# IMBA insurance ending



## drew p (Jan 20, 2012)

A place to share situations, solutions, questions, etc. for dealing with the potential end of a national IMBA insurance program.
https://www.imba.com/resources/liability/insurance-program-update

We are a chapter that is just (about 3 weeks now) getting into serious trail building with some part time paid staff running machines during the week and organizing and supervising big volunteer days. This was definitely not the news we wanted to hear.

All the work is donation driven (not receiving any funds from the LM to do this). All volunteers sign a club and land manager waiver.

Any lawyers here? Could our organization be considered a volunteer under our land manager (state forest) since we are not receiving payment from them for the work they receive. Our paid employees are members of our land managers official volunteer program (it is my understanding that you are like an unpayed employee, you take an oath, etc.) They did this during the layout/design phase before becoming paid by the club for their work on the trail.

I'd love to hear what solutions other clubs and groups come up with. Please share.

Thanks,
Drew

Trails guy
Mountain Bikers of Santa Cruz


----------



## pinkrobe (Jan 30, 2004)

DA FUQ!? Details please!


----------



## drew p (Jan 20, 2012)

Our club got an email today. Added link to first post.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

SDMBA just received the same notice. We have been waiting for rain down here to get a bunch of projects going, this being the middle of our trail building season.

Based on the new rates, which will no doubt be higher, we, being a new chapter, will probably end losing money for each membership.


----------



## fat guy (Feb 19, 2005)

https://www.imba.com/resources/liability/insurance-program-update


----------



## redd4573 (Apr 15, 2012)

Lower rates is one of the major perks that IMBA offered groups for thier chapter program. Now what are they offering for thier 60% share of dues, I hope they reduce the 60% down to around 20-30% or there will be losing alot of chapters?


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

We got the same message. This one looks like it will be high on our list for our board meeting next week.


----------



## pinkrobe (Jan 30, 2004)

Apparently there is no impact on those of us outside the US, due to different carriers, etc. phew


----------



## Sir Peanuts (Oct 3, 2011)

Obviously IMBA has been trying to find a way to make this work and its a sad thing that no matter what they have been able to find the cost of the rate increase is staggering by comparison to its prior pricing. Who works in insurance? Anyone out there have an idea?!?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Would a 501(3)C be of help? That is a not for profit status.


----------



## Loren_ (Dec 3, 2006)

It's proving pretty easy to find general liability coverage, but proving much harder to find a policy that covers any sort of trail building. If anyone has any success in this area, we would appreciate a pointer.


----------



## Fattirewilly (Dec 10, 2001)

The FAQ is vague on the issue of having or paying paid trail builders vs. being volunteer and happening to build on a volunteer basis "like" a paid builder. We fall into the later category and with far less frequency than someone who gets paid to build. I leave out pro-builders because they have their own insurance.

Is new trail construction by volunteers not a form of "trail stewardship"?

Add to the list of FAQ's, if a chapter finds their own insurance, I assume the fee split with IMBA is reduced by a corresponding amount? I'm sensing paperwork head aches ahead.

To the pro-builders, where is your insurance coming from? Would "landscape" company type insurance work?


----------



## Fattirewilly (Dec 10, 2001)

McKay insurance is still in business...They don't cover new trail construction but cover trail work. At what point does it stop being "new construction" and become regular maintenance?


----------



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

It doesn't make a difference in my experience.


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

That _does_ change the Chapter Deal, doesn't it?


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

drew p said:


> serious trail building with some part time paid staff running machines during the week and organizing and supervising big volunteer days.


I'm not sure about insurance qualifications but the part-time, independent contractor, volunteer, employee definition sounds marginal. Leadership, direction, scheduling, and adhering to program definitions are factors which define an employee, not an oath.


----------



## redd4573 (Apr 15, 2012)

Yes, yes it does. This is not a great thing to happen for those new clubs that have a weak finances like ours? Kinda got blindslided on this one, these IMBA Chapters get half a month to scramble to find insurance right before spring, not cool. We as board members will need to think about opting out of the chapter program if the percentage of thier take does not change.


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

In the short term look at McKay. Good folk, lots of experience.


----------



## fatguybiking (Jul 14, 2012)

fat guy said:


> https://www.imba.com/resources/liability/insurance-program-update


Anybody able to cut and paste the info in that link. It requires you to sign in to view and I'm not a IMBA member, but my club was just about to apply to the chapter program and this might change things. Thanks!


----------



## Kronk (Jan 4, 2004)

Chapters and clubs were aware about the two 60 day extensions, according to the IMBA statement. Also says that at a local level the insurance will probably be more than through the national plan. Reads like $8 is the cost per member now, and would jump to $15 through IMBA. 
Rates locally will differ from place to place, but even if it doesn't double it will be a factor for Chapters that don't have money aside from membership dues.

For the $30 membership, the Chapter gets $12. 
Staying a Chapter will be hard for some, I bet.


----------



## lkgeo (Oct 31, 2006)

@drew thanks for the thread - I was hoping someone had started a conversation to share info.
re chapters I don't know if we saw a discount on insurance so far (new chapter), but that wasn't a primary driver for our decision to become a chapter. 
imo it's a bigger issue that there's no equivalent replacement policy available - for clubs or chapters. hope we can come up with something.


----------



## Ridnparadise (Dec 14, 2007)

drew p said:


> A place to share situations, solutions, questions, etc. for dealing with the potential end of a national IMBA insurance program.
> https://www.imba.com/resources/liability/insurance-program-update
> 
> We are a chapter that is just (about 3 weeks now) getting into serious trail building with some part time paid staff running machines during the week and organizing and supervising big volunteer days. This was definitely not the news we wanted to hear.
> ...


I'm in another country, but my suggestion is you start talking to your LM ASAP. Get them to cover your insurance via a contract to look after their land (whatever that may mean) as part of your ongoing work. You may have to pause working for a while to get that "contract signed", but make sure the LM understands the consequences of IMBA leaving them isolated may involve delays in trail maintenance, rogue building, trail damage, plus potential ill will among trail volunteers.

Remember, they have probably been resting comfortably on the IMBA brand to cover their insurance. If they see IMBA pulling out, they should be keen to build local bonds knowing the alternative consequences are entropic.


----------



## Cotharyus (Jun 21, 2012)

For paid trail builders, it depends a lot on who is paying them. If they are contractors, they need insurance. If the LM is paying them as an employee rather than a contractor, then the LM is technically where the liability falls. But professional trail builders will often frown on building trails as an LM employee rather than a contractor.


Our local club is not an IMBA chapter, but we have an IMBA chapter (also a member of that) in the region - they have their hands full and rarely make it to our area. As such, we took things into our own hands with a 501 c3 and a couple of local agreements. We maintain one county trail system, but the city asked us to build a new one. Because of an agreement with the city, the club's liability on that is a non issue. I do wonder about liability on the trails we maintain, but I'm not sweating it because there are two other organizations that maintain that system as well, and given the age of the trails in the system, it would be difficult to assign liability to any of those organizations for any "feature" on the trails since nothing is really being added.

I know this sounds a little like a cop out, but I'm wondering if certain situations, some clubs, might not be able to forego insurance, or at least so much insurance, to keep things sane until something is worked out though IMBA.


----------



## 2bfluid (Aug 17, 2008)

What about SORBA? I heard they were able to keep their insurance. Can anyone confirm or deny this?


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

One cannot forego insurance if they are in the State of California. Having a land manager assume all liability may be an option although I do not see the process as being as simple as signing a document, at least not here in SD. Nothing is simple here.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

I'm interested to know what others come up with as well. This is not a surprise (IMBA and the carrier have been keeping us in the loop for several months about this), but it is really throwing us for a loop until we figure something else out.


----------



## cjohnson (Jul 14, 2004)

*Isn't the policy from October to October?*

Gotta check when we paid the bill. I keep thinking October. If cancelled, hope we get a refund.


----------



## redd4573 (Apr 15, 2012)

How did IMBA keep you in the loop? I am a board member of a local chapter and all we recieved were notices that they (IMBA) were shopping around for better rates. Then I saw the OP and zipped an email to my fellow board members. Later that day I found out we recieved the same letter from IMBA that morning stating that our insurance policy would be cancelled as of the first of march. How is 14 days notice not a surprise?


----------



## cjohnson (Jul 14, 2004)

*IMBA said they've known for a while and have been working on it???*

The email IMBA sent us Jan 17 touts liability insurance as a benefit. Below is part of the email.

"Dear Langlade Area Mountain Bike Association,

Thank you for being part of IMBA's mission to build better mountain biking experiences everywhere.
We are constantly improving the services we offer supporting organizations like yours; legal advocacy help, l*iability insurance, *....


