How would you handle this?

M

Mike Cox

New member
This is a purely hypothetical situation:

At a recent driver's school, a car owner (entrant) rented a car to a student for a fixed amount. This rental included a fire suit and helmet. (remember this is a 1st phase student with no SCCA expirience and only in SCCA for 1 month)

The entrant teched the car in. In teching the car in the entrant used a different helmet to get the tech sticker than the one he supplied the student. (for arguments sake, let's say he teched in a SA200 helmet to get the tech sticker and supplied the student with a M2000 helmet).

The entrant presented the car to the student and instead of a correct dual shoulder harness set up per the GCR, he installed a "Y" belt setup. (The seat location had to be modiifed for the height of the student)

The entrant knowing the approximate height and weight of the student supplied the student with a fire suit that was, shall we say, too big. (to the point that the sleeves were longer than the students arms)

Presented with circumstances, how would you as an instructor procede to assure the the student could complete their driver's school and what should the ramifications be towards the entrant?


Mike Cox
CFR
 
Just talking hypothtically:

The renter/driver/entrant is ultimatly responsible for knowing the rules and presenting himself as such, no matter how new. If he/she got bad information and illegal equipment and isn't allowed to run, they need to take that up with the owner. I would expect a full refund be in order if they were sold a bill of goods.

If you are going to go one step further and say that an injury was sustained because the equipment didn't meet manditory requirements, I would leave that one alone - big lawer-like discussions to be had - and that isn't my cup of tea.

As co-owner of a racecar rental business, I WOULD NEVER put a driver in a sub-standard car or safety equipment. As a simple business practice, we are not here for ONE rental, we are here for MULTIPLE. Word of mouth in some of these Regions runs quicker than it did in junior-high school. Best to be GOOD news.

From the instuctors veiw, if I saw some safety concerns, I would get the Cheif steward and have him make the call. It's nobodys fault but the owner.

All IMHO.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com
 
Andy makes great points. It is ultimately the drivers responsibility to make sure he is safe before he gets in the car and that everything meets the SCCA minimums.

This also reinforces the point of reading the rental contract. If the renter only agreed to supply the car to the driver, never mentioning that it would meet the SCCA standards, this could be a problem. It could be argued both ways, but in the end there would be bad blood on both sides.

------------------
Bill
Planet 6 Racing
bill (at) planet6racing (dot) com
 
now let's add a 3rd equation to the mix. The instructor recognizes the problem and corrects it by supplying the student with his personel safety equipment (fire suit and helmet) to insure that the student is safe.

Once again what should be the ramifications to the entrant for doing something like this to a student by the officials? Especially the fact of presenting a helmet for tech and then supplying an unsuspecting student with a substandard helmet
 
That is a good question that should be answered by a past or current Comp Chair or RE. (Dick, you want to comment?)

I would think that the owner would get a STERN talking to. He would then understand that he and his car(s) would be under a microscope for the foreseable future and any other infractions would result in the loss of his comp-license.

Is that to 'soft'?

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com
 
The firesuit sizing wasn't too big a deal. Helmet, well, again that falls on the driver to make sure he has the appropriate gear. If it were me, I would have questioned how everything got through tech when I had the helmet. I know it is his first time and all, but having read the GCR, he should have known what needed to be checked out (and at least checked it himself).

The bigger issue is the Y-type harness. How did that make it through tech?

As for punishment against the entrant, I don't think he'll be renting to anyone again once the story makes its rounds.

------------------
Bill
Planet 6 Racing
bill (at) planet6racing (dot) com
 
Isn't the entrant responsible for the driver’s actions??? Sorta like a driver is responsible for its crew’s actions?

Just a question... not sure if SCCA has ever gone after the entrant at a race, but their is a spot on your entry form for the entrant.

How would the instructor proceed to assure that the student could complete their driver's school?

The instructor shouldn't need to worry about ensuring that the driver can finish the school. The instructor should report his findings to a steward immediately. It is part of an instructor’s job (IMO) to keep EVERYONE safe at the school. It is not his/her job to make sure that the students finish the school. Also if the driver were to have driven the car after the instructor saw it then I think the instructor also deserves more than a talking to.

This is not to say that everyone at the track doesn't help out, cause we do and we will. We (most) are all nice people. But in your scenario I think the driver/entrant made multiple major safety mistakes that could have results on the entire club if there was an accident. Could the instructor supply the correct safety equipment, sure, but is he obligated in any way no.

Safety is not something that should be taken lightly IMO. Ignorance to your own safety is stupid all in its own. As a driver wouldn't you check out the safety gear in advance? and when brought different gear at the track wouldn't you have a hard time driving?

Drivers, yet green, still need to be aware of the rules especially safety issues BEFORE going to a school.

Raymond "Safety is most important" Blethen
 
Ray - Andy, email me

mcox@larkincontracting .com


Mike

[This message has been edited by Mike Cox (edited April 06, 2004).]
 
Somebody should have thrown some paper at the Entrant. Chief Stewards Action, or an RFA from the Tech Steward or Tech Chief.

Yeah...it's the driver's responsibility to have the right equipment, but the entrant rental guy was a dickwad, and needs to get hammered. The helmet and harness thing is inexcuseable. The entrant has all the same responsibilities as the driver...maybe he needs a couple of months of license suspension to think about it.
 
GCR 14.1 "Breach of the Rules"

.2 - "Any action having as its objective paticipation in a competition of a driver or car known to be ineligible or not properly entered or credentialed."

.3 - "Any fraudulent proceeding or act prejudicial to the interests of the SCCA or car racing generally."

14.2 - Who may be penalized

"Any organizer, entrant, driver..."


