North Birmingham CTC

Anything relating to the clubs associated with Cycling UK
123ttam
Posts: 42
Joined: 5 Nov 2012, 6:04pm

North Birmingham CTC

Postby 123ttam » 20 Jan 2016, 12:29pm

Hello All

The Current Contact information for the North Birmingham CTC is:-

Web Site:- http://www.nbctc.co.uk

Facebook:- http://www.facebook.com/groups/229003840545357/

Twitter:- http://www.twitter.com/NorthBrumCTC

Strava:- https://www.strava.com/clubs/ctc-north-birmingham

Email:- northbirmingham.ctc@gmail.com

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13665
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: North Birmingham CTC

Postby gaz » 20 Jan 2016, 7:40pm

I think you've missed the statutory legal notice from your website, as quoted from the Policy Handbook, page 9.
Cyclists’ Touring Club (CTC) a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England No 25185, registered as a charity in England and Wales Charity No
1147607 and in Scotland No SC042541. Registered office: Parklands, Railton Road, Guildford, Surrey GU2 9JX


You didn't know there was a statutory legal notice :shock: :wink: .
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

User avatar
robgul
Posts: 2883
Joined: 8 Jan 2007, 8:40pm
Contact:

Re: North Birmingham CTC

Postby robgul » 22 Jan 2016, 2:16pm

Distant drum beats and smoke signals suggest that N Brum may be looking at its future as a CTC MG ... any updates from anyone?

Rob

UPDATE: It would seem from another post on here relating to a Facebook post that it's correct and yet another MG may be abdicating

(I wonder how long the lease is on the CTC HQ building? :twisted: )

User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15008
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: North Birmingham CTC

Postby Si » 22 Jan 2016, 4:26pm

Code: Select all

Distant drum beats and smoke signals suggest that N Brum may be looking at its future as a CTC MG ... any updates from anyone?


This has been the case for umpteen years.

The status quo seems to be in the strongest position as it requires least effort :wink:

User avatar
robgul
Posts: 2883
Joined: 8 Jan 2007, 8:40pm
Contact:

Re: North Birmingham CTC

Postby robgul » 23 Jan 2016, 3:09pm

Si wrote:

Code: Select all

Distant drum beats and smoke signals suggest that N Brum may be looking at its future as a CTC MG ... any updates from anyone?


This has been the case for umpteen years.

The status quo seems to be in the strongest position as it requires least effort :wink:


I'm not so sure that drums aren't beating at a higher level and the smoke increasing in volume . . . . making a change more of a possibility . .

Rob

User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15008
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: North Birmingham CTC

Postby Si » 12 Apr 2016, 8:43am

From the northern news letter (I've not received a similar piece from the pro-affiliate conversion supporters so can't reproduce it):

The Northern - in or out? The case for staying as a CTC member group

The short read

CTC North Birmingham – the Northern to its friends - is a successful club with 185 active members, £6000 reserves and a proud 97-year heritage. We currently have the most successful CTC Member Group in the country with sixteen rides each week. A steady stream of new riders join us. We have members and volunteers of more than 65 years’ standing who are proud members of both the club and the CTC; they are still actively involved in helping run the club and are strongly opposed to both the club being dissolved and the association with the CTC being reduced to a mere insurance tie-in.

We need new blood on the committee and there is new blood ready to come forward and help run NBCTC but not to be involved in setting up or running a new club. We do not need to dissolve the club to make it more flexible and forward-looking. The reserves belong to CTC so the new club will have to build up new funds without the assistance of many of the current volunteers. The 33 signatories will do everything necessary to keep the Northern going and will form a new CTC member group if needed.

If you want the club to modernise within the current CTC structure, come and vote against the resolution on 30 April. Whatever your views, please come out and vote and do bring your CTC membership card with you.

The longer read - intro

I am ****** and I am a member of the committee of CTC North Birmingham. I have performed this role as a volunteer for 10 years during which time we have had enormous fun socially as well as in the saddle. I oppose and am deeply saddened at the prospect that the club may be dissolved as are the 32 other signatories of this note. Among the signatories are 15 leaders and 14 volunteers, including the organisers of the audax and the jumble. We will do everything necessary to make sure that the Northern lives on to celebrate its centenary in 2019. Even if we lose this current vote we will re-form NBCTC as an inclusive club and CTC Member Group and keep its fundraising events going.

