JoshW
Well-known member
The BCA have just posted a statement on their website, which should be in no way controversial in any way shape or form, but I’m certain that someone will find it so.
BCA statement on peer to peer training
- Thread starter JoshW
- Start date
The BCA have just posted a statement on their website, which should be in no way controversial in any way shape or form, but I’m certain that someone will find it so.
I think it’s nonsense. Sorry. We are not at work, so forget the HSE. There is zero obligation on any member of a uni club (in particular) including the “leader” to take responsibility for anything based on competence they prob don’t have. They cannot possibly ensure a trip is “safe”, they cannot assess leaders. All they can do is just give it a shot. They cannot be held responsible if it goes to shit, and I am quite concerned about this sort of thing being bandied about when something does happen as there is a strong suggestion that you should acquire competence (somehow). Recent events show the sort of thing that happens when you get the slightest break in the already very tenuous transfer of knowledge from one year to next.
If the insurance ends up in any way linked to demonstration of competence, qualifications or good decision making then it is completely useless. It has to cover the most utterly outrageous acts you can dream up.
It was this type of circular argument that got uni clubs shut down in the past by universities. They wanted qualifications and paperwork. It didn’t help caving much in the UK. I have run a uni club for several years so I am pretty clued up on the reality of people still in their teens. It’s a wing and a prayer. Same happens in uni climbing clubs, survival intact can be pretty random.
JoshW
Well-known member
So I’m going to pre-face this by saying I am not a legal expert, just someone who happens to manage the BCA insurance policy.
Public Indemnity policies are designed to cover the costs of being sued for causing injury to a third party or the property of a third party. The insurance therefore doesn’t state what you can and can’t be found liable for, it only states in what instances it can and will step in to cover the costs (up to a limit).
The law and the interpretation of the law (using previous cases and the interpretation of the law in those cases) along with the specifics of the case will dictate whether you can be sued for your action by the injured party (or party whose property was damaged).
There is an extremely limited number of cases to base the interpretation of the law on with regards to recreational leadership, however it would not be unreasonable to believe that a a club running trips for novices would have suitably competent people running those trips.
I sat on the fence about needing the HSE definition in here and so here is some background that lead me to including it. Some universities are now looking to require qualifications as demonstration of competency. In a recent example someone within BCA had given the university the answer they wanted: that qualifications are a suitable requirement for recreational cavers. One of this statements primary aims is to put this argument to bed once and for all (and for what it’s worth this has worked).
Universities are ‘at work’ when engaging with university caving clubs and so using language and definitions that are familiar to them will help clubs to ensure their continuation.
Public Indemnity policies are designed to cover the costs of being sued for causing injury to a third party or the property of a third party. The insurance therefore doesn’t state what you can and can’t be found liable for, it only states in what instances it can and will step in to cover the costs (up to a limit).
The law and the interpretation of the law (using previous cases and the interpretation of the law in those cases) along with the specifics of the case will dictate whether you can be sued for your action by the injured party (or party whose property was damaged).
There is an extremely limited number of cases to base the interpretation of the law on with regards to recreational leadership, however it would not be unreasonable to believe that a a club running trips for novices would have suitably competent people running those trips.
I sat on the fence about needing the HSE definition in here and so here is some background that lead me to including it. Some universities are now looking to require qualifications as demonstration of competency. In a recent example someone within BCA had given the university the answer they wanted: that qualifications are a suitable requirement for recreational cavers. One of this statements primary aims is to put this argument to bed once and for all (and for what it’s worth this has worked).
Universities are ‘at work’ when engaging with university caving clubs and so using language and definitions that are familiar to them will help clubs to ensure their continuation.
I’m not sure what circular argument you’re referring to by this point in your rant. Can you clarify.
JoshW
Well-known member
I haven’t said that anywhere at all.
Acquiring competence means you need to go caving when you don’t have it yet. But you can’t go caving because you don’t have competence.
Are you serious that someone in BCA told a uni that people needed qualifications? To get any caving qualification you need experience. See above.
BCA is about as much use as NCA was.