----------



## Ridnparadise (Dec 14, 2007)

There's 2 ways to look at this - using the glass half full point of view:

First is that after rolling over and taking endless BS about liability from land managers, councils and government bodies, we have reaped what we allowed them to sow and are in a position of escalating risk now that "they" are all moving away from unaffordable insurance cover.

Second is that this is part of a correction that was always coming and will help identify real risk and insurance requirements.

About a year ago, someone posted on a popular Australian MTB forum "his" understanding of the insurance status in Australia. Representing a major insurer re-insuring city and regional councils, he said that there had been no change in legal claims, liability risk, claims pending OR INSURANCE COSTS since MTB had become more popular. 

He said he and the industry had heard rumours of the impact of MTB risk, but that it was all a load of rubbish. Our LM is a federal organisation and they also have no outstanding MTB claims and have never lost one to date! As a rider, his explanation was that MTB riders don't try to make someone else responsible for their actions as a rule. I doubt that is a surprise to the rest of us.

However, there are situations where I would feel quite exposed as an uninsured trail building volunteer. The first is when trail is designated one-way after being historically two-way. What better way to ensure potential legal conflict than bring hard heads together over a point of legal right! 

The second is inadequate trail signage. Where we work, the LM cannot get its head around the need for accurate signage. They only accept signposting and including on maps "legal trails" and that currently means 15% of all trails are explained publicly. That means Joe Blow punter and his family come for a ride one weekend and read a trailhead sign that is totally inaccurate and confusing. They haven't been to the websites that show maps and even riding times for all local trails, because they are not experienced riders. Now, I am sure you are getting my point; I don't want to be responsible for the multiple ramifications of this situation because the LM allows us to work on trails not yet legalised and signposted. 

If my insurer was IMBA and they pulled out, so would I. Not saying I wouldn't help maintain the trails, but I would not perform authorised tasks until the LM indemnified me and my group of volunteers. 

Therefore it comes down to the same old argument and it is not one of insurance. It is whether LM's prefer the concept of unauthorised trail building, or whether they will indemnify trailcare volunteers with a history of sound work and relationship with and for them. My impression is that most LM's have enough common sense to sort through this dilemma and those that don't will lose control of "their" land.


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

Like many of you others, this IMBA insurance situation will make it difficult for our club to continue some of our normal trail activities. It was a real surprise after receiving all the upbeat messages about how good the underwriter search was going.

A few comments about earlier posts. We are in the southeast but not a SORBA chapter. We got their sales pitch before the merger and decided to remain independent. I do visit their web site occasionally just to see what is going on. I found this information in their Nov. 2013 BOD meeting minutes: "As insurance costs continue to rise, SORBA finds it more and more difficult to pay chapters' insurance. All other IMBA chapters pay their own insurance bill, but SORBA pays for its chapters. The Board voted to recommend that IMBA raise its membership dues to cover the cost of insurance for all chapters."

As for injury lawsuits, most likely they are being brought by health insurance companies using subrogation to recover their costs and not by the individual cyclist.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

I don't know the details, but our treasurer (who handles the insurance, and was contacted) has known about the insurance challenges for many months (seems like we have been talking about it since Nov or Dec), and passed this on to the rest of the board. 

I thought it was very clear that the current extension until Feb 28th was in order to buy more time for IMBA to find a better policy.

I don't know why we knew this and your chapter did not, but I am guessing it has to do with how on the ball our treasurer is.


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

We knew about this situation since the extension invoice back in October. It is just that all the messages from IMBA and M&M since then were mostly positive in tone. Like this one from January: "We have some news regarding your IMBA Chapter/Club insurance. We’ve received bids from three insurance companies, and are now finalizing our review process with IMBA. Once this is wrapped up, a new 12-month policy should be issued, effective March 1, 2014.

Overall, getting more than a single carrier to compete for this book of business is a positive thing, especially given the multiple open claims that remain and the complexity of the IMBA Chapter/Club insurance program."

That made it look like everything was going well. And then..........


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

Sounds like a sure fire way to increase Trail Solutions share of the pie if you ask me.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

What our club needs more than anything else right now is a good source of information as to what activities will expose us to liabilities as "trail builders". I assume advertizing other groups' trailwork (which is something we do a lot) is not an issue, but once we are more involved, I want to know the nitty gritty of what constitutes trai-lbuilding. How do agreements with different land managers affect our exposure? In some cases we contribute financially to a trail project, though it is not "our" project, is there any liability there?

This is what I am most concerned with right now. I am guessing that coverage for other activities (rides and events) will obtainable. I am currently reaching out to the local road riding clubs to see who they use.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

AZ said:


> Sounds like a sure fire way to increase Trail Solutions share of the pie if you ask me.


Do explain.


----------



## redd4573 (Apr 15, 2012)

My thoughts mirror those of old_MTBer, everything was given a positive outlook. I know they may not of wanted to cause panic knowing they may not be able to provide coverage for the chapters but they should have said something to prepare us for the worst case. In my veiw this is starting to form a pattern of other issues we have had as a new start up chapter. It seems that IMBA is a perfect exsample of an organization that as grown to fast in too many directions at one time.


----------



## redd4573 (Apr 15, 2012)

Yes AZ, I to am interested in your claim?


----------



## c0nsumer (Mar 17, 2008)

Per the FAQ on the IMBA site there are some chapters that had already opted out of the IMBA-provided coverage, seeking their own. Do any of you know which chapters these might be, and who may be covering them?

(Note: I ask this as chairperson for CRAMBA-IMBA, since we have a number of trails each with different LMs and we really don't want to put ourselves at risk by going without any insurance, especially as we move into springtime.)


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

redd4573 said:


> My thoughts mirror those of old_MTBer, everything was given a positive outlook. I know they may not of wanted to cause panic knowing they may not be able to provide coverage for the chapters but they should have said something to prepare us for the worst case. In my veiw this is starting to form a pattern of other issues we have had as a new start up chapter. It seems that IMBA is a perfect exsample of an organization that as grown to fast in too many directions at one time.


Right. We knew this was a potential issue, but believed it had a high probability of getting resolved. And perhaps under the circumstances that was a reasonable assumption on IMBA's part, I really don't know.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

It's obvious that many are concerned/unhappy with the false sense that business was being handled by IMBA in regards to securing uninterrupted liability insurance. I have to assume that IMBA is working to resolve this issue.

This said, I/we also have to realize the fact that IMBA may fail to secure insurance by the end of Feb. 

Therefore, we can do nothing and hope IMBA secures a policy before the current policy expires or we can actively secure our own policies. 

If we wait and do nothing and IMBA secures a policy, all is fine. If IMBA fails, my Chapter is shut down from performing trail work in the middle of our trail work season.

This thread discusses obtaining coverage from individual land managers. This may or not be an option. One of the benefits of using SDMBA to build/maintain trails is that we carry our own insurance, eliminating the bureaucratic BS and TIME to secure park liability insurance, if that is even an option. 

Furthermore, land managers faced with 100% liability will no doubt take a more conservative approach to trail building/maintenance projects, at least here in SD, and the scope of our projects will no doubt reflect this shift in responsibility.

I have only seen one suggestion for an alternative insurance carrier in this thread. I have a potential alternative that I will be contacting Tuesday morning. My suggestion to you is that you all invest a little time researching other potential carriers and make contact ASAP. Then return to this thread and share your information.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

One more thing. I find it a little disturbing that a thread in a forum sponsored by IMBA that discusses an issue that is affecting all Chapters/Affiliates and that is seeking information has been ignored by IMBA. Maybe we should start another thread entitled:
WHICH CHAPTERS / AFFILIATES ARE CONSIDERING OPTING OUT DUE TO INSURANCE ISSUES. 

Just to get their attention, of course. (Insert smiley here)


----------



## c0nsumer (Mar 17, 2008)

Boulder Pilot said:


> IThis thread discusses obtaining coverage from individual land managers. This may or not be an option. One of the benefits of using SDMBA to build/maintain trails is that we carry our own insurance, eliminating the bureaucratic BS and TIME to secure park liability insurance, if that is even an option.


Very much this. Our chapter has eight different land managers that we work with. Pursuing this with each one is a non-starter. Maybe for chapters that just have one large trail system and one LM this could happen, but I doubt we'd even get meetings with all of them to explain the issue by mid-summer.



Boulder Pilot said:


> I have only seen one suggestion for an alternative insurance carrier in this thread. I have a potential alternative that I will be contacting Tuesday morning. My suggestion to you is that you all invest a little time researching other potential carriers and make contact ASAP. Then return to this thread and share your information.