The notes in the April newsletter present the dissolution of CTC North Birmingham - the Northern to its friends – as a fait accompli. Members have nothing to lose by deserting the ship and jumping onto a new one. Nothing will be different and all will be well in the best of all possible worlds. Let me put a different point of view. Here are some thoughts on why the club should not be dissolved so that members can take an informed view when they come to cast their votes.

How is the club doing these days?

We currently have the most successful CTC Member Group in the country with sixteen rides each week. There was an influx of faster riders about five years ago. Very few of them did anything except ride with the club. Scarcely any of them espoused the spirit of the CTC and volunteered to lead rides or help out at fundraising and social events. That influx of members has largely moved on. We greatly enjoyed their company but numbers are now more manageable.

What about the reserves?

NBCTC currently has over £6000 in reserves. The committee is proposing to dispose of the assets before the club is dissolved, including passing some start-up capital to the new club. The committee is not proposing to pass the reserves back to the CTC as required by the clear directive in the policy handbook.

What about change?

Those behind the resolution to dissolve the club point to vague perceived restrictions in the current CTC Member Group policy handbook. They have spoken of their plans should they be given free rein. Yet they form the majority of the committee and have not made any significant changes (let alone proposed any changes that have been stymied by the policy handbook) during the time that they have been on the committee. The facts put simply are firstly that the main changes proposed are that cyclists who are not members of the CTC will be permitted to join, so long as they have other third party insurance; this may make it cheaper to cycle with the new club. Secondly, families and beginners will be referred to Bike North Birmingham.

What about the constitution of the new club?

The new club proposed is a members’ association so all members will have personal unlimited liability for the debts and liabilities of the new club. There will be more autonomy than in a CTC member group but there will not be more flexibility since the new club will need policies on all kinds of matters to ensure that it treats issues consistently. Who is going to write and review those policies? The constitution of the new has not been published – is it wise to hold a vote when such a vital part of the structure has not been settled?

Can we stay as one club?

Those behind the proposal to form a new club make great play of their desire to keep the club as one organisation. Regrettably the atmosphere has turned nasty with older member berated in the review meetings for not keeping up with the times in terms of use of social media and so on. Alison Readman and I have been patronised for daring to question the wisdom and legality of the resolution and it is we who are being accused of being undemocratic – perhaps this is a taste of things to come?

The proposers of the resolution have no loyalty to the CTC or its inclusive ethos. They just want to form a new club without the effort of building up a membership, a rides programme or a volunteer base and with no care or respect for the long standing and loyal CTC members who have built a successful club all these many years. We fail to understand why those pressing for a new club joined NBCTC in the first case - there are a large number of Independent affiliated clubs already existing which they could have easily joined.

What is the best way forward?

Please consider if it is really necessary to dissolve a successful club that will celebrate its centenary in three years’ time with many long-standing members still loyal to the CTC. If you don’t like the current set up you are not prisoners of the club. Just leave amicably and let the club do the modernising needed in a more caring and inclusive way.

Thank you for reading my note and whatever you decide please do vote on 30 April.

Yours in cycling


<list of signatures and name of writer removed by me>

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13665
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: North Birmingham CTC

Postby gaz » 12 Apr 2016, 6:53pm

... The reserves belong to CTC so the new club will have to build up new funds without the assistance of many of the current volunteers. ...

What about the reserves?

NBCTC currently has over £6000 in reserves. The committee is proposing to dispose of the assets before the club is dissolved, including passing some start-up capital to the new club. The committee is not proposing to pass the reserves back to the CTC as required by the clear directive in the policy handbook.
...

I have no practical expeience of NBCTC nor any knowledge of the present situation beyond that which has been posted on this thread. Technically (perhaps bizzarely) all CTC members are members of all CTC MGs, so I'm allowed an opinion.

By the letter of the MG Handbook I have a difficult time with MGs winding up to rise phoenix like as AGs.

What CTC Council may expect of CTC Member Groups:
...
to hold in trust for current and future CTC members the financial and intellectual properties of the Group to the collective benefit of such members;

That appears to prevent MG Committees from starting an AG, transferring "seed funding" to the AG and then calling a SGM to wind up the MG. Although in practice it appears that others have followed the broad outline of that process without attracting the disapproval or seemingly even the remotest interest of Council.

