No more Llama events at Ironbridge!

On or around Tue, 8 Jun 2004 10:57:02 +0100, "Paul - xxx"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>
>I think they come to every and any 'open' event .. but really this sounds a
>bit like sour grapes. After all, what is 'off-roading' ? I started with a
>wreck from the local auctions, unfit for the road, but driveable .. now I
>wouldn't dream of it, but everyone has to start somewhere. Why not just
>have an area where anyone can let rip 'no-holds-barred-noresponsibility
>accepted' etc ?
>

I suspect that some git would find a reason to either ban it or sue you in
spite of disclaimers. 's getting very difficult to have functional
disclaimers of responsibility. I suppose that if you have a written
disclaimer which the individuals sign, they'd have a job disputing it, but
you have to be careful of that thing about unreasonable contract terms. The
other possibility is that you have an arrangement where they don't
(officially) pay, and therefore you have no contract, even implied.

sadly, the off-road thing at Pontardawe seems to be defunct. Landowner can
get more from some bloody euro scheme for not farming, or some such crap.

In a way, I wish we still had the place we used to live in about 20 years
ago - 30 acres of land up a hillside, with bogs, slopes, ruts, the lot. I
could make a fookin' ace off-road site there, but it's 20 years too late,
buggrit. Have to have a word with sister's BF, I reckon he's got the
makings of an off-road site on his farm, and if suitably policed, it
shouldn't have too much impact on the farming side either.



--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
Confidence: Before important work meetings, boost your confidence by
reading a few pages from "The Tibetan Book of the Dead"
from the Little Book of Complete B***ocks by Alistair Beaton.

Ah....Ponty.

Is the Folk Festival on this year?

--
Nelly

Austin Shackles posted:
> On or around Tue, 8 Jun 2004 10:57:02 +0100, "Paul - xxx"
> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
>>
>> I think they come to every and any 'open' event .. but really this
>> sounds a bit like sour grapes. After all, what is 'off-roading' ? I
>> started with a wreck from the local auctions, unfit for the road, but
>> driveable .. now I wouldn't dream of it, but everyone has to start
>> somewhere. Why not just have an area where anyone can let rip
>> 'no-holds-barred-noresponsibility accepted' etc ?
>>
>
> I suspect that some git would find a reason to either ban it or sue you in
> spite of disclaimers. 's getting very difficult to have functional
> disclaimers of responsibility. I suppose that if you have a written
> disclaimer which the individuals sign, they'd have a job disputing it, but
> you have to be careful of that thing about unreasonable contract terms.

Yeah, same as we sign for when we race formally .. These are standard
terms absolving organisers of all responsibility for the users personal
injuries etc etc ..

> The other possibility is that you have an arrangement where they don't
> (officially) pay, and therefore you have no contract, even implied.

OK, four crates of Newcastle Brown and we can all go play on my sister's
farm .. but that's a bit flat. Though I guess that's what a JCB's for, like
they do just up t' road at Loversall ..

> sadly, the off-road thing at Pontardawe seems to be defunct. Landowner
> can get more from some bloody euro scheme for not farming, or some such
> crap.
>
> In a way, I wish we still had the place we used to live in about 20 years
> ago - 30 acres of land up a hillside, with bogs, slopes, ruts, the lot. I
> could make a fookin' ace off-road site there, but it's 20 years too late,
> buggrit. Have to have a word with sister's BF, I reckon he's got the
> makings of an off-road site on his farm, and if suitably policed, it
> shouldn't have too much impact on the farming side either.

Heheheh, I sense a hastily concocted plan forming ..

--
Paul ...

(8(|) ... Homer Rocks

Big problem is that despite signing a disclaimer you can still do whatever
you have signed to say that you won't - ie. you can still sue even if you
sign a disclaimer.

I would suggest that the landowner is after my custom.

The other thing I said was that I did not to be associated to such
behaviour. I am not saying that it should not happe, I am just saying that
as both David the offroader and david of Llama 4x4 I do not wish to be
associated to it !!