Hear hear. I hope that we all are able to share our options and solutions once they become available. I intend to do so from a CRAMBA-IMBA perspective, and I hope that you all will as well.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

Boulder Pilot said:


> One more thing. I find it a little disturbing that a thread in a forum sponsored by IMBA that discusses an issue that is affecting all Chapters/Affiliates and that is seeking information has been ignored by IMBA. Maybe we should start another thread entitled:
> WHICH CHAPTERS / AFFILIATES ARE CONSIDERING OPTING OUT DUE TO INSURANCE ISSUES.
> 
> Just to get their attention, of course. (Insert smiley here)


Your assumption that IMBA has not been paying attention to this issue is completely without basis.


----------



## c0nsumer (Mar 17, 2008)

kapusta said:


> Your assumption that IMBA has not been paying attention to this issue is completely without basis.


Beyond that, it would do IMBA leadership little good to get mired in the back and forth discussion and sniping that comes with an online forum conversation. I do believe they are working this, and I'd rather their time be spent doing that.

Anyway, your regional leader is the best one to be answering your chapter's questions about this all.


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

c0nsumer said:


> Our chapter has eight different land managers that we work with. Pursuing this with each one is a non-starter.


I am wondering if exploratory conversations with a few of these LMs might reveal the potential for using their insurance. Once done, it can be used as an example to bring to the other LMs.

You represent a very cheap and skilled labor pool. Any time we show up at a park with 20 volunteers these LMs are all smiles.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

I never said "IMBA has not been paying attention to this issue." I also understand communicating via forums is not the best way to communicate.

No one in this thread has shown any anti-IMBA sentiments. We are IMBA. We are seeking information and solutions. I have suggested we do not sit back and actually be proactive to find a solution that will benefit all chapters. We are IMBA.

I agree my last post did nothing to promote our need to find a solution. My bad.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

Originally Posted by c0nsumer 
"Our chapter has eight different land managers that we work with. Pursuing this with each one is a non-starter."

Mike, I believe the main point being made was this:

"but I doubt we'd even get meetings with all of them to explain the issue by mid-summer."


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

kapusta said:


> Do explain.





redd4573 said:


> Yes AZ, I to am interested in your claim?


Pretty simple, charters have no insurance = no building. No building = smaller pool of potential builders. Time will tell. The subject of an appearance of a conflict of interest with Trail Solutions and local trail builders isn't a new one by any means. Flame away.


----------



## c0nsumer (Mar 17, 2008)

Boulder Pilot said:


> Originally Posted by c0nsumer
> "Our chapter has eight different land managers that we work with. Pursuing this with each one is a non-starter."
> 
> Mike, I believe the main point being made was this:
> ...


That's exactly it, unfortunately. I look at this as an issue we have ~2 weeks to solve. If we go in to a LM and can't wholly explain the issue and why we're asking them for help, we'll look bad. For us, at least, I'd like to find a solution ourselves without going to the LM yet. If we had just one LM to work with and a much closer working relationship I'd go for it, but I don't think it's the right call yet. It is a good idea in general, though.

(On top of that we don't have the best relationship with some of our land managers, some allow us to do maintenance but are otherwise ambivalent, while others are extremely welcoming and defer to us on all manners MTB-related.)


----------



## gt2brew (Mar 23, 2006)

kapusta said:


> Right. We knew this was a potential issue, but believed it had a high probability of getting resolved. And perhaps under the circumstances that was a reasonable assumption on IMBA's part, I really don't know.


We were under the same assumption, I would assume that negotiations did not go well.

Perhaps we can all share insurance opportunities and details. I know not everyone shares the same insurance requirements, but I'm sure we can help each other get past this hurdle.


----------



## Cotharyus (Jun 21, 2012)

c0nsumer said:


> Very much this. Our chapter has eight different land managers that we work with. Pursuing this with each one is a non-starter. Maybe for chapters that just have one large trail system and one LM this could happen, but I doubt we'd even get meetings with all of them to explain the issue by mid-summer.


I think I brought that up. So I'll touch on it again. The land manager - city parks - asked US to come onto their land and build a trail system.Discussions ensued, and of course, the city wants very much for this to be their trail system, but to work with us on it. The co-operation extends to the loan of a machine to build trail and features with, for which they had to make the operator a city employee for liability and insurance purposes. As a result, they are covering the whole project, construction and long term.

I realize this is very much outside the norm, and boarders on dream land territory. Still, there are enough LM's out there in similar positions in terms of having policies that cover recreational facilities in spite of recreational liability laws that similar agreements should be feasible.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Cotharyus said:


> I think I brought that up. So I'll touch on it again. The land manager - city parks - asked US to come onto their land and build a trail system.Discussions ensued, and of course, the city wants very much for this to be their trail system, but to work with us on it. The co-operation extends to the loan of a machine to build trail and features with, for which they had to make the operator a city employee for liability and insurance purposes. As a result, they are covering the whole project, construction and long term.
> 
> I realize this is very much outside the norm, and boarders on dream land territory. Still, there are enough LM's out there in similar positions in terms of having policies that cover recreational facilities in spite of recreational liability laws that similar agreements should be feasible.


lol. I am not so sure about that. I think your situation IS dreamland status. For us, it's not even a question. If we don't secure insurance by March 1, all trail work stops until we can secure new insurance.


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

Hi All -- sorry I've been absent from the discussion. I've been on family vacation and have tried to stay away from work matters. I'll be back in the saddle later this week and will start adding updates. I know that folks in Boulder have been searching hard for solutions to the insurance problem -- it's certainly in IMBA's best interest to find a workable plan ASAP.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

AZ said:


> Pretty simple, charters have no insurance = no building. No building = smaller pool of potential builders. Time will tell. The subject of an appearance of a conflict of interest with Trail Solutions and local trail builders isn't a new one by any means. Flame away.


Actually, if what you are suggesting is true it would be a potential boost for ALL professional builders.

However, the suggestion that this situation is somehow a financial plus for IMBA is simply ridiculous.


----------



## 2bfluid (Aug 17, 2008)

kapusta said:


> Actually, if what you are suggesting is true it would be a potential boost for ALL professional builders.
> 
> However, the suggestion that this situation is somehow a financial plus for IMBA is simply ridiculous.


Agreed


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

Let's stay focused boys & girls. I'm contacting 2 potential insurance companies tomorrow morning and will post my results. I suggest everyone else do the same.

Thanks Mark for chiming in. We all know IMBA is working hard to secure uninterrupted coverage. In my opinion, if IMBA could list ALL the insurance companies they are aware of that offer trail building/maintenance coverage it would benefit all of us chapters/affiliates. We have too many projects that have taken months/years to secure to risk not being able to get shovels on the ground in March.


----------



## phred (Aug 25, 2007)

Yes please post any successes with obtaining insurance. I will do the same.


----------



## 2bfluid (Aug 17, 2008)

Can anyone chime in on whether SORBA lost their insurance? Unless I am mistaken, it was a separate policy. If it wasn't cancelled or dropped, then it seems that would be the best place to start.


----------



## pmdishwash (Jun 4, 2010)

What scares me the most about this is the potential liability that Chapters/clubs/members will be exposed to in the event that there is some terrible accident on the trails that they built. The main reason the premiums went through the roof was three or four claims made against the policy, two involving paralysis and one death. Without insurance that covers trail building (as opposed to maintenance, events, etc.), Chapters and clubs will be the attorney's primary target. Granted, without insurance, our pockets are pretty shallow, but then they'll just go after individual club members, from the club president down to the guy who came out that one Saturday and helped bench the hillside where the accident occured. To me, that's what's most concerning about all of this. If trailbuilding is really this difficult to insure, are we as volunteers really aware of the level of risk we're under?


----------



## ungod (Apr 16, 2011)

I got the email but apparently i didn't grasp the enormity of the situation. 

So if i understand correctly, there are two parts to the insurance: 1). liability for people out on club/charter rides and 2). liability protection for us for having built the trail (if someone unrelated to the club/charter injures themselves on a trail we built). 

Correct? We have mostly been interested in insurance for #1, but now that i think about it, insurance for #2 is probably a bigger concern.


----------



## thickfog (Oct 29, 2010)

pmdishwash said:


> What scares me the most about this is the potential liability that Chapters/clubs/members will be exposed to in the event that there is some terrible accident on the trails that they built. The main reason the premiums went through the roof was three or four claims made against the policy, two involving paralysis and one death. Without insurance that covers trail building (as opposed to maintenance, events, etc.), Chapters and clubs will be the attorney's primary target. Granted, without insurance, our pockets are pretty shallow, but then they'll just go after individual club members, from the club president down to the guy who came out that one Saturday and helped bench the hillside where the accident occured. To me, that's what's most concerning about all of this. If trailbuilding is really this difficult to insure, are we as volunteers really aware of the level of risk we're under?


