushroom?
 

 
125 RIDERS' ALLIANCE

A wise person simplifies the complicated, a fool complicates the simple.
Go to Top of Page

oldonk
Level 2 Member

Australian Capital Territory


84 Posts

Posted - 21 Sep 2007 :  5:17:22 PM  Show Profile Send oldonk a Private Message  

 
Seems strange to think that MA has got things wrong and the Large boys have got it right???

Did the insurance the boys had actually cover injury to a third person, that is somebody they may run into. Maybe they had personel accident insurance that only covered themselves without realising that it did not cover a third party.

Perhaps that is the real issue.

Anyway David Large seems to have more information about it, lets wait and see.

 
Edited by - oldonk on 21 Sep 2007 6:14:52 PM
Go to Top of Page

acotrel
Advanced Member

Victoria


2147 Posts

Posted - 21 Sep 2007 :  5:35:17 PM  Show Profile Send acotrel a Private Message  

 
Oldonk, I think you've hit the nail on the head. There are a few issues - personal accident insurance, public liability, insurance of the promoter against being sued by competitors. MA will naturally want to be 'in control', but that's not really how it has to be. The coronial inquest into the death of Beveridge at Albert Park during the GP became a chase around CAMS,the organiser and the circuit owner. CAMS suddenly didn't want to be the 'controlling body' any more! The sh*t ended up with Ron Walker and the GP Corporation. The insurance issue is one aspect that can make or break motor sport. We might end up like the kids that can't ride ponies due to no insurance!
 

 
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible?
Go to Top of Page

OldKwak
Level 2 Member

Victoria


156 Posts

Posted - 24 Sep 2007 :  4:51:02 PM  Show Profile Send OldKwak a Private Message  

 
Guys,

I don't understand this attempt to polarize the discussion. The fact is that MA could have simply explained its reasons for its decision much more clearly. In not doing so MA is wrong in terms of the process, not necessarily in terms of the outcome. In failing to put its reasons clearly it has failed in one of its fundamental responsibilities - to ensure that justice is seen to be done. I for one am concerned that in taking this approach MA might have done something capricious and not based on sound reasoning.

The only submission to date that has shed any light on a possible reason has been from Peter Large who states:-

"When speaking to Brian Payne after the decision had been handed down he said that the issue was with 'repatriation' insurance. This is insurance to fly your remains home if need be."

In light of the circumstances this seems a bit flimsy as a ground for conviction and provides me with no confidence in the decision if it was the reason, equally it could be that this was but one opinion and the full reasons are yet to be revealed.

If, as has been suggested by Alan and Oldonk, and for which both have absolutely no evidence, the reason was the inadequacy of the cover in terms of third party coverage; this flies directly in the face of Peter's suggestion (based on Brian Payne's comment) of the lack of 'repatriation insurance' and even more brings into question the adequacy of the reasons.

But, as I have said previously, there is no legal imperative for MA to be more expansive. I believe there is a moral responsibility simply because I would like to know that such issues are being dealt with in a proper way, based on sound reasoning and I am certain the rest of the members of MA are of the same opinion. MA might be correct, I hope they are because if they are not then what confidence can we all have that the dire predictions of Alan and Oldonk won't become self fulfilling prophesies.
Go to Top of Page

acotrel
Advanced Member

Victoria


2147 Posts

Posted - 24 Sep 2007 :  7:08:25 PM  Show Profile Send acotrel a Private Message  

 
Oldkwak, now is not a good time to shake MAs tree over insurance issues. For a while now circuit owners have been warring with 'controlling bodies' and insurance is a major issue. Whoever provides the insurance sets the conditions for racing. In effect 'controlling bodies' then want to tell circuit oners how to conduct business on their own properties! Insurance for motorcycle racing is difficult to get and MA is a good source. I suggest that we should actively avoid situations which might endanger the process. If we cop a hard time for a misdemeanor - cop it sweet!
 

 
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible?
Go to Top of Page

OldKwak
Level 2 Member

Victoria


156 Posts

Posted - 25 Sep 2007 :  11:28:03 AM  Show Profile Send OldKwak a Private Message  

 
Alan,

This is not an issue about the adequacy or otherwise of the insurance in general on racing or about "warring" parties, its about natural justice and justice being seen to be done.

