Is fleet and or regatta insurance really needed?
Does anyone know of a case where a fleet or regatta management team was sued by anyone?
Does a regatta or fleet, by purchacing insurance, only
increase the chance of being sued by someone due to the creation of a "deep pocket"?

Just asking, as I feel that the money spent on regatta insurance is wasted.

Mark L.

i'm curious. is this a medical type of insurance or physical -boat wreck- type of insurance or other?

Hmm... Is regatta insurance wasted?

Regatta liability insurance covers your Race committee, Volunteers, Club officers against all claims while you are on the water. So... if someone dies on the water (which just happened at a Tornado Race) and his wife and 2 little kids takes you to court claiming that you as PRO and your neighbor in the mark boat (which every one insists is really your rescue boat) were negligent you will have legal representation and any judgment against you will be covered up to one million dollars.

Personally, I think it is irresponsible to ask your volunteers for help in conducting an event and not taking out an insurance policy for some tragedy on the water.

CRAC has the good fortune to be able to use a former sailors private property (as opposed to a state park) for a leg of the Cheseapeake 100 or the Down the Bay. If something happend on the water or on the beach...again we would be completely irresponsible if we did not insure his property. This policy is in addition to the regatta liability coverage.

If everyone involved in conducitng the regatta understands that you are not insured.... so be it.. (Some clubs in our area take this point of view) Full disclosure to those volunteers is the key though.

Do you create a deep pocket if you have insurance?

Well, I suspect that if your fleet did not have insurance then you would be sued personally. So I guess your homeowners insurance would kick in. If not... I guess you defend your self out of pocket. In any case... I want no part of this scene.... Its just not worth it.

For a 30 boat regatta.... it works out to 5 bucks a person for a one time fee!....
Cat Sailors are so damn cheap that they can be penny wise and pound foolish. (damn I am getting old)

Take Care
Mark

As Mark implied, most regatta policies only cover the host and the volunteers. Some of our venues require that we have this kind of policy just to use their body of water. Sailors should be told that they are NOT insured against damage to them or damage they cause.

Tim Dry
Minden, NV

I see your point. I was moved to ask the question as in
reading some fine print on a regatta policy I found that
there was a waiver if the race team was found to be guilty
of "careless or reckless actions". I have found this to be a kind of a loophole that some insurance co's use to worm
out with. The term is so subjective that you never know how
a court will rule on it.

So, read your fine print, and make sure your really covered.

Regards, ML

When Hobie Division 8 was wondering about this a few years ago, the insurance available covered only "spectators"! What- for maybe 10 people on the beach? What the hey was the good of this? Maybe somebody getting run over by a boat surfing in to the beach? If competitors are adequately covered, I would have to read the policy to believe it would ever pay off.

Beach Insurance is much more then the beach!

If your wild christmas party turns into a true sailors bash and your gracious and unsuspecting host's priceless ming dynasty vase is smashed by somebody's three year old..... You and your host are covered!

Again... insurance companies operate on the principle of distributed liability.... so... if a sailor (who is insured) drops the mast on somebodies parked car....or worse the head of a passerby you the organizing party may be held partially liable. Who knows... a jury decides that you should have blocked off the area behind boats droping their masts. (seems reasonable to a non sailor).


Is it worth the risk.... Will you run a fleet without insurance coverage?... Will you tell your wife that you/she might be personally liable for an action that a jury finds negligent?...

Your call!

Finally, you noted that Division 8 investigated the beach insurance issue. My reading of the coverage indicated that Division 8 would be called a regional sailing authority. This entitiy could run a race and have insurance however... it could not extend its coverage to Fleet xx's regatta within the division. If each fleet had its own directors and bank account... they would have to purchase their own insurance policy.

Once again... its your call about the risk/ liability issue.

Take Care

Mark

The water patrol requires all major races that are held to have insurance in our area. We have no choice.

I think we need to distinguish between Div Points events, which are run by Division RC "officers or officials" for Div points;, and fleet events that are not part of the Div. schedule. Is that enough distinction for the lawyers :-) Probably not, but the other way, both fleets AND the Div would need a policy (the Div should have told the fleet to not hold the race in big surf, and the Fleet mishandled the chase boats, so both are liable, etc).
Our Potomac group got sued when a RC volunteer slipped on the dock after coming in and broke an arm. Myers-Brriggs claimed 67 lawsuits filed against RCs in the past 10 years (quoting from faded memory)...

Chris

I asked this question of Myers Briggs several years ago. They told me that if you have two bank accounts and two sets of officers... eg Hobie Fleet xx and Division.Y. then you have two groups. Therefore you need two insurance policies.