JoshW
Well-known member
Ahh gotcha, yeah the old catch 22. Spend a lot of time explaining this to unions. The safest way to get good at caving is to go caving!
JoshW
Well-known member
Apologies, somewhat snappy from me!
With regards to the competence piece it would come into play in two ways.
1) if as a club you ensure your leaders are competent there is less* likely to be incidents and therefore less likely a need to start playing the blame game, which leads me onto
2) if as a club a leader of one of your trips aimed at novices is clearly incompetent, during the course of legal proceedings following an incident, it is inevitable the club would be found somewhat liable for the incident (almost certainly as well as the individual). In this case if the member and club were both BCA members the insurance would end up covering their costs. If the club ensure anyone running trips for them can be demonstrated to be competent then they are less likely to even need to invoke the insurance as the fault would lie either with the individual in that circumstance or external forces (or even the third party trying to sue).
For further avoidance of doubt - I am NOT a legal expert, this is based purely on my experience of these kinds of policies and actual procedure may vary.
*corrected by moderator at poster's request.
Last edited by a moderator:
hyweldavies
Member
The statement is ill though out and an appalling thing to put out
I am assuming the link isn't a stupid wind up but I genuinely shocked that such a missive has been put out by the supposed national body, seemingly with little or no consultation or thought as to the consequences
It states that club has a reaponsibily to police leaders. Clubs traditionally was a joining together if like minded people largely doing their own thing. Suggesting that clubs must now appoint leaders is totally undermining the whole of club caving and is an utterly unreasonable burden on the committee members to appoint suitable leaders.
FFS think people !
JoshW
Well-known member
You’re the one that’s used the word police (and appoint for that matter).
We seem to be into tail wagging dog territory.
The problem with insurance is it motivates lawyers. When we were students we hadn’t heard of things like “insurance”. We had no money. Nothing would happen. Some poor 21 year old will end up in court for years so everyone gets their cut. It won’t be hard to show they are not competent (or it prob wouldn’t have happened). Easier to ditch the insurance, you don’t need it if you have no money.
This is exactly what happens to many doctors who are barely out of uni. They get burned for everyone else's benefit. I get this in my ear every few days.
The problem with insurance is it motivates lawyers. When we were students we hadn’t heard of things like “insurance”. We had no money. Nothing would happen. Some poor 21 year old will end up in court for years so everyone gets their cut. It won’t be hard to show they are not competent (or it prob wouldn’t have happened). Easier to ditch the insurance, you don’t need it if you have no money.
This is exactly what happens to many doctors who are barely out of uni. They get burned for everyone else's benefit. I get this in my ear every few days.
hyweldavies
Member
Well what does it mean then ?
You have earlier said choice of unsuitable leaders would be at the committee's door (point 2 of your follow up)
Such opinion stated on behalf the of the governing body ate very troubling and could create a situtation which didn't exit before
I'm rarely that oponionated on here but carelessly putting this kind of thing out can have major harmful consequences.
Regarding expertise: when the old insurance scheme unravelled I took it upon myself to read Clerk &Lindsell on Tort (the standard work apparently) from cover to cover,
and whilst I forgotten a lot I likely still have more clue than most
JoshW
Well-known member
If ‘random caving club’ and their committee say Tony the psychopath is running a trip and Tony characteristically makes bad decisions and injures the whole party, I’d say there is going to be reasonable chance that the committee end up having to demonstrate why they thought it would be okay for him to take people caving
JoshW
Well-known member
Technically not a governing body. Just an association of clubs and individuals. Some will hang draw and quarter for stating the BCA is a governing body
cap n chris
Well-known member
BCA is not the National Governing Body for caving in Britain, then? So does that mean there is no NGB for caving at all? (notwithstanding MikeM's clarification (above) of the QCA Governing Body role for professional qualifications, obviously. It would be helpful to know as for decades I've routinely trotted out the expression the "British Caving Association is the National Governing Body for Caving" and I'd definitely like to know whether this is correct or not, as I would not wish to perpetuate an untruth if indeed it is untrue. Thank you. 