Generally, volunteers are protected under the VPA: "The Volunteer Protection Act of 1997 pro-tects volunteers to some degree from civil liability. The act was designed to help reduce the cost of liability insurance and protect volunteers from lawsuits when they did not break a law or engage in misconduct. States can opt out of the federal statute if legisla-tures restore state laws on civil liability for volunteers."

U.S. Code › Title 42 › Chapter 139 › § 14503
42 U.S. Code § 14503 - Limitation on liability for volunteers

Current through Pub. L. 113-65.

(a) Liability protection for volunteers
Except as provided in subsections (b) and (d) of this section, no volunteer of a nonprofit organization or governmental entity shall be liable for harm caused by an act or omission of the volunteer on behalf of the organization or entity if-
(1) the volunteer was acting within the scope of the volunteer's responsibilities in the nonprofit organization or governmental entity at the time of the act or omission;
(2) if appropriate or required, the volunteer was properly licensed, certified, or authorized by the appropriate authorities for the activities or practice in the State in which the harm occurred, where the activities were or practice was undertaken within the scope of the volunteer's responsibilities in the nonprofit organization or governmental entity;
(3) the harm was not caused by willful or criminal misconduct, gross negligence, reckless misconduct, or a conscious, flagrant indifference to the rights or safety of the individual harmed by the volunteer; and
(4) the harm was not caused by the volunteer operating a motor vehicle, vessel, aircraft, or other vehicle for which the State requires the operator or the owner of the vehicle, craft, or vessel to-
(A) possess an operator's license; or
(B) maintain insurance.
(b) Concerning responsibility of volunteers to organizations and entities
Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect any civil action brought by any nonprofit organization or any governmental entity against any volunteer of such organization or entity.
(c) No effect on liability of organization or entity
Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect the liability of any nonprofit organization or governmental entity with respect to harm caused to any person.
(d) Exceptions to volunteer liability protection
If the laws of a State limit volunteer liability subject to one or more of the following conditions, such conditions shall not be construed as inconsistent with this section:
(1) A State law that requires a nonprofit organization or governmental entity to adhere to risk management procedures, including mandatory training of volunteers.
(2) A State law that makes the organization or entity liable for the acts or omissions of its volunteers to the same extent as an employer is liable for the acts or omissions of its employees.
(3) A State law that makes a limitation of liability inapplicable if the civil action was brought by an officer of a State or local government pursuant to State or local law.
(4) A State law that makes a limitation of liability applicable only if the nonprofit organization or governmental entity provides a financially secure source of recovery for individuals who suffer harm as a result of actions taken by a volunteer on behalf of the organization or entity. A financially secure source of recovery may be an insurance policy within specified limits, comparable coverage from a risk pooling mechanism, equivalent assets, or alternative arrangements that satisfy the State that the organization or entity will be able to pay for losses up to a specified amount. Separate standards for different types of liability exposure may be specified.
(e) Limitation on punitive damages based on actions of volunteers
(1) General rule
Punitive damages may not be awarded against a volunteer in an action brought for harm based on the action of a volunteer acting within the scope of the volunteer's responsibilities to a nonprofit organization or governmental entity unless the claimant establishes by clear and convincing evidence that the harm was proximately caused by an action of such volunteer which constitutes willful or criminal misconduct, or a conscious, flagrant indifference to the rights or safety of the individual harmed.
(2) Construction
Paragraph (1) does not create a cause of action for punitive damages and does not preempt or supersede any Federal or State law to the extent that such law would further limit the award of punitive damages.
(f) Exceptions to limitations on liability
(1) In general
The limitations on the liability of a volunteer under this chapter shall not apply to any misconduct that-
(A) constitutes a crime of violence (as that term is defined in section 16 of title 18) or act of international terrorism (as that term is defined in section 2331 of title 18) for which the defendant has been convicted in any court;
(B) constitutes a hate crime (as that term is used in the Hate Crime Statistics Act (28 U.S.C. 534 note));
(C) involves a sexual offense, as defined by applicable State law, for which the defendant has been convicted in any court;
(D) involves misconduct for which the defendant has been found to have violated a Federal or State civil rights law; or
(E) where the defendant was under the influence (as determined pursuant to applicable State law) of intoxicating alcohol or any drug at the time of the misconduct.
(2) Rule of construction
Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to effect subsection (a)(3) or (e) of this section.


----------



## robbiexor (Aug 22, 2011)

pmdishwash said:


> What scares me the most about this is the potential liability that Chapters/clubs/members will be exposed to in the event that there is some terrible accident on the trails that they built. The main reason the premiums went through the roof was three or four claims made against the policy, two involving paralysis and one death. Without insurance that covers trail building (as opposed to maintenance, events, etc.), Chapters and clubs will be the attorney's primary target. Granted, without insurance, our pockets are pretty shallow, but then they'll just go after individual club members, from the club president down to the guy who came out that one Saturday and helped bench the hillside where the accident occured. To me, that's what's most concerning about all of this. If trailbuilding is really this difficult to insure, are we as volunteers really aware of the level of risk we're under?


It can't be that easy to determine liability. For example:

Is the land owner responsible?
The person who approved the plans?
The person who designed the trail?
The guys who built the trail?
The crewleader who led the building of the trail but didn't design it?
The people who maintain the trail? Was it the land owner's responsibility to maintain the trail? The Land Manager's? The club's?

This is going to vary from club to club, and probably trail to trail if multiple networks fall under one club's responsibility and access.


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

I am not sure how much of a boon to the pro trail builders this will be. Parks are are strapped for money just to keep the grass cut. 

I met with one of our land managers about contacting Trail Solutions for some advice on our difficult soil. I was on a conference call with the LM and TS. We talked about the situation and needs. Just to visit the site and make recommendations the quote was $11,000. That went nowhere.

With the legal system bent to sue everyone you can for as much as possible we are all at risk. Our club has built a number of small bridges. Many were built to enhance safety, yet the insurance available from LAB or McKay treats them as "constructed trail features" and will not cover them. Between now and March 1 all pictures and references to construction or trail extensions and reroutes will be removed from our web site. They are an invitation for a lawsuit.


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

2bfluid said:


> Can anyone chime in on whether SORBA lost their insurance? Unless I am mistaken, it was a separate policy. If it wasn't cancelled or dropped, then it seems that would be the best place to start.


The SORBA web site shows the same certificate the rest of us received. So they are relying on IMBA too. 
http://sorba.org/sites/default/files/dmdocuments/Insurance/SORBA_Insurance-Certificate_2014.pdf

Insurance is getting too expensive for them. I found this information in their Nov. 2013 BOD meeting minutes:

"As insurance costs continue to rise, SORBA finds it more and more difficult to pay chapters' insurance. All other IMBA chapters pay their own insurance bill, but SORBA pays for its chapters. The Board voted to recommend that IMBA raise its membership dues to cover the cost of insurance for all chapters."


----------



## splitter_66 (Oct 19, 2004)

kapusta said:


> Actually, if what you are suggesting is true it would be a potential boost for ALL professional builders.
> 
> However, the suggestion that this situation is somehow a financial plus for IMBA is simply ridiculous.


IMBA chapters are contractually required to contract Trail Solutions for any professional trail work.

IMBA clubs seem to be free to contract with professional trail builders.


----------



## c0nsumer (Mar 17, 2008)

splitter_66 said:


> IMBA chapters are contractually required to contract Trail Solutions for any professional trail work.


This is wrong. For reference, here is our chapter charter and professional trail work is not mentioned.


----------



## splitter_66 (Oct 19, 2004)

c0nsumer said:


> This is wrong. For reference, here is our chapter charter and professional trail work is not mentioned.


That seems true is the case of Clinton River. I feel that most chapters and trail contractors consider #18 to be the requirement clause. You have to consult with IMBA for approval before hiring a contractor.


----------



## centaur11 (Jan 26, 2011)

FYI for anyone thinking that the League of American Bicyclists will insure you. NOT if you are a Mountain Bike club.
This is going to be a tough couple of weeks sorting out this nightmare. Without GL insurance we as well will be put out of the business of constructing trails. Really crappy timing! I can't believe IMBA didn't see this coming a couple of years ago.

Anyone know if McKay insurance will cover us for man made structures built in the past? I understand they don't cover design or construction of new trails but I do hope the old stuff is ok.


----------



## c0nsumer (Mar 17, 2008)

splitter_66 said:


> That seems true is the case of Clinton River. I feel that most chapters and trail contractors consider #18 to be the requirement clause. You have to consult with IMBA for approval before hiring a contractor.


Yep -- I get that. But a requirement that contractors be run by IMBA is FAR different from a predefined requirement that a single vendor be used. Can you cite other chapters' charters that call out Trail Solutions by name?


----------



## 2bfluid (Aug 17, 2008)

Trail solutions usually is not the actual builder. That work is subbed out to professional trail builders. They primarily design and do some of the project management.


