Insurance

Risk Management
Pete Lyon Risk Manager/Legal Counsel

Right from SCCA.com
[/b]
Click to expand...
Taken alone, that is not a conflict of interest.

You see, Pete Lyon is not only the club's insurance agent and insurer, but also the club's risk management specialist and general counsel not to mention that he is appointed by a BoD that is elected by mostly non-road racers and solo drivers.
[/b]
Click to expand...
If the part about "insurance agent and insurer" is also accurate, that's the part that looks odd. Is it accurate?
 
I have experience with Motosport insurance on a much smaller scale, helping to found/run a local marque club.

We run several different events that require insurance - autocross series (5-7 year), HPDE days (2-3 year), large car show (1 event). By far the most expensive is the car show, none of the cars are moving, but we have several thousand people walking around the facility all day and that represents greater risk to our insurance company. This event alone is more costly to insure than all of our driving events combined in some years. The track days are not competitve events, but are approximately the same insurance cost as the autocrosses (typical participation 30-60 drivers).

Based on that experience, I would say that the event that draws more people to the facility would be more expensive to insure. Not being an SCCA autocrosser, I don't have any feel for turnout compared to road racing.
[/b]
Click to expand...

EXACTLY! FINALLY SOMEONE WHO UNDERSTANDS WHAT LIABILTIY INSURANCE IS!

Guys, Please read the above quote. Liability has nothing to do with how fast you go or how dangerous the activity is. The medical coverage is reflective of that. We can't sue so the insurance company has no liability. Liability is what they call a potentially substantial risk above calculatable and manageable risk outside of the insured participants. It has NOTHING to do with the event medium. It has to do with lawsuits from those with the ability to make a case and sue. Medical payments are nothing. Very manageable. A personal injury lawsuit is NOT capped or part of a sepcified plan. Potentially it could cost millions. That's why liability insurance is so expensive. It can turn into a runaway loss.

Get the notion of which sport is more dangerous out of your heads for just a minute. It has NOTHING to do with liability. Particpants can't sue anyone. It's the legal fees and potentially arbitrary damages resulting from a judgement by a non-participant that the insurance company fears. Nothing to do with the racing or activity. Most of you are mixing the medical coverage and liability into one common single classification of "insurance". Medical is capped. Ask an insurance guy whether he'd rather pay off a big medical claim on a road racing accident or face some ambulance chasing contingency lawyer in court on a slip and fall in a junior high school parking lot, and he'll take the medical claim from the road racer all day long. Remember, liability risk is all about legal fees, not danger involved in the activity.
 
But then it should cost me the exact same to put liability on all of my cars. But in truth the prices are different based on the potential of the car. take a NA car vs. its turbo model, there are differnent liablitiy rates.[/b]
Click to expand...

Personal auto insurance is far different that event liability insurance. And remember, the liability coverage has NOTHING to do with the cars in our case. With a personal auto liability policy it has everything to do with it. Millions of numbers are crunched by actuaries at insurance companies allocating portions of personal auto liability risk using historical data based on everything from number of cylinders to potential driving distraction features. THey tehn assign a value to each of those policy components and come up with a number based on claims already filed. The average rate of liability claims involving a certain car and driver profile is x, therefor the premium is 1/x. But to tell you the truth, liability on different cars for the same driver shouldn't differ that much. My 1999 truck and my 2006 Acura are only $30 apart for the same coverage.

In the case of our libility for the event it's just about how many people are there and the likelihood of something happening outside the event activity for which someone could be held liable for damages beyond the general insurance. How many cyclinders are in the cars or how fast they go doesn't figure into it. The only common thread is that it's insurance to protect against lawsuits not medical coverage.
 
Taken alone, that is not a conflict of interest.
If the part about "insurance agent and insurer" is also accurate, that's the part that looks odd. Is it accurate?
[/b]
Click to expand...

Here you go:

SCCA/SCCA PRO Master Insurance Plan 2006
Summary of SCCA Participant Accident Coverage
Written by ACE American Insurance Company
through Wisenberg Insurance + Risk Management

http://www.wisenberg.com/TeamMembers.htm

My question is are we also paying for Pro racing's liability?
 
Matt-

I couldn't get the last link you posted to work... and I am not sure it answers my question, maybe you can.

How are the different rates determined for the different "events" that SCCA puts on?

What is our past experince (Claims) in each "event type?"

Again Matt, as mentioned earlier among my lack of caring on this topic, thank you for your interest in this area of SCCA. Even though I don't fully understand it and didn't have interest before, I appreciate learning about the topic, even if I feel that I have voted in people that can handle the issues. I at least can ask questions to them now or in the future.

Raymond
 
Link worked for me. Pete Lyon, who is Risk Manager for SCCA and therefore involved in insurance program selection, is also Director of Legal Affairs for the insurance agent who apparently supplies SCCA with its coverage.

That is odd, I agree.
 
Untill you have that information on true actual costs of coverage your always going to grasp at straws.

Matt dont base your insurence rates argument based on non competitive track events vs. autocross. I am sorry but untill I know exactly what levels of liability are required, and the RISK assement of each style of event I cannot agree you have the full picture only half.

Also ever consider that there may be a base liablity rate negotiated and that the higher risk events require supplimental coverage above that basic liablility coverage?
 
James, How about you take the lead and try to get that information. You seem not to want to look at the facts that have been provided so maybe youcould get more info that would help. I find it hard to believe that a full solo 200 participants with people standing exposed to cars on the surface could be any cheaper to insure for liability that a Road Race where people are protected by walls and fences. Maybe you will find more answers to prove me wrong.
 