MGs are a tool by which CTC promotes its own Charitable Objects. MGs sit outside of the Charity, run by subsidary companies and have their own set of Objects to follow.

By the spirit of what CTC is trying to achieve in the promotion of cycling, a healthy well funded AG operating where the alternative would be an MG that has folded seems like a good thing. Perhaps Council is adopting a pragmatic approach.
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

Barred1
Posts: 85
Joined: 22 Jan 2016, 12:30pm

Re: North Birmingham CTC

Postby Barred1 » 12 Apr 2016, 7:35pm

What the North Birmingham diatribe doesn't address is the value for their money that CTC members get - the whole tenor is "it's always been like this" and the centenary is a bit of red herring .. so what?

It looks to me (having read the newsletter post on the MG website) as if the movers and shakers that want to inject some life in the old dog have the right reasoning in today's world.

B1
=======================
EDIT More from the website - this looks the other side's approach

Potential Conversion to Affiliated Club

Introduction

At the clubs AGM on 3rd November 2015 it was agreed that the club undertake a root and branch review to ensure that it is delivering maximum opportunities and benefits for its members.

The findings of the review have been presented to members and are available on the club web site.

Results of the review process

Q What are the benefits of becoming an independent Cycling Club affiliated to CTC?

The main benefits are; that being an affiliated club would provide more flexibility in membership to assist in the clubs growth, would retain the same level of insurance cover for both ride leaders and organisers, would enable the club to retain all funds raised and to spend such funds in any way it wished and would remove the other restrictions imposed by the policy handbook. Individuals’ CTC membership and the benefits this brings would be unaffected.


Q What would we lose by not being a CTC Member Group?

Other than the potential loss of some club funds we would lose nothing by becoming an affiliated group.


Q Should we run an Independent Club in parallel to a CTC Member Group?

We concluded that we should not, as we do not want to split the club into two separate entities. In addition it would take twice the administration resource for little additional benefit and would potentially cause some confusion with members and local riders.


Q What about rider and organiser liability insurance?

We agreed that Liability Insurance was very important and would be insisted upon. We concluded we would affiliate to CTC in order to obtain Organisers Liability Insurance which covers our ride leaders and event organisers in the event of a claim from a third party.

The new Independent Club, would on its membership application form, ask members to provide:- “Their personal liability insurance details” to cover cycling. This could be through membership of an organisation that includes liability insurance within its member benefits, e.g. CTC, Tandem Club, British Cycling, London Cycle Campaign, League of Veteran Racing Cyclists - or through specialist cycle insurers like ‘CycleGuard’ or ‘CyclePlan’ - or having cover under their own household insurance.


Q What should we do about the club funds?

Our current club cash balance would be donated to the Cyclists Defence Fund, other local cycle related charities and be given as ‘seed funding’ to the new affiliated cycling club we are going to set up. Other minor assets would be transferred to the new affiliated club.


Q How would we fund the new Independent Club?

We would charge a nominal Membership Fee of just £1 per year. The remainder of our funding will come from the successful Jumble Sale and Audax events that we organise each year.


Q How will the new Independent Club be managed?

A constitution has been drawn up for the new club and this will be shared with members once it has been agreed by the committee.


Q How will this affect me?

You will see no change in the way the club operates on a day to day basis.


You can still be a member of CTC at your current level of membership.

You could perhaps reduce your costs by becoming a CTC Affiliated Member.

You could perhaps reduce your costs by changing your Insurance cover.

We will still run the club as before, with the same events and weekly rides.

We will be able to attract more riders from the wider local cycling community.

We will try to expand the rides program to offer more interest and variety.

We will introduce new technologies to improve communication with members.
....
Riding high!

User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15008
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: North Birmingham CTC

Postby Si » 13 Apr 2016, 9:10am

Given that a number of those who are against becoming an AG do a lot of work on the committee, my first worry would be that there would not be enough people willing to take over these posts and keep things going to the same standard. As it is, the MG has sometimes found it hard to find committee members, so removal of some of those who do put the effort in would not be good. And ditto ride leaders.

I agree that some of the advantages that being an AG offers are a good thing, but if that AG then flounders due to lack willing volunteers to do all of the behind the scenes donkey work, then it would be a very bad thing.....going from being a thriving MG to nothing in not very long.