----------



## splitter_66 (Oct 19, 2004)

c0nsumer said:


> Yep -- I get that. But a requirement that contractors be run by IMBA is FAR different from a predefined requirement that a single vendor be used. Can you cite other chapters' charters that call out Trail Solutions by name?


Not without throwing good people who probably made an assumption under the bus.

I will take my lick an move on.


----------



## thumpduster (Nov 19, 2008)

For transparency's sake I'll start by saying I own a business that specializes in natural surface trail development. I'm also on the board of our local IMBA chapter and have been involved with many different non-profits over the years.

While I'm surprised with the speed at which this is happening, the fact that it _is_ happening doesn't surprise me one bit. For clubs- many of whom are essentially doing defacto professional work- to have gotten a bargain on this level of coverage for so long is the real surprise. Those shades of gray between volunteer and professional look very different to an insurer or professional than they do to a volunteer. And, in this distinction lies our quandary.

Here's the real problem: you guys (and gals) are too good!

Honestly, at some point for many of you the passion of building trails likely overtook your passion of riding trails. You started with showing up at a work day, soon you were leading work days. Perhaps you did (or hosted) the TCC workshops, went to conferences, traded notes with your trail building peers in other groups. What ever, how ever, you sought knowledge to become a better trail builder. And, you built better quality trails. Some of you have LM's providing heavy equipment for you to use, or maybe your group is using its expertise as an auxiliary enterprise- you build for a small fee in one area to pay for the construction in another. Enterprise units are common, that's why IMBA has Trail Solutions and the USFS has Trails Unlimited.

It comes down to how you define *Professional*. 
How do we define who we are as the organizations that we belong to?
1. We advocate and work our butts off for the the thing we love.
2. We are a not-for-profit entity.
So, in the light of #2, and even in a legal IRS-ish sense, it can be said that we aren't pro builders because we don't make money on this. We have day jobs, right?

But, the law has another way of defining professionals. 
From my perspective it's those who perform specialized tasks that require a specific training and whose quality of work can impact the well-being or rights of other people. Think doctors, lawyers, engineers, surveyors, elevator technicians, etc. In most states these are defined as professions, regulated as such, and carry the same liability, even if the person is working without pay.

If you look like a professional trail builder, smell like one, act like one, have been trained like one, build bridges and structures like one, and often do as good of work as one, well..... just maybe.... a lawyer might confuse you for one.

At that point you have litigation costs. Your waivers, blanket volunteer protections, etc. are nearly worthless, might as well be printed on toilet paper. 
Maybe you win in court, but the lawyers on both sides still get paid. And at the end of the day that's what this is about.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

centaur11 said:


> FYI for anyone thinking that the League of American Bicyclists will insure you. NOT if you are a Mountain Bike club.
> This is going to be a tough couple of weeks sorting out this nightmare. Without GL insurance we as well will be put out of the business of constructing trails. Really crappy timing! I can't believe IMBA didn't see this coming a couple of years ago.
> 
> Anyone know if McKay insurance will cover us for man made structures built in the past? I understand they don't cover design or construction of new trails but I do hope the old stuff is ok.


Nevermind, I want to double check what I think before responding.


----------



## Harlan (Apr 6, 2007)

An element to this that I came to understand today is that the insistence of IMBA to package their trail building (contractor) insurance with the rest of their coverage offerings is what is causing the issue. The high claims are from that side of the policy. I'm an ICP coach certified through IMBA and they offered a very appealing insurance policy. So now I'm scrambling to find insurance for my business to continue operating. 

I protest the implication that IMBA was giving fair warning of this happening. Their tone in the letters about extension of coverage did not give a sense that we were about to be left in the cold. The gravity of the situation was not well conveyed. If it had been, the conversations here would involve more exchange of options that people had decided to start exploring.

If the warning had been given, insurance agents might have foreseen a business opportunity on the horizon and made moves to prepare for it like any person practicing good business would. 

As it is now, I've been calling around and I had one agency say they are on hold from creating any new policies until they see what happens with the overall program.


----------



## c0nsumer (Mar 17, 2008)

Harlan said:


> I protest the implication that IMBA was giving fair warning of this happening. Their tone in the letters about extension of coverage did not give a sense that we were about to be left in the cold. The gravity of the situation was not well conveyed. If it had been, the conversations here would involve more exchange of options that people had decided to start exploring.


Hear hear. As a chapter leader I felt like the extensions were just business as normal, a slight wrinkle in getting things straightened out. If we'd known months ago that we needed to begin shopping for our own policies, we would have started months ago. Two weeks out, frankly, sucks.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I'm not sure if this will be helpful, but it might be worth contacting Lora at ISU Westlake. Her agency handles a LOT of bike industry insurance (including my own liability insurance) and it's possible that she would be able to write policies for trailbuilders/trailbuilding.

ISU Insurance Services of Westlake | Specialty Insurance Provider

-Walt


----------



## noreastn (Jun 27, 2009)

Walt,

Thanks for the lead. I just had a nice conversation with the folks at Westlake. They are going to work up a quote for our club. They felt comfortable with group rides and club events. However, she wasn't sure how trail building & maintenance would factor in to the equation. They are going to investigate some carriers and get back to us. 

I'll let everyone know what I find out. 

Nick
Pocono Bike Club


----------



## gt2brew (Mar 23, 2006)

noreastn said:


> Walt,
> 
> Thanks for the lead. I just had a nice conversation with the folks at Westlake. They are going to work up a quote for our club. They felt comfortable with group rides and club events. However, she wasn't sure how trail building & maintenance would factor in to the equation. They are going to investigate some carriers and get back to us.
> 
> ...


Cool, please do. I sent them an email just now. I heard from McKay today and they state they are not taking on any IMBA clubs that they didn't already insure. McKay also stated that they are trying to get a hold of IMBA....hmmm


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Lora is used to weird insurance needs - if she can insure some random hack in a garage building custom bikes I'd think she can come up with something for a club doing trail work. 

Let us know what you find out. Hell, maybe IMBA should be talking with her...

-Walt


----------



## sick4surf (Feb 4, 2004)

I have been looking into these guys for insurance coverage. I interviewed them and told them all that we do and they didn't say no yet. Since time is of the essence I will provide this link for others left searching for alternatives:
Pachner & Associates


----------



## Cotharyus (Jun 21, 2012)

Regarding the question "Does this affect SORBA" - I know of at least two SORBA clubs that it does affect. I'm not sure if that means it affects all of them or not. I suspect there's a good chance some of them use different insurance.


----------



## 2bfluid (Aug 17, 2008)

Spoke with our chapter president last night and it affects all of us. We found coverage for $1000/year. I will find out who its through and post it as soon as I get the info.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

Still waiting to hear back from one potential insurer. The other one rubbed me the wrong way. I will continue to seek out other options for all of us.


----------



## centaur11 (Jan 26, 2011)

I spoke to McKay today and they are actively looking for an insurer to help us all out. Although they don't expect anything to happen by March 1st. At this time they are only taking contact info from clubs interested in a GL policy. No new policies are being written for any club that is or has been involved in any trail building. Also of note: McKay insurance will want a "no loss" document from your present insurance before you can be considered a candidate for insurance through them.

They have been bombarded with calls from frantic clubs since last week. And until last week they knew nothing about the IMBA insurance issue. They felt that had IMBA reached out to them earlier then they might have avoided this mess.
To my thinking this is a major snafu that "could" be the beginning of the end of IMBA. I do hope for the sake of all clubs and trail builders out there that "my" thinking does not come true.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

We had our club meeting last night (club for 27 years, IMBA club for many, chapter for about one year). Our analysis is that insurance is the only benefit we have gotten from IMBA, we gained no members becoming a chapter, as they stated we would. We see no reason to be a chapter or even an IMBA club with no insurance, since we have a far stronger reputation locally than IMBA.

We have MOUs with some Land Managers that require us to have insurance, so if we have get that on our own, then why pay IMBA for getting nothing in return?


----------



## Dirt Engineer (Sep 12, 2012)

2bfluid said:


> Can anyone chime in on whether SORBA lost their insurance? Unless I am mistaken, it was a separate policy. If it wasn't cancelled or dropped, then it seems that would be the best place to start.


From the emails I've been getting form Robin and Tom Sauret it appears their insurance is one and the same as IMBA's. SORBA chapter insurance expires at the end of this month. Tom Sauret is diligently looking for alternatives.


----------



## noreastn (Jun 27, 2009)

Just received an email from Frazier Insurance: Unfortunately we do not have a market for cycling at this time and are unable to even recommend any other carriers that might. As a result we will have to decline quotation, but we appreciate you thinking of Frazier Insurance. 

