Technical Regulations

[Peter Mallett]

A question.

If the regulations in a championship are changed and sanctioned and they include something that is potentially dangerous would the draftees of the regulations be liable in the event that an accident occurred and was proven to be as a result of said potentially dangerous regulation.

I know this is one for the lawyers.

Thoughts people.

[carrera]

If the potential danger was brought to the attention of the draftees then I feel there is grounds for some sort of liability, although one must always remember that you are asked to comply with the regulations in force and if you do not believe them to be safe, then you should not compete.

Remember "motorsport is dangerous".

[Peter Mallett]

Good point. Or at least one shouldn't adopt said modification.

[dtype38]

An answer?

Dunno how it applies to motorsport in particular, but in the case of general rules and regulations for sports and other activities, I believe both the orgisers and the participants are held equally responsible for the safety of all involved. So, if an organiser creates a situation which could cause a danger to a competitor or others, this does not take away the responsibility of the competitor for their own safety and the safety of others. If the potential danger is spotted, it should be brought immediately to the attention of the organiser who had a responsibility to assess the risk objectively and take action if necessary. If the outcome is not to the satisfaction of the person raising the issue (ie. nothing is done and yet the danger still seems to exist) then they can take the issue to a higher authority if they wish, or perhaps with other competitors, or simply decline to take part in the event. If, however, the competitor chooses to take part, knowing the risk exists, they effectively accept the risk and would find it extremely difficult to claim later that any resulting accident was soley the fault of the organiser.

I think that's clear as mud :-)

[Slowcoach]

What prompted that question Mr. M. ? Have you spied something in some small print somewhere ?

[Peter Mallett]

Not at all. I just think we live in a litigious world and there are many traps for the unwary.

[thatorangething]

Hate to be a jilljoy, but if you let the litigation lawyers in to amateur motorsport, you will kill the sport. If we ever reach a situation where we have to have legal expenses, or third party insurance before we can race, thats the end. What we have in our largely self regulating sport is a prescious thing, dont mess it up. If you have a problem with a regulation, discuss it openly with your fellow competitors, and then present it to the organisers as a group. Once that problem is openly presented, i would be surprised to see a potentially dangerous regulation not be addressed if presented properly. If no fellow competitor agrees with you, it means you are whingeing! So shut up!!!

[Peter Mallett]

Actually I take your point and agree. However the question was posed as a discussion point not about anything specific. Certainly if there is something to discuss it should be in an open forum with all interested parties present.

As a point of interest my client is insisting that we put rollcages into our 4x4 vehicles. They do not consider the fact that a roll cage is inherently dangerous to soft skulls and that whilst you must wear a seat belt you can still come into contact with the cage in an accident. (And padding doesn't solve the problem).

One company is being sued because a driver suffered severe head injuries due to that reason. So a safety requirement drawn up with the best of intentions actually caused a death.

Whilst that is obviously a business issue, families of race drivers have the same right to sue anybody they think is at fault.

[StephenRae]

Has a safety belt manufacturer ever been held reponsible for a death on the public road? There must have been an occasion when someone was say trapped in a burning car by one.
Surely proponents of items like safety belts and rollover bars which for 99% of the time save lives shouldn't be held responsible for the 1% they make things worse.

[Peter Mallett]

Unfortunatley in the case I mention it does. Because you shouldn't have a cage without wearing a helemt and other safety gear including harness etc.

Point taken re the seat belt manufacturer etc. As I said I'm just interested in opinions really. And I'm not certain where "duty of care" comes into this.

[StephenRae]

I'm not competent to debate this at anything more than a 'common sense' level. There is probably a legal definition of 'duty of care'...Didn't McDonalds have to pay out because they didn't warn that their coffee might be hot, I heard of packets of peanuts with the warning 'contains nuts'
Its a symptom of our time that one persons 'reasonable care' can be anothers 'gross negligence'

[Peter Mallett]

Originally posted by StephenRae
Its a symptom of our time that one persons 'reasonable care' can be anothers 'gross negligence'

My point exactly.

[brickkicker]

(And padding doesn't solve the problem).

Just a question what sort of padding was being used?

[Peter Mallett]

Not sure if any was in that case. But the usual tubular padding is not good enough (that BTW is for protecting the helmet). Surprisingly (whilst we are talking about that particular installation) a rollcage is actually so restrictive as to be a hazard for ingress and egress. Our racing cars a stripped out so there is room. also we forget but steering wheels are generally smaller and relocated. Also seats don't have all that padding and therefore take up less space.