True enough. I will send an e-mail inquery to see what reponse I get. But remember this, I never had an issue with the current insurence costs, and I am not going to let a letter of rates for the season insurence costs be my only basis of fact to change my opinion that club racers are in fact footing the bill.
 
See James I see that attitude as part of the problem. Even if you were present with facts your mind is closed to it. I recommend you inquire of your area director the exact method on how the BOD splits these costs including how much of the total bill they assign to each compartment of the national office.
 
See James I see that attitude as part of the problem. Even if you were present with facts your mind is closed to it. I recommend you inquire of your area director the exact method on how the BOD splits these costs including how much of the total bill they assign to each compartment of the national office.
[/b]
Click to expand...


Joe-

I have to support James on this one... It seems to me that noone here understands how the BOD (or others such as the insurance company) splits these costs, thus maybe those that are upset should be the ones finding out how the splits are done, and then if you still feel that it is still an issue that you and others want support on maybe you could post whats wrong with how the splits are done?

I understand that you don't agree that "we" as road racers should pay more, but I am confused as to why you or anyone else can be upset if you don't understand the process that makes them different.

Raymond
 
Damn you can be a pompous know it all Joe.

Please tell me, how do you know how the BoD allocates insurance costs to entry fees?

Enlighten me and open my mind. Maybe I am wrong. I truly don't believe that the BoD is having road race entry fees subsidize autox entry fees. Show me the numbers where I am wrong.

I am open to some of the scrutiny you and Matt are engaging in here, but I am telling you both, your message gets diluted by the way you present it.
 
Beware of opinions masquerading as facts. No one here has any facts, so the 'facts' presented so far are purely conjecture about how the pie is divided. Sure...I'd like to know how the pie is divided, but I'm not particularly worked up about it. Why ? Read on...

About once a year, I 'chair' an SCCA race weekend. What does a Race Chairman do ? All the dirty, scut-like administrative stuff that must be done in advance...make sure the track contract & deposits are done, make sure that T&S will have enough paper & toner, make sure that trophies are ordered, blah blah blah quack quack quack AND MAKE SURE THE INSURANCE IS IN PLACE by filing all the necessary paperwork and sending the requisite checks...and then doing all the 'post-race' paper work and tow fund audits and insurance audits blah blah blah. Chaired a bunch of Nat'ls, chaired a bunch of Reg'ls, and managed to find time to actually race those weekends, too. Once I even ran two different cars.

About 3 years ago, I was chairing a Nat'l at a certain NEDiv track that happens to be owned by a subsidiary of a rather large racing organization that's headquartered near a famous beach in Florida. The track normally managed the Friday 'Test Day' themselves...they provide staffing...and insurance bonds...but interestingly enough, we were contacted by their representatives and asked to make the Friday Test Day an SCCA-sanctioned test day, as they knew our costs for insurance coverage (it's published on the web, afterall....) and their own insurance provider couldn't get anywhere close to the costs for insurance in the SCCA package. We provided the insurance...and continued to do this for several years, until just this year.

Think about that....probably the largest race-sanctioning organization in the western hemisphere...providing sanctions to big & little tracks all around the country...and OWNING tracks all around the country...and the 900lb. gorilla in US motorsports...one of their major subsidiaries couldn't get as good a deal as we were getting in the SCCA package. This is the same package as we have today...although our costs have tweaked by maybe a buck or two per car.

Let's address the 'liability' issue here, too...although some here seem to have become instant experts on risk management and loss-history. Let's say you drill a wall in your A Sedan and mess up a bunch of guardrail, or back into a garage door in the track garage...do you get a bill ? There are race organizations that send the track after YOU to collect payment. SCCA's 'liability' includes property-owner coverage, which means that SCCA insurance pays the $2000 for the messed up guard rail, not YOU.

Before you guys start tossing around insults about who has an open mind, I suggest you attempt to get some facts, rather than just the loose conjecture presented here. There is a lot of ignorance around...because it's easier to sit at your computer and carp about your latest crusade, rather than actually participate and make a little effort to understand. "Oh...I don't have time" (the 'puppies and lollypops' defense). Bullshit. I raced under 13 SCCA sanction #'s this year (along with a NASA and an EMRA weekend)...and managed to chair a SCCA race, too. Oh...and that job thing, too...and lots of other stuff.

You can have your own opinions, but you can't have your own facts. This thread is long on the first and short on the second.
 
JohnRW,

We all truly appreciate all of your hard work in helping our club. Not many racers know how much work there is in putting on an event. But that's not the discussion here. Aside from the "facts" of what you have been doing for us, where are your "facts" about how the insurance money is split between the different areas of the club? While you say you don't get worked up over it, just because it doesn't bother you, or others, doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist. I could go on for pages with the qualifications of the many people with multiple degrees in Finance that feel that there is an issue here, and they are all 10 times smarter and more educated than I. They are only requesting that we, as paying members, should be able to see, unbiased, where our money is being spent. While I can see that some may not like the approach, I have to agree with the message.
We should all have the facts readily available, to any member who asks for them...anyone disagree with that statement?? Not starting a flame war, just expressing another opinion, because it's our club, and whether we agree or not, we all want to see us grow and prosper. Our hearts are all in the right place I think.
By the way...a show of hands....who here voted for our current SCCA President?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top