Nick
Pocono Bike Club


----------



## El Gringo Guapo (Aug 8, 2007)

It really calls IMBA's priorities into question. The email sent cited cost as the factor: “IMBA can not afford to fund the difference of a $400,000 premium, less the amount reimbursed from clubs and chapters, that would likely be $200,000.” The email further stated that our insurance would expire February 28. We received the email February 13, giving us 15 days to go it alone and find our own solution.

From IMBA’s email, I understand that the Insurance Program, which covers the IMBA clubs for building and riding activities, would cost IMBA $200,000 per year. IMBA deemed that to be too expensive.

According to IMBA’s 2012 Form 990 (available on its site), IMBA had $4.5M in revenue (with $1.1M coming from membership fees and $1.37M coming from trail consulting). Expenses were as follows:

$2.2M for compensation, pensions, and other employee benefits for IMBA’s officers, directors, and employees.
$761K for travel, occupancy, conferences, conventions, and meetings.
$625K for administrative expenses including $326K for membership printing/postage, $156K for office expenses, and $106K for legal and accounting services.

Running the organization consumes $3.6M or 78% of revenue received in 2012. Of the remaining funds:

$377K was spent on fees for “other” services rendered by non-employees.
$204K went to grants and other assistance to governments and organization.
$ 92K was spent on trail building and repair.
$ 88K was spent on insurance and, as far as I can tell, I believe $52K of that was the premium for the Insurance Program. Thus, I would estimate the delta to continue the Insurance Program to be ~$148K.

The brief description IMBA’s mission statement in its Form 990 is, “Encouraging low-impact riding, volunteer trailwork participation, cooperation among different trail user groups, grassroots advocacy, and innovative trail management solutions.”

So here’s the point:

No doubt $148K is a non-trivial sum of money. But it’s only 24% of what IMBA spends on adminstrative expenses, 19% of what it pays for travel and meetings, and a mere 7% of what IMBA pays in compensation and benfits.

However, that $148K provides the liability protection that unleases the creative trail building of the “more than 750 chapters, clubs, and patrols” that IMBA claims as its base. In terms of Return on Investment for enabling the mission of “volunteer trailwork” and “grassroots advocacy,” my opinion is that the $148K for insurance premiums to cover the thousands of club members plowing shovels into dirt is at least as important as the $761K spent on travel, occupancy, conferences, and meetings.


----------



## Joules (Oct 12, 2005)

El ****** Guapo said:


> However, that $148K provides the liability protection that unleases the creative trail building of the "more than 750 chapters, clubs, and patrols" that IMBA claims as its base. In terms of Return on Investment for enabling the mission of "volunteer trailwork" and "grassroots advocacy," my opinion is that the $148K for insurance premiums to cover the thousands of club members plowing shovels into dirt is at least as important as the $761K spent on travel, occupancy, conferences, and meetings.


This is shocking and disappointing. I haven't had an especially favorable view of IMBA lately, this just drives their reputation into the dirt (which we can't afford to dig in any more...)

For an organization that spends $326,000 sending out junk mail (in 2014, when there is absolutely no need or reason to print or mail anything to anyone ever), and $716,000 to go to conferences to say they can't foot ~$150,000 for something they agreed to previously, and is probably the single most important expense in accomplishing their claimed mission, that's just beyond the pale.


----------



## trailmap (Jan 11, 2005)

While there are some good points raised in the ******'s post, my understanding was that it was not just the increase in the price of the insurance, but it was also that the entire premium had to be paid up front. I am not a huge business expert, but I do understand that cash flow can often be a much bigger challenge than actual budgeting, so it may not be as simple as reviewing an annual budget to draw conclusions. It may simply be impossible to write a $400,000 check this month, especially if the price increase makes it difficult to predict how many clubs/chapters will use that avenue for insurance vs. finding their own coverage.


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

Looking at how IMBA spends money gives a sense of proportion. I don't think that using that matrix to weigh priorities gives the appropriate insight. That perspective leads to robbing Peter to pay Paul and squabbling over resources. 

IMBA is not the first business to buckle when finally confronted with real world operational costs. The insurance model for trail work was untenable at the price offered. That a few claims sunk the policy says so: insurance groups must be set up to handle claims, plain and simple. That is a primary fiduciary responsibility or it is a bizarre Ponzi scheme that fails.

What this says about IMBA is that they need to raise their price to its clients.

If groups must pay $1000 per year for trail building insurance and that amount, 750 chapters X $1000= $750,000, is aimed at IMBA, then the problem looks different.

Clients then must look anew at the IMBA deal. This is not so much a challenge to IMBA though they have some rethinking to do on many levels. It is more specifically a challenge to advocacy groups who were accustomed to managing with artifically lower costs. That part of their model must change.

There is yet another factor to consider, though: faith in IMBA.


----------



## El Gringo Guapo (Aug 8, 2007)

Maybe. But their balance sheet (2012, mind you) shows $775K in cash and savings, with an additional $644 in pledges and grants receivable, as well as an additional $279K in accounts receivable. 

No doubt, it's a challenge. My point is one of priorities. Not only is insurance critical to trail building activities, I estimate that it is probably the greatest single value-driver for clubs to affiliate with IMBA. I know that for our club, it was the sole reason we joined. Thus, I not only think that it's poor prioritization for return on investment for the MTB community, I think it's a bad business decision that will cost membership.


----------



## trailmap (Jan 11, 2005)

The other thing to remember is that the insurance issue wasn't a central part about IMBA or the chapter program. I know the central coast folks said it was for them, but that must be the exception. It was not a requirement that chapters get their insurance through the IMBA policy. Furthermore, that same coverage was available even if you weren't a chapter (although you needed to get the policy individually for the club). Our club got the RJF insurance a few years ago because it was better coverage than McKay. We only later (a year or two) decided to become a chapter, a decision nobody is second guessing. The insurance issue has/had nothing to do with this. The current crisis would have developed regardless.


----------



## pmdishwash (Jun 4, 2010)

This is a really interesting analysis, and, assuming all is accurate, one that should be brought to all Chapters' attention. I don't think there's a Chapter out there who wouldn't give up the grants (or the quarterly magazine, or the Trail Care Crew) if they could keep the insurance. If Chapters are required to find their own insurance for this year, I'm betting at least half will leave the program by next year. And I'm sure a lot of people won't re-up their IMBA memberships. To me, failure for IMBA to figure this out this year will result in massive changes to their current structure and quite possibly an end to the Chapter program altogether. I'm not anti-IMBA in the least, and I'm sure they're humble enough to realize this fact themselves.


----------



## trailmap (Jan 11, 2005)

I am finding these comments interesting, since as I pointed out in my post below that while getting insurance through IMBA was possible by the chapter program, it was not required, *and* it was possible to get the same insurance from the same carrier at the about the same price without being a chapter. I know because it is exactly what our club (now chapter) did.

I checked the chapter page (https://www.imba.com/chapter-program) and it doesn't even talk about insurance as a benefit (and I checked the wayback machine to see if the page had been edited since this crisis hit, and it hasn't).

So I don't understand how this impacts decisions on becoming a chapter. I think the benefits are huge, but that discussion doesn't belong in this thread.


----------



## pmdishwash (Jun 4, 2010)

You're right that their written benefits portion (at least on the websited) didn't include insurance as a "perk". However, for many clubs on the fence about becoming a Chapter, the insurance benefit was seen as deciding factor and was mentioned by Regional Directors as a benefit. Without IMBA having a blanket policy, non-Chapter clubs would never have gotten the rates they received. Everyone was benefitting from the Chapter program in that respect, even if they weren't a Chapter or never mentioned they were a Chapter when obtaining insurance. 

In the end, this isn't IMBA's fault, but I do think it will hurt the Chapter program pretty significantly. Large Chapters will no doubt continue to benefit from IMBA's back-office benefits. But smaller Chapters will begin to question the relationship, given that their membership logistics are easier to handle. It'll be hard to justify to members that they need to donate $30 (or whatever) to IMBA, but then chip in another $10, $15, $20 directly to the Chapter to make up the difference for insurance costs. Sure, it's small beans, but there are going to be people complaining, people questioning, and an inevitable struggle to maintain membership.


----------



## gopherhockey (Jun 3, 2004)

old_MTBer said:


> I am not sure how much of a boon to the pro trail builders this will be. Parks are are strapped for money just to keep the grass cut.


We are in a situation where we have built more trail than the land manager could possibly maintain if we weren't volunteering to do the work. Both parties know this and entered into it because we understand its been a long term partnership that has proven to work and that we all benefit... but in the back of their minds they understand if the day ever arrived that our club backed away (for whatever reason) they would be faced with more trail than they could manage.

If we can't meet the requirements of the land managers contract regarding insurance and amount, we are done... plain and simple.