David
LLAMA 4x4

"Paul - xxx" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:rwjxc.799$ud5.244@newsfe4-gui...
> Austin Shackles posted:
> > On or around Tue, 8 Jun 2004 10:57:02 +0100, "Paul - xxx"
> > <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
> >
> >>
> >> I think they come to every and any 'open' event .. but really this
> >> sounds a bit like sour grapes. After all, what is 'off-roading' ? I
> >> started with a wreck from the local auctions, unfit for the road, but
> >> driveable .. now I wouldn't dream of it, but everyone has to start
> >> somewhere. Why not just have an area where anyone can let rip
> >> 'no-holds-barred-noresponsibility accepted' etc ?
> >>
> >
> > I suspect that some git would find a reason to either ban it or sue you
in
> > spite of disclaimers. 's getting very difficult to have functional
> > disclaimers of responsibility. I suppose that if you have a written
> > disclaimer which the individuals sign, they'd have a job disputing it,
but
> > you have to be careful of that thing about unreasonable contract terms.
>
> Yeah, same as we sign for when we race formally .. These are standard
> terms absolving organisers of all responsibility for the users personal
> injuries etc etc ..
>
> > The other possibility is that you have an arrangement where they don't
> > (officially) pay, and therefore you have no contract, even implied.
>
> OK, four crates of Newcastle Brown and we can all go play on my sister's
> farm .. but that's a bit flat. Though I guess that's what a JCB's for,
like
> they do just up t' road at Loversall ..
>
> > sadly, the off-road thing at Pontardawe seems to be defunct. Landowner
> > can get more from some bloody euro scheme for not farming, or some such
> > crap.
> >
> > In a way, I wish we still had the place we used to live in about 20
years
> > ago - 30 acres of land up a hillside, with bogs, slopes, ruts, the lot.
I
> > could make a fookin' ace off-road site there, but it's 20 years too
late,
> > buggrit. Have to have a word with sister's BF, I reckon he's got the
> > makings of an off-road site on his farm, and if suitably policed, it
> > shouldn't have too much impact on the farming side either.
>
> Heheheh, I sense a hastily concocted plan forming ..
>
> --
> Paul ...
>
> (8(|) ... Homer Rocks
>
>

> It all started to change when a new landowner purchased the land.....
>
> There have been many disagreements since but now it has come to a head....
>
> Part of the problem is that I feel that the site is simply not worth as
> much as I am being charged! The only way i can combat this is to put the
> price up but even that is interfered with by the landowner:
> Any increase I put on they want half of - that means I need to put twice as
> much on the entry fee as I need just to get what I need to cover costs. This
> is clearly the start of a vicious circle ending up with customers having to
> pay too much for what they are getting.
>
> This is not however the major issue, though the landowners quest for more
> and more money from the site is at the heart of it:
> If I am honest then probably as much as half of the customers are what I
> would call ' a bunch of muppets racing round a field in knackered old 4x4
> wrecks pulled out of the scrapyard for the day'. That is not what I define
> as offroading and as such do not want to be associated to it. Neither do I
> want the job of policing people who are not really interested in doing it
> properly anyway!
> My obvious route would be to banish them from the site but this is where
> the control is taken away from me. The ( IMHO ) over interfering landowner
> seems to want anything as long as they pay at the gate thus increasing their
> revenue.
> My events were only mine if there was a problem - when all was well there
> was the landowner to claim all the glory..... this is not the way I am
> prepared to run 'my' business and so chose to walk away and be involved in
> the events no more. I do not want the rest of my business ( and hobby ) to
> be associated to that style of event.
>
> I will now have to work to replace the money i earned there but at least I
> will be happy that I am both in control of my own affairs and also only
> associated to real offroading, not just the use of knackered 4x4's as a
> cheap alternative to Alton towers!!
>
> David
> LLAMA 4x4

Sorry to hear it David, I had never quite made it to one of these
events although I know the site very well having used it for outdoor
development and corporate events. I'd been hoping to make it
eventually . . .

Frankly, from your description, I think you are well out of it.
Without a coherent set of policies and implementation and a clear
authority for control of the event I think you were heading for
trouble. Not intentionally . . . but it would have come. Part of the
firm I work for consults in leisure site safety and we come across
this kind of situation frequently. Not only with off-road driving but
with steam fairs, clay pigeon shooting, quads and buggies - the lot!

When responsibility and authority are split there is often a messy
court case at the end! I presume you had the necessary measures in
place to have the site exempt from the Road Traffic Acts? Assuming
that elementary precaution and assuming you were the nominated
'Organiser' on the insurances the landowner was putting himself in a
very exposed position overriding your control unless he / she had been
nominated the 'Organiser' leaving you as what . . . 'Chief marshal?'.

Did you not have sufficient marshals to manage the gate and check
vehicles and licenses yourself?

I visited Lee James's 'Open Day' last month and was mega impressed.
The site owner there (well, Leaseholder I think) had got together with
him to make sure they were both covered and that lots of fun could be
had with minimal risk to life and limb.

Regrettably I think most 'play day' type events are going to be simply
closed down over the next couple of years caught in a 'pincer' as the
HSE and the Police apply the H&S and RTAs and insurers (there are only
two active underwriters in this field in any case) hike the premiums
or simply refuse cover. It is already hitting many commercial
operators and clubs.

Anyway, thanks for your enthusiasm and for trying . . . I see someone
had hinted that your 'proper way' was expensive. Well, the problem
with 'cheap' is that all the costs are loaded onto the individual or
the family of the 'next one' to suffer a preventable mishap. I'm sure
your risk appraisal, vehicle and site inspections would have been
adequate to prevent happenings like that around a year ago, I think,
when a mans knees were wrecked by a fallen sheep fence obscured by
long grass and mud that a vehicle travelling too fast snagged and
dragged . . .