You be surprised at how cramped a Disco is with a full cage. Indeed its difficult to keep two hands on the steering wheel because one of them gets jammed between the wheel and the cage.

[brickkicker]

Not sure if any was in that case. But the usual tubular padding is not good enough (that BTW is for protecting the helmet).

I know thats why I asked, you can get FIA padding that is good though, it is rarly seen in club racing which is a shame guess that is to do with the cost. But can you put a price on your life?

[Peter Mallett]

I meant the FIA padding.

You need to read the FIA regs. You'll find that they require helmets, harnesses, padding and a seat when you have a rollcage.

Find out about it here. http://www.mallettracing.co.uk/safety.htm

[thatorangething]

I think that most of us would agree that to operate a vehicle with a rollcage in a situation where it might come in to contact with an unprotected skull - padded cage or not, would be inappropriate. But that would never happen in a competition environment, would it? However In a corporate entertainment environment it could easily happen, and surely the responsibility has to be with the organiser. Trackdays are an interesting one, where the organisers might allow passengers out in an uncaged car, or possibly worse,to passenger in a cramped race car that has a padded driver cage area only, on a national or grand prix level circuit. What about the 'road going race car, with an FIA spec cage, that again has a padded driver area only, where helmetless seatbelted passengers could suffer serious head injuries at parking speeds. Maybe the-possibly slightly unrealistic answer -is for any cage to be padded for the number of operational seats in the car, and for any passenger in the car, in any environment, to wear a helmet all the time, that is the way the cage is supposed to work, as part of a package. With regards to a 4X4, there are external cages available for some. No cabin problems then. All the vehicle manufacturers soft crash pads unobstructed.

[Peter Mallett]

Well whilst we've strayed away from my original question it is appropriate. The problem with external cages is that they aren't braced and tend to crush the shell locally to the cage components. (Been there, seen it, done that.)

Track days are indeed interesting. It frightens the life out of me when I see a "caged" car being driven up the road. Insurance companies won't pay out for injuries caused by a cage. And vehicle manufacturuers withdraw warranties if you put one in. (That last bit obviously only applies to new vehicles).

[dtype38]

This discussion has taken an interesting turn... It is of particular relevence to what I (in the past) and a number of fellow competitors have been doing - that is driving a "road going" class car to race meetings. Two years ago I drover my race car (a Jaguar XJS)to every meeting for a season, raced it and drove it home again. My road insurance company had a full set of photographs of the car clearly showing the racing driver seat with full harness, the full roll cage (padded in the driver areas only) and the standard passenger seat and seat belt. They made no comment on the unprotected areas of the cage around the passenger area, but as they had photos surely this means I was insured? For obvious reasons I and any passengers didn't even consider wearing crash helmets in the car on public roads.

[thatorangething]

Point taken regarding cage damage, but is the cage there for the safety of a driver or passenger, or to minimise cosmetic damage to the vehicle. I would see an external cage as something that might be fitted to a vehicle that could require it to save the passengers of say, a safari vehicle. That vehicle's occupants are wishing to get from A to B in reasonable comfort, maybe in difficult terrain, without taking unecessary risks, whilst having the reassurance of the cage if something unexpected ruins your day. Useable vehicle, added safety.
However in any environment where the onus is on thrill seeking for money, pushing the limits, whether as a driver or passenger, surely it should be presumed that the vehicle concerned will, at some time have a big off, probably involving much greater loadings than our family on safari! In that case, the vehicle should have a (padded) cage as strong as is necessary to keep it the right shape to protect it's occupants, and that those occupants should be suited, harnessed and helmeted to keep them safe in that cramped, strengthened vehicle.

[Peter Mallett]

The point is "harnessed and helmeted". I suspect the vehicle damage would be insured but the head injuries bit may not.

[Peter Mallett]

Sorry I should clarify. Our business insurance covers injuries whilst at work and we've also limited speeds to 80 kph. Thereby reducing the accident risk.

We carried out extensive research and discovered the warranty thing.

[bf1]

Sorry if I seem dim but does the #whatever# (race in this case) at your own risk.. apply?

bf1

[Peter Mallett]

Good question. That's why I posed the point in the first place.