My second worry is that some the advantages of being an AG would not be enacted. For instance I asked if the new AG would cater for families and was told 'yes', but now I see that families will be passed on to BNBCC (another AG in the same area who are there to cater for those new to cycling and those who are put off by the serious club scene and feel wary of keen-cyclists with all the kit), which suggests to me that the new AG isn't really that interested in building a new generation of cyclists.

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13665
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: North Birmingham CTC

Postby gaz » 13 Apr 2016, 8:04pm

Si wrote:... I agree that some of the advantages that being an AG offers are a good thing, but if that AG then flounders due to lack willing volunteers to do all of the behind the scenes donkey work, then it would be a very bad thing ...

+1.

It is unsurprising to find differences of opinion amongst members on how CTC should operate locally as well as how it should operate nationally. IMO local issues are best resolved locally, I'll not stick my oar in any further.
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

User avatar
Philip Benstead
Posts: 1147
Joined: 13 Jan 2007, 7:06pm
Location: Victoria , London

Re: North Birmingham CTC

Postby Philip Benstead » 14 Apr 2016, 11:13am

robgul wrote:Distant drum beats and smoke signals suggest that N Brum may be looking at its future as a CTC MG ... any updates from anyone?

Rob

UPDATE: It would seem from another post on here relating to a Facebook post that it's correct and yet another MG may be abdicating

(I wonder how long the lease is on the CTC HQ building? :twisted: )
CTC HQ is freehold
Philip Benstead | CTC London and FORMER CTC Councillor SE
| 0794-980-1698 | philipbenstead1@gmail.com |
Organizing events and representing cyclist in southeast since 1988
Cycle Ride? http://www.meetup.com/socialcycling4u/
Bikeability Instructor/Mechanic

Mike Eades
Posts: 2
Joined: 19 Apr 2016, 10:58pm

Re: North Birmingham CTC

Postby Mike Eades » 19 Apr 2016, 11:17pm

An open response to the 33 signatories from Mike Eades

I am pleased that those against the proposed changes to the club structure have finally put forward a case for remaining a members group.

I would point out that outcome of the review is not a fait accompli. It has been presented to members and the way forward for the club will be decided by a democratic vote.

I would like to respond to the points put forward.

How is the club doing these days?

The paper says we have the most successful members group in the UK, yet our membership has fallen by 30% over the past four years. If the club is to have a long term future it is imperative that we attract new members. Success isn’t about numbers of rides, but growing and holding onto our Members and offering rides that best suit the membership.

Since Cycling UK membership is mandatory for members groups this may be a barrier to attracting new members. How do we know this, well, since Heart of England dissolved and became an affiliated group in September 2015 their membership has grown from 50 to 75, according to a post from their club secretary. Hopefully we can repeat their experience.

What about the reserves?

Getting a definitive answer from Cycling UK on funding issues is proving difficult. David Cox, the Chair of Cycling UK Council, sent me an email with advice from the Cycling UK's Honorary Solicitor, which states that the £200 Members Groups receive each year must be spent on the Charity’s Objects. Money members group raise themselves is currently outside the charity and can be used to subsidise Xmas lunches, make donations to other charities and a variety of other purposes that make sense to the Members Group committee. What we don't know is what percentage of club funds are from Cycling UK contributions and what has been raised locally, though this could be estimated.

However, when I contact Julie Rand, who is responsible for Members Groups, and ask for funding advice she refers me to the Policy Handbook guidance that Member Groups must ‘hold in trust for current and future Cycling UK members the financial and intellectual properties of the Member Group to the collective benefit of such members’.

I think one of the committee members summed it up when they said “if we weren't a members group we wouldn't have this problem, we could simply decide what to spend the money on and spend it”.

There are no plans to dispose of the club assets except as outlined in the April newsletter and these have been successfully implemented by other clubs which have dissolved and are in line with the Policy Handbook as the Cyclists’ Defence Fund is a subsidiary of CTC.



What about change?

The document implies that the current committee has been ineffective and hasn’t introduced any significant changes. To put the record straight here is a list of the changes I have personally been involved with.

1) Transparency of Committee Meetings

When I joined committee no dates for committee meeting were published, nor were the minutes or outcomes of the meetings. It took pressure from me at several committee meetings before transparency was introduced.