This *could* result in closed trails. I'm quite certain its already going to mean less chapters, and ultimately less IMBA members... and quite certainly if we lose momentum our clubs could also lose memberships.

See where this is headed? I'm not sure they do.

Fortunately it sounds like our club will get to keep its coverage but at a cost to us. I hope for the sports sake everyone is able to find a solution.


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

I'm not sure I could divorce access to insurance from the list of assets available which attracted chapters, required or not. Items like insurance are a part of the presentation of facilities IMBA provides in a sort of 1-stop shopping fashion. 501c3 non-profit status, back office support, trail care, legal services, insurance, additional support.....all touted as value-added if not direct values for your groups money.

The chapter program benefits many kinds of organizations by offering support for pieces of the puzzle that are missing, even soup-to-nuts if needed. Who needs membership help if you have someone who can do it, or non profit status if you already have it, or insurance, or paper processing. Some groups either don't have the talent or perhaps the time to develop these assets. The facility and access to these features is definite selling point and they are presented that way; rightly so. This is work done so you don't have to reinvent the wheel.

To back away from seeing this is a value when it fails...one cannot have it both ways.


----------



## pmdishwash (Jun 4, 2010)

Out of curiousity, is anyone here considering closing trails if they're unable to secure adequate insurance for the spring (and/or beyond)? 

Say, for instance, your club/chapter built 10 miles of new singletrack last year. Assuming that you don't have some additional agreement with the landowner beyond permission to build and maintain the trail, I would think that a bulk of the liability would fall on the shoulders of the club/chapter in the event of an accident or incident anywhere along that 10 miles. Without insurance, how is a club going to deal with that? 

I'm more worried about that scenario than the prospect of not being able to build this upcoming season. It's one thing to not be able to build and ride new trails - it's another to not be able to ride at all. And are some of the more saavy and involved land managers going to catch wind of this insurance issue and close the trails themselves?


----------



## El Gringo Guapo (Aug 8, 2007)

Yes. Our MOA REQUIRES insurance. Without coverage for the features and a certificate naming the owner as an additional insured, we are in breach of our agreement for any type of access - building OR riding.

It was only in October that we engaged and discussed this with IMBA and then affiliated as a club. Since then, there have been several hundred dollars invested, as well as events scheduled; all of which are now at risk, especially given the very short notice of discontinuation. And yes, I take issue with those that say it was expected, because once the extensions began, we maintained verbal communication and were told that there were two viable options pending.

On a dark note, I really think this was a poor business decision because once clubs understand that the trails they've invested so much into are at risk of being closed and that the loss of insurance may put them in breach of their agreements, I'm not sure there won't be clubs that sue either (a) for the cost to cover under an alternative policy or (b) to recover value for the resources invested under determintal reliance on IMBA's offering of the program.

Please don't get me wrong - I'm not threatening or encouraging this. But I really don't think the full impact/consequences of this decision was fully comprhended.


----------



## zasyatkin (Jan 14, 2014)

Has anyone requested the insurance claims info from IMBA that resulted in such huge increases? I think it would be really beneficial to understand what happened in those cases.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

Insurance Update as of Feb. 20

IMBA's national insurance policy for chapters and supporting organizations will cease coverage at the end of this month.
We are in the process of negotiating replacement insurance.
Dear [email protected]
Earlier this month, IMBA contacted leaders of local mountain bike organizations in the United States about the pending elimination of a national insurance program that IMBA has endorsed in recent years.
Unfortunately, that program is no longer viable as IMBA's insurance broker, Marsh and MacLennan (formerly RJF), has not found an underwriter that is willing to support the program at affordable terms and cost.
IMBA staff is working very hard to find suitable replacements for a national insurance program. We have already interviewed nine potential brokers, with several additional interviews scheduled in upcoming days.
However, it's not likely a new program will be in place in time to avoid a lapse in coverage, given the current policy's expiration on Feb. 28.
The situation remains challenging. For the moment, here is some advice for locally based groups:
•IMBA chapters and clubs can continue to shop and find their own coverage. In some locations this coverage may be equally, or even more, affordable than the expiring national policy.
•For activities where proof of insurance is required, including group rides, skills instruction and volunteer trail work events, it may be possible to partner with another group, like a local road cycling club, to meet insurance requirements.
•In the case of trail work, the land manager may be willing waive the insurance requirement by having the individuals volunteer directly for them. This is being done now by several chapters, where the land manager has offered to indemnify the chapter's volunteers so trail work days can continue. 
•Social activities can still take place just as unsanctioned activity, meaning not organized by the chapter.
•There are options for chapters to secure one-off event coverage, including trail work events via the League of American Bicyclists, or through USA Cycling's broker, and possibly other brokers. IMBA is compiling a list of options and will publish it next week, or perhaps as soon as tomorow.
•Chapters and clubs shopping on their own, should NOT present to a broker their organization and core activity as "trail building" - unless of course they are truly doing professional trail building similar to IMBA's Trail Solutions program.
•If chapters are doing professional trail building, or engage in "operating" and "maintaining" trails and/or bike park facilities and they have written agreements with land managers to this effect, they will then need to either have general liability that includes products/completed operations coverage - though that coverage will be very expensive - or they should rewrite those agreements to better reflect the work as volunteer stewardship activities. 
The expiring national program became unsustainable and cost prohibitive for several reasons, including an increase in legal claims that name local mountain bike organizations, which drives up underwriting rates even despite the fact that many of these claims have been summarily dismissed. Another challenge has been that a significant number of clubs and chapters were unable or unwilling to participate in the national program, placing additional stress on those groups that remained in the group.
IMBA has every intention of replacing the outgoing national insurance program with a better one. Unfortunately this is not something that can be achieved immediately but we are doing everything in our power to speed the process.
On behalf of myself and IMBA, I sincerely apologize for the concern that this is causing many of our local groups.
Thanks for your attention, and please stay tuned for additional updates.
Sincerely,

Michael Van Abel
Executive Director


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

Again, I understand everyone is concerned, unhappy, and are trying to save their trail work season. PLEASE use this thread to provide RESULTS of what you have found in the way of potential insurance carriers. Thank you.


----------



## Mallet21 (Sep 24, 2013)

It'd be pretty interesting to take a look at the claims. Didn't realize people actually sue volunteer organizations.....only in 'merica


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

The lawyers don't care who they are suing. They just sue everyone they can find that may have something to do with an incident. It also may not be people who are initiating the suing. It is probably ambulance chasers or subrogation agents. 

We may never see the details of what caused this issue. We had to get a "loss run" for some insurance applications. That is the record of claims placed against your organization. We received this from M&M "Please note - loss runs are in the name of IMBA, with all clubs and coaches loss activity listed on them. Therefore, due to confidentially issues, we cannot release the loss run documents to individual clubs/insured’s." The email included a statement that our club did not incur any losses.

Even with a completely clean record we have not received a hint of getting coverage. But we keep on hoping. I think that IMBA let us all down. They should have started shopping around back in October for that "just in case" situation that M&M could not find another underwriter. I feel like the many are being punished for the sins of a few.


----------



## trailmap (Jan 11, 2005)

In response to posts 105 and 106, here are some excerpts from the IMBA e-mail we got last week:



> How did we get here? Some of you may be aware, but IMBA clubs and chapters were hit with four lawsuits last year, including two involving paralysis and one death. Even though there has been no judgment against the policy, the fact they the cases have gone to court is a black mark against the policy.


So Mallet - there were four claims, but none of the people suing won their suits. Things like assumption of risk doctrine and recreational use statutes generally make it hard to win such suits.



> After more than 6 months of negotiating, IMBA has NOT been able to create a national insurance policy for our chapters and clubs. Our current policy extension is up at the end of February and we do not expect to get another extension.


So Old-MTBer - 6 months ago would put things around September. Perhaps they should have gone to someone other than M&M/RJF. Hindsight is always 20/20. Note, the agents are actually doing "shopping", that is what agents do I think, but I guess you could also shop agents as well. I am no insurance expert.


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

Boulder Pilot said:


> Again, I understand everyone is concerned, unhappy, and are trying to save their trail work season. PLEASE use this thread to provide RESULTS of what you have found in the way of potential insurance carriers. Thank you.


This sort of statement is an attempt to cut off broad discussion. I don't particularly like people trying to handle me like this and resent it. Thank you.

I don't care, topically, how people use this forum to express their thoughts on the IMBA insurance event. For all of the value people seem to have for IMBA as expressed on many other threads this issue begs discussion from many angles and features. I only hope for civility and clarity.


----------



## Visicypher (Aug 5, 2004)

BP - Try HD Insurance outta Boise, ID. My understanding is that they insure Alpine Bike Parks. They also handle non-profit orgs.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

Thank you Visicypher, will do first thing in the morning and report back here with what I find out.