The question that needs answering is; for what reason was the insurance that the Large's had inadequate? Simply that. Nothing more. I want to know this to be sure that both sides in this debate have followed a proper process and to learn about errors that have been made - so that I don't make the same mistake.
Go to Top of Page

acotrel
Advanced Member

Victoria


2147 Posts

Posted - 25 Sep 2007 :  5:41:51 PM  Show Profile Send acotrel a Private Message  

 
Oldkwak, I suggest it's more about who calls the shots in motorcycling. MA is our competitors union. They provide the insurace. They say what goes. You can pursue the 'natural justice' thing ad nauseam. Where it ends up, is with an attack on MA. I suggest you need to look where you are going with this thing.
 

 
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible?
Go to Top of Page

acotrel
Advanced Member

Victoria


2147 Posts

Posted - 25 Sep 2007 :  7:16:41 PM  Show Profile Send acotrel a Private Message  

 
Oldkwak, I appreciate your concern for the human rights of fellow competitors. I've only one question - I would have thought that Dave Large would have enough fron to come on this forum and square off on his own behalf? Perhaps his index finger has got stuck up his nose!!
 

 
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible?
Go to Top of Page

oldonk
Level 2 Member

Australian Capital Territory


84 Posts

Posted - 25 Sep 2007 :  8:12:15 PM  Show Profile Send oldonk a Private Message  

 
Acotrel, language people have their own reason for not coming on, there is no need to be rude about it. I will assume he has not got the goods unless he explains what went on, we heard about it hear and few were happy about the risk it could have created. I know some felt he was hung out to dry, but just as many did not.

 
Edited by - oldonk on 25 Sep 2007 8:15:35 PM
Go to Top of Page

David
Site Administrator

Australia


999 Posts

Posted - 25 Sep 2007 :  8:36:52 PM  Show Profile  Visit David's Homepage Send David a Private Message  

 
Since Dave Large has not been on, here is the text he sent me on the 16th September 2007:
quote:
Motorcycling Victoria’s case against David and Peter Large.

After the conclusion of racing at the Southern classic meeting, Saturday 2004 I was approached by
David Morgan the MA representative. He asked to see our licences as he believed we were unhicencecj.
I pointed out that our licences were produced at scruiteneering that morning but he was welcome to see
them again. He then asked for insurance certificates. I produced mine but Pete had left his at home. He
then took us to talk with other officials from MV who insisted that Pete go home and get his insurance
document. As racing had finished for the day and Pete had had a couple of beers he quite rightly
refused to ride home. The 3 MV officials and the MA official then said that we were in breach of the
regulations and could not ride on Sunday.

We produced the letter from MA chief executive stating that it was ok to use a Scottish licence in
Australia providing we had adequate insurance. The officials ignored this official MA document. We then
gave our bikes to other riders to use on the Sunday. We did not argue with the officials even though we
knew we were right. The next morning We were told by the steward that they had reconsidered the
matter and it was ok to ride. We did not ask for our bikes back and so missed the first southern classic
that we did not ride in since the beginning of the event many years ago. As Pete had won the four
previous sidecar southern classics and was likely to win his 5th, naturally he was a bit upset.

Several weeks later Peter received a hand written letter from a person we did not know. The letter was
not on an official letter head and stated that this person was investigating the alledged breach of the
rules. I contacted the race secretary to ask him to try to find out from MV who this person was and what
right he had to question us. The race secretary was informed by MV that the investigator, Dale Wylie,
was authorised by MV to investigate the case. The race secretary passed this information to us but as
we were soon to leave to go to the UK to race we did not respond further. When we returned from the
UK 7 weeks later we were informed by MV that they had carried out an extensive investigation which
found that we were unlicenced and uninsured. MV imposed a fine of $3000 each and banned us from
racing for two years from the date of payment of the fine.

At no time was I contacted by MV regarding the charges. Peter Wright of MV claimed they did not have
my adress. He only had to look at the entry form, a copy of which was given to MV be the race secretary.
All information I had regarding the charges against us came from Peter Large. We do not believe we
were given an opportunity to defend ourselves.

We decided to appeal and paid $750 to lodge an appeal stating the reasons for the appeal. We
contacted a barrister who gave advice on how to proceed at the appeal. While we were in the barristers
office he rang MA to make enquiries as to how the appeal process worked. He was told that as we had
a good case and it was probably a routine that had to be foliwed there was no need for us to be
represented. We attended the appeal the following night.