In the end, it is as much the driver's responsibility as it is the entrants. The driver should have not gone on track with that helmet and those belts. He bears some responsibility for doing so.
Now, the entrant switching helmets is to me a fraudulent action.
The instructor should have notified all parties involved (entrant, driver and officials) so that the situation is corrected.

That's my take on it.

------------------
Ony Anglade
ITA Miata
Sugar Hill, GA
 
Ray. you are correct in your asesstment of the situation however, the student was told the safety equipment was fine, but never shown the safety equipment until the student got ready to suit up and go out in the car. Once again the entrant not being forthcoming.

I feel it is the instructor's responsibility to make sure the driver is safe, isn't that what we are there for. To teach and help.

Once again what should happen to the "entrant" ?

John, I agree completely with your statement

Ony: the driver went on the track only after the safety concerns were corrected.

IMHO, the entrant committed fraud and could have put a students life in danger and should be suspended. (until hell freezes over)



[This message has been edited by Mike Cox (edited April 06, 2004).]
 
I understand your feelings, Mike, and believe me, I feel about the same. However, the entrant didn't put the driver on track in the car with the equipment. There is some personal responsibility on the driver's part to make sure he/she is safe.

Uggh. What an ugly situation. I hope this never happens to anyone!

------------------
Bill
Planet 6 Racing
bill (at) planet6racing (dot) com
 
I am not sure the entrant needs to have a racing license or even be a member??? Is there anyplace that has rules addressing this?

Raymond

Sorry no GCR infront of me
frown.gif
 
This reminds me of grenade practice in basic training.

- It's the trainee's job to assume the proper stance.
- It's the trainee's job to pull the pin in the correct manner.
- It's the trainee's job to aim and throw the grenade toward the target.
- It's the trainee's job to take cover prior to the explosion.

So what is the job of that big, no-nonsense sergeant standing in the pit with the trainee? To make sure said trainee doesn't blow themselves into the next county.

Good job, Sergeant Cox.

------------------
Gregg Baker, P.E.
Isaac, LLC
http://www.isaacdirect.com
 
Ray, in this instance the "entrant" had a racing license and is a member of SCCA and he knew better. He was just trying to pull something over and he got caught.

I think a good change for driver's school would be that the student and the entrant, on Saturday morning, must present the car, the log book, and all safety gear for inspection to tech for approval before the car goes on the track. This will familiarize the student as to the tech precedure that's expected of them and insure that all is on the up and up.

Fortunately this situation had a good ending. Next time it may not.

Thanks to all who contributed to this thread and a special thanks to my student who busted her butt and was named the "most improved driver" of the school. She's gonna make us all proud one day by being the first female IT7 regional champion.

Mike
 
The 'bait and switch' w/ the belts and helmet are inexcuseable, and as others have pointed out, an intentional act of fraud. Things like this will get annual gear techs done away with, and we'll have to present our full gear at each event. The person that did this needs to be reported to SCCA officials. Amazing what people will do to make money!

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
 
Mike,
Are going to "let" her beat you, or just tell us that you did?

This hypothetical situation was amazing, and Mike didn't even tell half of it
smile.gif


Jim
 
First let me say that this posting is not intended to bad mouth tech, because in over 75% of these items, the race officals at the track forced tech to approve the car, to the point that one of the tech men not only quit tech, he quit SCCA and never came back in protest. Just some of those less than correct items were:
window net painted on window in SS
7" wheels in IT-B for a full season
seat mounted with 2x4 in IT-A
Holley carb in IT-A
Mallory distributor in IT-A
large holes in firewall in GT-3
window nets held in by bungie cords in IT
13B's in RX-2&3's
ram air hose on 2002 in IT-B
heaters and wireing completely gone in IT
front half of roll cage missing in IT-A*
fire bottle upside down in IT-A
black paint over cord on tire in GT-2
IT car running in SS/B with header
stock gas tank in GT-2
ALL THESE CARS HAD LOG BOOKS ISSUED BY SCCA TECH AND ALL THESE CARS RAN THE DAY I SAW THESE ITEMS
* This was the one the tech man quit over, and yes, the car was allow'd to run with only a roll bar.I saw all these items myself and many more in the last 27 years.
 
The guy who rented the car should be heavily sanctioned by the club. He showed a callous disregard for the most important rules of our organization, namely, those related to safety. It would be bad enough if he was just lazy or stupid. But he went 10 steps beyond by *intentionally* perpetrating a fraud upon the safety rules of the SCCA. NOW, factor in the reality that this jerk did all of this at the expense of the safety of another, someone who had trusted him. That makes it 20 times worse in my book. Thats a guy who doesn't deserve an SCCA membership in my book.

The student isn't without fault, of course. He has a duty to know what the rules are, most especially about safety. Very kind of the instructor to show some sympathy here, but there has to be some question as to personal responsibility.

Car owner should be writing a check back to the renter and be looking for a softball league to fill all the time he should have on his hands since he shouldn't be racing with us.



------------------
Steve Ostrovitz
07 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com
 
The owner/renter demonstrated forethought, malicious disregard for anothers safety, and he knowingly and intentionally intended to put SCCA itself at risk. All for what, $500 bucks?
Minimum one years suspension/expulsion from attending and/or participating in any SCCA event. It's all about the attitude.

If he is ever involved in another similar incident, then out forever. We don't need guys like this in thsi club.

The driver, I am unclear about. His punishment, or lack thereof, depends on his level of knowledge and his understanding of the incident and it's gravity. If he was ignorant, but concerned once he was made aware of the situation, let it go. If he had a part in it, then certainly a warning and perhaps some time donated to tech checking gear or an assistant race chair position is in order.

The possible ugly outcomes of this situation are not what the SCCA needs.

Kudos to the instructor who identified the issues.

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top