2) Changes to Northern News

When I joined the committee Northern news was printed in three separate sections, cover, photos and text and these were then manually collated and stapled. I streamlined this process so that it could be fully automated and carried out by a single printer. This improved the content as photos could be included throughout the magazine and shown next to the text to which they related instead of being included only at the beginning and end of the magazine. The changes also improved the turn-round time for printing and reduced overall costs.

3) Notice board

I identified a piece of software, which could be used free of charge, to provide a club notice board on the website. I configured the software accordingly and then asked Ian Heys, the webmaster, to embed the software on the club site.

4) Changes to club evenings

I proposed changes to the club meetings so that instead of meeting every week at the club house there would be club house meetings on the 1st and 3rd Tuesday with a pub meeting on the 2nd Tuesday. The pub meetings didn’t go as well as i had hoped but I will try and resurrect them. The change to meeting twice a month actually increased attendance at the club house as well as more than halving costs.

5) Wednesday Evening Summer Rides

Two years ago I introduced the Wednesday evening summer rides and I plan to run these again this year.

6) Garmin and Strava Groups

I have set up and continue to administer the Garmin and Strava groups. Around 40% of club members are members of the Strava group and the software is proving very useful at notifying members of last minute changes to scheduled rides and is also providing a facility for setting up additional ad-hoc rides

I would also point out that Geoff Howle, a serving committee member, set up and manages the NBCTC Facebook page and, in his short time as chairman, Matt Hinckley has created our monthly newsletter, set up and manages the North Brum Bulletin Boards, the North Brum Twitter account and the North Birmingham CTC Group on the “Birmingham Cyclist.com Internet Site”


There is a statement in the case for staying as we are that ‘families and beginners will be referred to Bike North Birmingham’ but this is incorrect.
At the presentation we had a discussion about junior riders and I said I was personally unhappy with Cycling UK policy which stated that leaders were obliged to take unaccompanied 14 year olds on rides if they had a note gving permission to ride from their parent/guardian.
We agreed that there was no issue with taking accompanied juniors on rides which would facilitate family rides.

What about the constitution of the new club?

A constitution has been drafted and will be agreed by the new club, if that is the outcome of the vote. The constitution for the new club can only be agreed by the members of the new club. Given that we haven't had a vote and don't know who the members would be we cannot agree the constitution now. I am happy to share the draft with anyone who wishes to see it, email me at eades.mike@virginmedia.com to request a copy.

Can we stay as one club?

The proposal has always been that we stay as one club. I have publicly stated that if the outcome is to remain a members group I will remain a member of the club, continue to lead rides, may offer to stand on committee again and will continue to press for the introduction of new technology to improve communication with members.

We find ourselves in this position following a virtually unanimous show of hands at the AGM in favour of having this review. The person in charge was also agreed at the AGM and has been monitored throughout by the committee.

This current resolution has been arrived at by this Root and Branch Review and the vote is the natural culmination of this process.

What is the best way forward?

We would still be able to celebrate the centenary even after a name change. CTC has changed their name twice now and still say Cycling UK has been promoting cycling and protecting cyclists since 5 August 1878.

Conclusion

I recognise that many positive things were done by the previous management in building up and organising the Club and my aim is to continue to develop and enhance this work for the future.

The CTC themselves have recognised the need for change with the move away from a members club to a charity a few years ago and the now the change of trading name to Cycling UK.

The paper does not put forward any actual benefits for remaining a members group and there are no facts within it which change the logic of the original conclusion which is :-

Being a Members Group offers no significant benefits above those available as an Affiliated Group, but it imposes a number of restrictions, as set out in the Policy Handbook. Being an affiliated group would provide more flexibility in membership to assist in the clubs growth, would retain the same level of insurance cover for both riders and organisers, would enable the club to retain all funds raised and to spend such funds in any way it wished and would remove the other restrictions imposed by the policy handbook. Individuals’ Cycling UK membership and the benefits this brings would be unaffected.

Following the presentations these additional policy handbook restrictions have also been identified.

1. we have had several requests to implement postal voting, but this is not allowed by Cycling UK
2. concern has been expressed about the vote being decided on a simple majority, but we can't change this
3. we have received conflicting information from Cycling UK HO on how funds should be spent
4. we have no control over the clubs constitution

Mike Eades
former NBCTC Treasurer

User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15008
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: North Birmingham CTC

Postby Si » 20 Apr 2016, 9:55am

Please note, the below are not criticism of the proposed change, but before voting I think it only right to ask relevant questions to inform one's decision. At the moment I'm still a floating voter.

