Cap'n Chris said:
cavermark said:
Hughie said:
BCA insurance is wholly inadequate at it's current level. Cover of only ?5million is no longer considered sufficient.
For third party liability? what sort of scenario would require more than this?
Since truth is stranger than fiction, any guesswork scenario you can envisage (no matter how bizarre and preposterous it may sound) will be nowhere near as bizarre and preposterous as a reality that could result in a +?5m claim.
An accident to a young child resulting in quadriplegia could easily result in a claim higher than ?5 million. But this is a bit off topic I think?
I'm a bit disappointed in the result, not for reason you might think, i.e. because it's a yes vote, but because of the size of the vote.
Just 1400 out of over 6000 cavers, less than 25%, of BCA members have voted for CRoW. The remainder either don't know, don't care or have voted against. Obviously some may not have received the ballot papers. I suspect the BCA decision to not present cavers with any information plays a big part in this.
So the end result is that BCA will be embarking on a process that could result in reduced access, in an era where as we've seen recently access has been improving, based on the wishes of less than one in four members.
To me that's a pretty sad state of affairs. The true situation is a very long way from the overwhelming support we've been repeatedly told CRoW enjoys amongst cavers, in fact over 75% in one form or another don't support it, or don't support it enough to tick a box.
I'm also disappointed in Badlad's statement, as the forum owner it's a bit odd to describe a third of your own members as "turkeys", perhaps we should all be sending him stuffing for Xmas as he has so many to deal with?