They addressed this question in a faq about regional sailing authorties and insurance for member clubs and published this info on the US Sailing web site.

This distinction makes sense to me because otherwise... why don't we say that NAHCA runs all of our races and insist we are covered under a single NAHCA policy.... why draw the line at the division.

The bottom line for me is ... unless you write your check to Hobie div XX for the regatta that the division officers are running you have two clubs and need two policies.

Perhaps John Williams has more information concerning how Hobie Divisions, Hobie Fleets and Unaffiliated catamaran clubs can choose among the policies and have confidence that they are indeed insured.

Take Care
Mark

I just read Paul Ullibari's comments on adequate powerboat coverage for a regatta in the most recent NAHCA news. He makes two main points:
He notes the need for marks boats to manage the race course effectively and he wrote about the implied contract between host clubs and the sailor with respect to quality racing.

I have a problem with his second point.
He goes on to set a standard of 1 patrol boat or support boat for every ten cats on the water specifically for safety concerns . He seems to state this as official Hobie policy.

I believe that this standard (which sounds like a regatta requirement) exposes RC's to unnecessary liability and leaves clubs negligent if they fail to meet this Hobie saftey standard.

Again, I refer to a conversation with a Myers Briggs representative a few years ago. He repeatedly stated the underlying principle is that RC's should do nothing to undercut the responsibility of the skipper to judge the prevailing conditions and continue to race or not race. He stated that RC’s job was to conduct a race if conditions permit and not to judge whether it was “Safe” for boats to be on the water. He warned that by declaring you had support boats on the water, you implied that you (RC) would assume some responsibility to rescue the sailor. Moreover, you would be grilled on the proper training for your rescue boat personal or why you did not have the proper equipment to stabilize an injured sailor, etc etc. If NAHCA set a policy of 1 support/rescue per 10 cats for safety reasons then RC's which fail to provide such a standard would be negligent (or have a tough time proving they were not negligent).

Rather, he suggested that Race Committees provide marks boats only! If the skipper of a mark boat was able to offer assistance to a sailor in trouble he would be acting just like the skipper of another cat or the skipper of a recreational boater passing by. His actions or (inability to offer assistance) would be covered under the good Samaritan laws.

Has NAHCA unintentionally raised the bar for fleets and made them responsible for an individual racers safety on the water?

Take Care
Mark

Mark, Your not advocating the elimination of safety boats to limit legal liability, are you?

Mark L.

Absolutely!

But not just to limit legal liability.

Saftey on the water is the captains responsiblity solely. If he or she can't handle the conditions then they should retire for the day. Under no circumstance should he count on being rescued from his personal emergency by the Race committee.
When you announce "saftey patrol boats are on the course" you are saying hey... take some chances... we have your butt covered. " This is a silly statement to make and you will get someone into real trouble this way.

Having adequate marks boats so that you can efficently manage the race course is good race comitte work.

Pretending that somebody's neighbor on a "saftey patrol" has the ability to pull an injured sailor out of the water or in the situation in the Tornado regatta in Europe cut a drowning sailor out from under his turtled tramp is crazy. (The folks who tried to rescue this fellow were on coach boats... not race committe saftey patrols and they were on top of the situation within minutes)

These "captain is responsible" guidelines are recognized by the coast guard. They will not assign coast guard auxillory boats to patrol your regatta as a trained saftey patrol. They will tell you... Its each skippers responsiblity to operate his vessel in a safe manner. If you have an emergency... hail the coast guard on channel 16.

Having said this... every cat sailor, marks boat operator and Race committe person should be aware of saftey and assist when they can..... I anounce this standard at every skipprs meeting that I run. This is very different then saying... '"We have patrol boats positioned on the course. We have got you covered"

Remember, ANY time that you spend checking on a capsized sailor will be remanded by the RC. This is one of the racing rules that we follow.

Finally, take distance racing for example... It is impossible to patrol a 100 mile race course (Worrell 1000 leg). We don't pretend that we can. What is the difference between say the Statue of Liberty race (70 boats, 40 mile course and a busy commercial harbor) and a buoys race?

Nothing! ..... Each sailor take on the responsibility for himself his crew and the boat to race or not.

Race committes should not undercut this responsibility. They establish a starting line, set a fair course and record finish times.