The chairman was a barrister hired by MA and there were two MA members on the jury. MV was
represented by Peter Wright, with Dale Wylie and Andrew Winter as the witnesses for the prosecution.

Dale Wylie gave his evidence and agreed that at no time had he spoken to us during the course of his
extensive investigation. He then left, claiming he had to work the next day. We also had to work the
next day, Pete at 5.30 am and me at 3.30 am. We were willing to stay to the end. The” ~ndependant
chairman” insisted on taking a break even though we objected and he left the room with the MV officials.
We don’t know what they talked about.

We produced the Scottish licence and a letter from the Scottish ACU confirming our membership. The
chairman would not accept these as he stated that there is no such place as Scotland and so the
documents must be false. MV stated that they had contacted the ACU in England and there was no
record of us. Again we pointed out that the Scottish ACU is not the English ACU. The “independant
Chairman” on behalf of MV stated that they had spent hundreds of man hours and thousands of dollars
envestigating the case. Despite this massive waste of members resources they were unable to locate
page 42 of the ACU handbook. Thats the page that lists the Adresses and officials of the Scottish
ACU and affilliated clubs.

He also stated that as his own insurance did not cover motorcycle racing the nobody elses would either.
My death Cover was for $425000 and Peters was for 318000, both much better than that offered by MA
and both valid for racing. Andrew Winter stated that the sidecar riders are a law unto themselves and
did their own scruteneering on Friday and so we did not show our licences. He was not asked to
produce any evidence to support this lie. We were not there on Friday.

Several weeks later after the 2005 Southern Classic Peter contacted MA for a decision. He was told that
the decision was made weeks ago but the result was not released until after the Southern Classic. The
outcome was that we were fined $1000 each for having no insurance and banned for two years.

In compiling this report I have stuck to the facts and have not offered any opinion as to why MV and MA
are so keen to ban me from racing. It is unfortunate that Peter is caught up in this persecution as he
would have had another 35 years of racing ahead of him.
Dave either doesn't understand how to reset his password is just figured he did not have to justify their actions.

I also have to agree with Oldonk about your rudeness Alan C, there was no need for it, just keep to the facts.
 

 
Regards,

David
Webmaster & Owner of Classic Motorcycling Australia

Quote: I thought I wanted a career, turns out I just wanted to be paid.
Go to Top of Page

acotrel
Advanced Member

Victoria


2147 Posts

Posted - 26 Sep 2007 :  10:51:54 AM  Show Profile Send acotrel a Private Message  

 
I've a few questions - did Dave's insurance cover the situation where he might cause injury to other competitors or members of the public? Did it also cover the situation where the promoter might be sued due to incidents involving themselves? Have both Dave and Peter paid their $1000 fines to MA yet, or are these still outstanding? Do both these guys now have current MA licences and Scottish licences, so they can race in local events and overseas again in the future?
 

 
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible?
Go to Top of Page

acotrel
Advanced Member

Victoria


2147 Posts

Posted - 26 Sep 2007 :  10:54:09 AM  Show Profile Send acotrel a Private Message  

 
P.S I sincerely apologise for being rude on this forum.
This topic has some importance for the future of historic racing in Victoria.
Best Regards,
Alan Cotterell
 

 
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible?
Go to Top of Page

john feakes
Advanced Member

Victoria


791 Posts

Posted - 26 Sep 2007 :  12:02:44 PM  Show Profile Send john feakes a Private Message  

 
As I am stuck in a time warp can someone explain a few things for me? Am I correct in assuming that the insurance premium is included in the licence fee? If so, what is the position of international riders competing in Australia? As far as I am aware, when I last had a licence we had no insurance at all. But that was in the middle of the last century. Cheers, John
 

 
125 RIDERS' ALLIANCE

A wise person simplifies the complicated, a fool complicates the simple.
Go to Top of Page

Alan
Forum Moderator

Western Australia


353 Posts

Posted - 26 Sep 2007 :  3:00:29 PM  Show Profile Send Alan a Private Message  

 
Alan Cotterell either has no idea of the rule structure or doesnt want to know. On this basis he should either keep quiet or investigate properly before making incorrect statements or asking irrelevant questions.
After reading Dave Large`s statement it appears that they may have been hard done by but this is all history now and should be left where it is. The Large family have obviously moved on and maybe its time the rest of you did.
My advice to all would be to get a copy of the Manual of Motorcycle Sport, read it and if you dont understand it contact MA and ask for clarification. You can download the manual from the MA website if writing in for a copy is to hard for you.