2) Changes to Northern News


Is the NN still going in some form I've missed? - I've not received one for ages - used to get emailed links to the E-version on the website, but looking at the website the newest one seems to be 2014.

yet our membership has fallen by 30% over the past four years.

Has anyone done any research to ascertain why numbers have fallen? Are the reasons likely to be addressed by becoming an AG? Is it predominantly old members that are being lost or is it case of an influx of new members who tried it for a while and then decided to move on to something else?

4) Changes to club evenings

As an aside, I've always found it a bit odd that a club with perhaps 90%+ of its members based in SC & Erdington has the club room in Shenstone! OK for a nice summer's evening ride out there, but not great for getting people to ride there in the middle of winter. Last few times I went, there were only two or three of us arriving by bike, everyone else drove.....which for me doesn't really work as we were meant to be a cycling club!

Anyway, what it boils down to for me is this: the resultant club/group should have two purposes: to allow the existing membership to continue to ride and socialise just as they have been doing (the only thing that I can see stopping this is the possibility that there are a number of the current ride leaders/organisers not being happy with the change and leaving....have we polled the ride leaders to see how many would still be with the group if it did affiliate?); and to promote cycling: the two issues that it has had before have been the requirement to be a member and the lack of beginners' rides and promotion to beginners. It would seem that for many people the change would make it cheaper to join the group but the requirement for 3rd party insurance still involves a cost....if the leaders are indemnified (as they would be in a AG) do we really need riders to have 3rd party insurance...should that not be a personal decision? In the past the Northern has had a few beginners/family rides (i.e. rides of around 5 miles or less that involve very little traffic) but apart from one or two people, not many have put in much effort to promote the club to absolute beginners. I would have thought that if, as outlined in the above, one of the many reasons for the change is to keep in step with the CTC's change to Cycling UK, then the new AG ought to be putting forward a proposition concerning how it will act to encourage brand new cyclists and returners who aren't capable or confident enough to do a Saturday group 6 ride?

Psamathe
Posts: 10115
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: North Birmingham CTC

Postby Psamathe » 20 Apr 2016, 10:04am

Seems to me a very significant thing here is that the membership are getting to vote on the proposed changes. Club wants to make an important change and membership gets their say (through voting).

Now there's an idea.

Ian

AndyK
Posts: 789
Joined: 17 Aug 2007, 2:08pm

Re: North Birmingham CTC

Postby AndyK » 20 Apr 2016, 3:00pm

Si wrote:but the requirement for 3rd party insurance still involves a cost....if the leaders are indemnified (as they would be in a AG) do we really need riders to have 3rd party insurance...should that not be a personal decision?


Here's how I've had it explained to me in the past. For big claims, insurance companies like to claim off other insurance companies rather than individual people, because they know that other insurance companies have lots of money while individuals may not have.

  • Alice leads a ride. During the ride, one rider (Bob) veers sideways suddenly, causing an incident that results in hundreds of thousands of pounds being paid out to third parties by their own insurers.
  • The third parties' insurers go looking for someone to pay them back (because that's what insurers do).
  • Bob is the obvious target, but he doesn't have any third party insurance. As an individual he doesn't have anywhere near the amount of money they want, even if he sells all his worldly goods. Getting the money out of Bob will be expensive and long-winded.
  • So they ignore Bob and go for the first person in the chain of liability who does have insurance: the ride leader. They claim that as leader, Alice should have had better control over the group, should have chosen a different route, should have known Bob was an unsafe rider, whatever.
  • Eventually the whole thing gets sorted out between insurers.
  • In the short term, though, Alice gets put through a whole lot of stress as the third parties' insurers try to find ways to blame her. Trust me, that's an unpleasant experience even if you do have your own insurers behind you.
  • In the long term, the premiums for ride leader insurance go up. Even if Alice's insurers didn't pay up in the end, it will have cost them time and money having to handle the case, and insurers really resent having to work for their money. They will bump up the premium and may even start insisting that all ride participants must be insured.

So if you lead rides or you run a club, it's in your own interests for the participants to have their own third-party cover.