Take Care
Mark

I agree wholeheartedly with Mark.
Just look at the potential liabilities.
The owner of the "crash boat" could be liable for not seeing the boat in trouble in time or taking too long to get there.
The helpers on the boat could be liable for not being able to untangle the sailor in trouble or lift them onto the "crash boat" or administer first aid or administer CPR.
The "crash boat" skipper and crew could be liable if someone were injured while righting the boat or the boat were damaged.
The PRO could be liable for not contacting the "crash boat" or boats and coordinating the rescue.
Everyone on the Race Committee boat could be held liable if they didn't see a boat in trouble quick enough and send a "crash boat".
Then there is the Regatta chairman who didn't have an emergency plan, know where the nearest hospital and its phone number was, check the qualifications of the "crash boat" skipper and crew, make sure there was first aid kits everywhere, and have a medivac standing by.
And don't forget the members of the host fleet. Even if they weren't at the regatta, a court could find the Fleet liable and they would have to pay.

You must NEVER use the terms "crash boat", "safety boat", "rescue boat" or the like and have a long and complete waiver on the NOR and make it very clear at the skipper meeting that everyone was responsible for their own safety.

I must go on the record here as having a very different opinion than Mark or Sam on limiting safety to avoid liability.
While I agree that it's a good idea to designate
them as "Mark Boats" for legal purposes, I believe it is very wrong headed to not have as many as possible. I have sailed over 25 years and I can promise you that, on occasion, conditions will change drasticly after the racing starts and contrary to the forcasted and anticipated conditions. Paul U. is absolutly right in recommending the extra boats, and I am sure it's based on his vast experience in just these type of circumstances.
Maybe there is a sailor or two that will step in over his head because of the presence of safety boats. I believe, however, that having only 2 or 3 boats available to help
50 or so boats in need of assistance is a nightmare to be avoided if at all possible.

When we compromise safety to avoid liability, we are being cowardly.

Mark L.

Hi Mark

You wrote: Paul U. is absolutly right in recommending the extra boats, and I am sure it's based on his vast experience in just these type of circumstances.

Here's the problem with Paul's position. If for a Hobie sanctioned event the guideline states that 5 patrol boats for 50 cats are recomended for adequate saftey.... Then the fleet that has 4 boats on the course is negligent if the X hits the fan. We should get US Sailing's insurance provider to comment on this standard about just how negligent we are if we only have 1 power boat on the course. My hunch is they recomend to drop the saftey issue. On the flip side of the issue... How do you answer the question... how many patrol boats are enough for a worse case scenario of 50 capsized boats? (conditions which probably took out your powerboat as well)

You wrote "When we compromise safety to avoid liability, we are being cowardly"

This is a false dichotomy. How are more or less crash boats safer? ... What exactly do they provide that makes your sailing safer on the race course? For example:

Racers confuse saftey with convenice. If I drop the rig.. because my 10 year old forestay fails... am I in trouble (saftey) or just inconveniced? This is followed up by... Do I pay Seatow. 150 an hour from the dock to pull my rig back to the beach.... OR....do I expect my entry fee to count as a towing insurance and expect the RC to tow me back... OR.. do I secure the rig and paddle home? (been there done that)

How about if I turtle the boat??? A saftey issue or just damn inconvenient. Once again... I 800 seatow will solve this problem.

If someone is injured and needs immediate hospitialization when you drop the rig... I agree a mark's boat would fit the bill for providing immediate help. From my point of view... this is sort of like having the ambulance stand by in case you need medical assistance. I usually accept the risk that I may have to wait for an ambulance or in this case the coast guard, another sailor, power boater, or a mark boat/Race committe for assistance. Again... I as skipper would be a fault if I had no means to hail them... whistle... radio. flare... whatever.

Should you get seperated from the boat... how does a crash boat provide an additional saftey factor compared to the other 50 sailboats on the water?

This year's Tradewinds regatta saw a boat capsize on the start line at a start and a second boat run over the rig. Was this dangerous... yes. Could a saftey boat have done anything no... Had someone been injured... what would have happened? ... Well... My guess is that Rick White would have pulled anchor .. abandoned racing for the duration and taken the injured sailor to a waiting ambulance. The remaining racers would be greatly inconveniced (no racing until he got back on station)... but saftey would not have been sacrificed.

Bottom line...cat sailors log hundreds of hours just sailing without saftey patrols around. Whats the key difference about a sailboat race that warrants a standard of 1 saftey boat for 10 cats?

In an early post in this thread you wrote:
"I found that there was a waiver if the race team was found to be guiltyof "careless or reckless actions". I have found this to be a kind of a loophole that some insurance co's use to worm
out with"

If PU's standard is on the books... X hits the fan and you have too few Saftey or Patrol boats on the water.... My guess is that the Insurance company will declare that your RC actions are careless and reckless... Sam's comments are other examples of how you make the careless and negligent standard while contributing nothing to real saftey on the water.