Alan Sidecar 21 WA
Go to Top of Page

OldKwak
Level 2 Member

Victoria


156 Posts

Posted - 26 Sep 2007 :  4:40:57 PM  Show Profile Send OldKwak a Private Message  

 
David,

Thankyou for posting the info from David Large, I guess I am now more concerned than ever in respect of MA's actions as they have been portrayed so far. In my opinion nothing I could say can constitute a greater attack on MA than David's information.

Alan, I am the one to be sorry about your outburst, it was not my intent to upset you but it was my intent to draw your attention to what I consider a major precedural flaw that could cause someone else problems down the track. I am not sure I want to be part of a union, as you put it, that can hurt a member's reputation without just cause. At the same time I have some faith and respect for the system as it stands, hence my disappointment in the lack of proper published reason.

I also agree that insurance is a major issue for us all but so should high handedness be an issue. On the latter point, I don't think it should just be left alone and forgotten about, I think MA should publish the other side of the story and explain if some of the questions you (AC) have put were the cause of their findings, just to clear the air.
Go to Top of Page

acotrel
Advanced Member

Victoria


2147 Posts

Posted - 27 Sep 2007 :  08:36:21 AM  Show Profile Send acotrel a Private Message  

 
Oldkwak, I agree there has been a 'major procedural flaw' in the handling of this matter by MA. There is obviously agreement/process within MA for the recognition of the international licences of stars such as Giacomo Agostini, Valentino Rossi, Dave Large, and Casey Stoner. And it must handle insurance issues in a way which satifies the rest of us who pick up the tab in Australia.
I suggest that a simple action on the part of Dave, could have avoided all this kafuffle. I wonder why he didn't ring David White and complain when heis Scottish licence was rejected at Winton, early on in the piece? The fact that he was then allowed to ride at subsequent meetings elsewhere demonstrates glaring inconsistencies in the way MA controls meetings at various circuits, and promoted by other clubs. I suggest that if officials at Winton can pick up a potentially unconventional situation, the question must be raised about the actions of other officials!!!
I suggest that if this is the best MA can do to control motorcycle racing in Australia, they should get out of the business. The control and disciplinary process is obviously inadequate!!
 

 
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible?
Go to Top of Page

OldKwak
Level 2 Member

Victoria


156 Posts

Posted - 27 Sep 2007 :  08:54:46 AM  Show Profile Send OldKwak a Private Message  

 
Well said Alan.
Go to Top of Page

acotrel
Advanced Member

Victoria


2147 Posts

Posted - 27 Sep 2007 :  7:26:17 PM  Show Profile Send acotrel a Private Message  

 
Oldkwak, if we work at it hard enough we can get around to believing that only MA has a 'duty of care' at race meetings!
 

 
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible?
Go to Top of Page

oldonk
Level 2 Member

Australian Capital Territory


84 Posts

Posted - 05 Oct 2007 :  8:30:12 PM  Show Profile Send oldonk a Private Message  

 
At the end of the day, the question about whether that insurance held actually covered other riders is the point I was asking.
Having insurannce for yourself is one thing, covering others is another.
David L has not clearly answered that question.
Go to Top of Page

acotrel
Advanced Member

Victoria


2147 Posts

Posted - 11 Oct 2007 :  7:41:55 PM  Show Profile Send acotrel a Private Message  

 
I agree that Dave Large still has something to say to the rest of us! It's unfortunately pretty clear that MA cannot reasonably make a statement about why it proceeded against David and Peter Large, without causing a stupid controversy. MA are obviously clear in their own minds that these guys put our sport at risk!! Personally I can't see why the MA tribunal decision is being debated here?
 

 
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible?
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 2 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Classic Motorcycling Australia Forums © 2000 - 2025 Go To Top Of Page
This page was put together in 0.94 seconds. Snitz Forums 2000


 
 
 
Copyright © 2000 - 2025 by Classic Motorcycling Australia | Web design by: Greening Computer Services