By the way, If matey there is operating a dangerous event and
especially if he is doing it without the cover of your insurance I
hope you have reported your suspicions to the H&S Inspectorate?

Good luck in your next ventures! Lurch

> >
> It all started to change when a new landowner purchased the land.....
>
> There have been many disagreements since but now it has come to a head....
>
> Part of the problem is that I feel that the site is simply not worth as
> much as I am being charged! The only way i can combat this is to put the
> price up but even that is interfered with by the landowner:
> Any increase I put on they want half of - that means I need to put twice as
> much on the entry fee as I need just to get what I need to cover costs. This
> is clearly the start of a vicious circle ending up with customers having to
> pay too much for what they are getting.
>
> This is not however the major issue, though the landowners quest for more
> and more money from the site is at the heart of it:
> If I am honest then probably as much as half of the customers are what I
> would call ' a bunch of muppets racing round a field in knackered old 4x4
> wrecks pulled out of the scrapyard for the day'. That is not what I define
> as offroading and as such do not want to be associated to it. Neither do I
> want the job of policing people who are not really interested in doing it
> properly anyway!
> My obvious route would be to banish them from the site but this is where
> the control is taken away from me. The ( IMHO ) over interfering landowner
> seems to want anything as long as they pay at the gate thus increasing their
> revenue.
> My events were only mine if there was a problem - when all was well there
> was the landowner to claim all the glory..... this is not the way I am
> prepared to run 'my' business and so chose to walk away and be involved in
> the events no more. I do not want the rest of my business ( and hobby ) to
> be associated to that style of event.
>
> I will now have to work to replace the money i earned there but at least I
> will be happy that I am both in control of my own affairs and also only
> associated to real offroading, not just the use of knackered 4x4's as a
> cheap alternative to Alton towers!!
>
> David
> LLAMA 4x4


Sorry to hear it David, I had never quite made it to one of these
events although I know the site very well having used it for outdoor
development and corporate events. I'd been hoping to make it
eventually . . .

Frankly, from your description, I think you are well out of it.
Without a coherent set of policies and implementation and a clear
authority for control of the event I think you were heading for
trouble. Not intentionally . . . but it would have come. Part of the
firm I work for consults in leisure site safety and we come across
this kind of situation frequently. Not only with off-road driving but
with steam fairs, clay pigeon shooting, quads and buggies - the lot!

When responsibility and authority are split there is often a messy
court case at the end! I presume you had the necessary measures in
place to have the site exempt from the Road Traffic Acts? Assuming
that elementary precaution and assuming you were the nominated
'Organiser' on the insurances the landowner was putting himself in a
very exposed position overriding your control unless he / she had been
nominated the 'Organiser' leaving you as what . . . 'Chief marshal?'.

Did you not have sufficient marshals to manage the gate and check
vehicles and licenses yourself?

I visited Lee James's 'Open Day' last month and was mega impressed.
The site owner there (well, Leaseholder I think) had got together with
him to make sure they were both covered and that lots of fun could be
had with minimal risk to life and limb.

Regrettably I think most 'play day' type events are going to be simply
closed down over the next couple of years caught in a 'pincer' as the
HSE and the Police apply the H&S and RTAs and insurers (there are only
two active underwriters in this field in any case) hike the premiums
or simply refuse cover. It is already hitting many commercial
operators and clubs.

Anyway, thanks for your enthusiasm and for trying . . . I see someone
had hinted that your 'proper way' was expensive. Well, the problem
with 'cheap' is that all the costs are loaded onto the individual or
the family of the 'next one' to suffer a preventable mishap. I'm sure
your risk appraisal, vehicle and site inspections would have been
adequate to prevent happenings like that around a year ago, I think,
when a mans knees were wrecked by a fallen sheep fence obscured by
long grass and mud that a vehicle travelling too fast snagged and
dragged . . .

By the way, If matey there is operating a dangerous event and
especially if he is doing it without the cover of your insurance I
hope you have reported your suspicions to the H&S Inspectorate?

Good luck in your next ventures! Lurch

David_LLAMA 4x4 posted:
> Big problem is that despite signing a disclaimer you can still do whatever
> you have signed to say that you won't - ie. you can still sue even if you
> sign a disclaimer.
>
> I would suggest that the landowner is after my custom.
>
> The other thing I said was that I did not to be associated to such
> behaviour. I am not saying that it should not happe, I am just saying that
> as both David the offroader and david of Llama 4x4 I do not wish to be
> associated to it !!

Fair points, and good luck ..

--
Paul ...

(8(|) ... Homer Rocks