Take Care
Mark

I can think of two local events that may be applicable to this discussion. Back in the 70s, a microburst or severe thunderstorm cell with winds in excess of 50 ripped through the Potomac dinghy fleet on their normal Sunday sail. No one saw it coming, and almost everyone (60+) boats went over. Some people were in the water for hours (on a very narrow constrained body of water) as the RC, Harbor Police, fishermen, etc slowly found everyone. The RC had no more than 4 boats, and maybe only two.

Last year (or maybe year before), the Albacore fleet had a big event at Solomons Island when a squall went through. About 50 boats went over. Most of these eventually righted themselves, but there were some broken masts and damage. Recovery was hampered by RC boat breakdowns and loosing count of total numbers of boats on the water. RC again had no more than 4 boats.

Now, you can probably argue both of these either way. Even if the RC had 20 boats on the water, the amount of boats over and the speed at which they drifted would have still caused problems. The sailors still HAD to be dressed to handle the conditions. More chase boats would have certainly sped things up. If I can afford it, I would definitely like to run a dinghy race with lots of chase boats, especially in areas with commercial traffic (i.e., drift into the shipping lane and get run over). I am not convinced the typical dinghy can actually self-righting, whereas I am more confident with cats. It is kind of ironic that we typically do "high risk" distance races with little or no support, whereas bouy races in semi-sheltered waters have lots of support. Maybe one driver is the amount of C fleeters/novices you expect to see. I'll also note that the Optimist class has VERY rigid guidelines on chase boats required per number of competitors. Maybe as adults we do assume more responsibility...

Chris

Mark L.,
I NEVER said you shouldn't have as many "marks boats" as possible. To read that from my statements is ludicrous.
On the contrary, I have never been to a regatta where I felt there were enough "marks boats".
I have been to regattas where I felt it was more dangerous to rely on the "marks boats" rather than each other.
I have been to regattas where there were these large power boats riding around with ONE PERSON in them who pretended to help.
I have been to regattas where a power boat stayed tied to the committe boat all day except when it moved marks.
I have been to regattas where power boats circled the committe boat, chatting with the committee DURING the prestart.
I have been to regattas where a power boat was tied to the committe boat on the STARTING side.
I have been to regattas where power boats parked on a nearby beach to watch the race from shore.

I realize how hard it is to get people to volunteer as "marks boats".
Unfortunately when a person knowingly volunteers to assist people who may be in a life threatening situation, you MUST be able to depend on that person. And conversely the organizers of the regatta MUST protect that person from possible liabilities.

An important concept in our court system is "expectation". The expectation of privacy, of performance, of safety, of rescuing us from our own stupidity. If you don't say "can't" or "will not" you may leave an expectation of "can" or "will". Sad but true.
If the regatta organizers don't do everything in their power to put the safety onus on the competitors, they may be liable.

Let me repeat, the more "marks boats" the better. Any kind of "marks boat" is better than none. Anybody on a "marks boat" is better than none.

nevermind...I thought you guys were actually recommending that fewer committee boats was a good thing because of the legal ramifications.

Hi Sam and Mark,

Sam, my confusion as to your opinion stems from the following: I posed the question to Mark asking if he advocated the elimination of crash boats to avoid liability
and his answer was "absolutly". Your answer was that you agreed with Marks opinion. Now I see that you agreed that
the term "crash boat" was wrong and "mark boat" was better.
Your last sentence says my opinion exactly. The more mark boats the better.

Mark, I fully agree that we can not ever provide or give the impression of providing total safety or service to racers. I've never been to an event where anyone asked for
or expected that either. In the senario that we are talking
about, many situations occur that take some time, even hours, to cross the bridge from "bad" to "tragic".
A few that spring to mind are hypothermia, drifting into rocky shores in surf, moderate bleeding, badly sealed deck
caps on an overturned boat causing gradual sinking. There
are many more. The more boats avialable to render assistance the better. The greater the odds nobody gets killed.

I think we may be arguing different points: I'm only addressing how best to save a boat in a tight spot. I think
you may be addressing how to best position the RC legally
if something does. If the two positions conflict, than
count me solidly on the side of saving people. Hence the
opinion that to not seek as many assist boats as possible simply to make it look better in court is cowardly. To not seek them feeling that they will not be needed is misguided.
But thats just my opinion, and Ive been wrong before.

Regards, Mark L.