Have a great day Mike.


----------



## Ridnparadise (Dec 14, 2007)

pmdishwash said:


> Out of curiousity, is anyone here considering closing trails if they're unable to secure adequate insurance for the spring (and/or beyond)?
> 
> Say, for instance, your club/chapter built 10 miles of new singletrack last year. Assuming that you don't have some additional agreement with the landowner beyond permission to build and maintain the trail, I would think that a bulk of the liability would fall on the shoulders of the club/chapter in the event of an accident or incident anywhere along that 10 miles. Without insurance, how is a club going to deal with that?
> 
> I'm more worried about that scenario than the prospect of not being able to build this upcoming season. It's one thing to not be able to build and ride new trails - it's another to not be able to ride at all. And are some of the more saavy and involved land managers going to catch wind of this insurance issue and close the trails themselves?


This may be a time when mountain bike riders and trail volunteers have to work together. There are a few options:

Say to land managers; "either you cover us including retrospectively or we walk" and rogue trail building blooms
Say nothing, build on and see what happens
Close everything you have ever built and surrender to insurance fraud and fear of your own kind

I am not in the USofA and I do not face the same issue. Our LM covers us as "employees" while and only while we are doing authorised work, whether repairing or building new trail, or doing emergency repairs. If I were in your positions, I would ask them to cover us and try to avoid option one. We have a good relationship with our LM and essentially identical goals for the trail system; those revolving around increasing public access and recreation. Hopefully that is as far as things would go and I hope it works for you, especially those working with multiple LMs.

Option 2, the suck it and see may work here, but it tastes bad. I prefer rogue building.

Fu(# option 3. Under no circumstance should we roll over as a collective, traditional, valid and positive user group. It may not be Kiev, but WE are more important than any insurance rort. Getting this parasitic and poisonous industry out of our lives and I say that with respect, because criminal industry is closer to the truth, has to happen. We deserve better than being responsible to and making decisions based on risk assessed by corporates making money from risk! As Sir Richard Branson recently said about something else: "It's like having a bleeding competition with the blood bank. You can't win."

In the end I would be very surprised if land managers do not re-evaluate their real insurance risk. If you don't believe so, then say goodbye to your freedom to enjoy the land and enjoy yourself. They already take money for your health, possessions, shelter, life, death and soon your freedom will belong to insurance companies. This thread suggests it already does!


----------



## centaur11 (Jan 26, 2011)

pmdishwash said:


> Out of curiousity, is anyone here considering closing trails if they're unable to secure adequate insurance for the spring (and/or beyond)?
> 
> Say, for instance, your club/chapter built 10 miles of new singletrack last year. Assuming that you don't have some additional agreement with the landowner beyond permission to build and maintain the trail, I would think that a bulk of the liability would fall on the shoulders of the club/chapter in the event of an accident or incident anywhere along that 10 miles. Without insurance, how is a club going to deal with that?
> 
> I'm more worried about that scenario than the prospect of not being able to build this upcoming season. It's one thing to not be able to build and ride new trails - it's another to not be able to ride at all. And are some of the more saavy and involved land managers going to catch wind of this insurance issue and close the trails themselves?


We have about 25 miles of trail to maintain with two LM's and YES we will have to close both if we can't find insurance by the end of next week.


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

Is this for trail building and maintenance only,but still can use trails?


----------



## trailmap (Jan 11, 2005)

Ridnparadise said:


> I am not in the USofA and I do not face the same issue. Our LM covers us as "employees" while and only while we are doing authorised work, whether repairing or building new trail, or doing emergency repairs. If I were in your positions, I would ask them to cover us and try to avoid option one. We have a good relationship with our LM and essentially identical goals for the trail system; those revolving around increasing public access and recreation.


We have that too in the USofA. The thing is, that protects the volunteers when they out building the trail. So when you cut your foot swinging a pulaski you have some coverage.

That is not what this insurance crisis is about. The trouble finding insurance is for coverage of the volunteers *after* the trail is built, when someone is actually out riding on it.

If there is a lawsuit, the LM is probably getting sued, too. One potential LM, who really wanted us to build trails on their park, including buying tools etc. in anticipation, well in the end it turned out we couldn't because the paper pushers in the county hall wanted us to indemnify the LM. In other words, if there was a suit, then not only would we get sued, but we would also have to cover the part of the suit that went against the LM. Needless to say we didn't sign that, and not trails got built there. That really sucked. The only person happy was the paper pusher in the county hall.


----------



## pmdishwash (Jun 4, 2010)

It will close existing trails to riding. Many agreements with land managers require clubs (or anyone building trails) to have liability insurance. Even if the land managers don't require the insurance, clubs are going to be putting themselves at significant financial risk without insurance and will close the trails themselves. Like all things legal, it only takes one precedent to be set. If someone is injured on a trail and is successful in suing a club for negligence, those suits will pop up more and more every year. And insurance costs will go up every year, too.

Right now this issue is being addressed by the few people who are willing to do the dirty work to keep mountain biking going (i.e., those active in their local clubs/chapters). I'm sure we're all looking forward to the complaining that will happen this summer when trails are closed.


----------



## randyjackson (Feb 26, 2013)

Moved original post to the "IMBA Complaint/ Gloat" thread....


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

zasyatkin said:


> Has anyone requested the insurance claims info from IMBA that resulted in such huge increases? I think it would be really beneficial to understand what happened in those cases.


Yes. But they are cases that are in various states of pending, so it is not a very good idea to be going public with all the details, yet.

If you are someone in your chapter that needs to understand more, contact one of your reps. Mine was very helpful.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

> Again, I understand everyone is concerned, unhappy, and are trying to save their trail work season. PLEASE use this thread to provide RESULTS of what you have found in the way of potential insurance carriers. Thank you.


Agreed:thumbsup:

In an effort to keep this thread constructive, I've started another for everything else regarding this issue (who's fault it is, whether IMBA is going under, what IMBA should be doing/should have done, etc:

http://forums.mtbr.com/trail-buildi...ut-imbas-insurance-problem-thread-900347.html

Please vent or gloat there.
Thanks


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

I've seen a few questions regarding liability for trails already built by the club. I too was very concerned about this. This might help (someone please correct me if I am wrong, here)....

The current (about to expire) insurance policy is an "occurrence" based policy. That means coverage is based on when the allegedly negligent act occurred, not the claim for injury (that would be a "claims-made" policy).

I am more familiar with this in regards to building, but I assume the same idea works here: Lets say you have a deck building business, and you run it for 5 years. Then you sell the business, or just stop doing it. You cancel the insurance. Two years later, one of your decks fail and there is an injury claim. If you had an occurrence based policy, you would still be covered by it, because the act you are getting sued for occurred while you were insured. If you had a claims-made policy, you would be screwed, as the claim was made (thus, "claims-made") outside the coverage period (you can buy extra coverage to cover this, but that is not the point, here)

My understanding is that since our current policy is occurrence-based, clubs will continue to be covered for trial work done during the coverage period of the policy.

In the case of our club, we may need to stop club-sponsored trail building, but we should be covered for the stuff we built over the past year or so. As far as I can tell, there is no reason for us to close down those trails (they are not ours to close down anyway). 

Of course, there are plenty of other circumstances, like if there is some on-going maintenance agreement that keeps the trails open. I don't know enough about those to comment.


----------



## Mallet21 (Sep 24, 2013)

trailmap said:


> In response to posts 105 and 106, here are some excerpts from the IMBA e-mail we got last week:
> 
> So Mallet - there were four claims, but none of the people suing won their suits. Things like assumption of risk doctrine and recreational use statutes generally make it hard to win such suits.


Wow!! That pretty much explains the premium bump. I had no idea trail building was that dangerous.


----------



## trailmap (Jan 11, 2005)

It's not from building. It's from riding. 

That said, a trail volunteer for a hiking group did get killed on a trail work day in New York State a couple years ago. But that's not what this is about.


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

You are entirely correct about the occurrence/claims-made issue, and that this is a positive thing for the situation we're in now. 

I'm working on the next communication to IMBA groups (following yesterday's message, quoted earlier in this thread). It will be distributed early next week. We are still discussing alternative arrangements for a national program with multiple brokers and pushing them to provide possible solutions in the shortest possible time frame. 

One issue that is coming up a lot is that many local mountain bike groups have entered agreements with land managers that place an undue amount of liability exposure on the chapter/club because we have agreed to insure the trails. This is an area where IMBA will provide more guidance, because it has led all of us into an untenable (and unaffordable) situation. 

Let me put it this way: If a local hiking or equestrian group offers to a land manager that they are wiling to perform volunteer stewardship on trails, does the land manager ask them to take on the bulk of the liability exposure? Usually not, and when land managers do suggest this the other user groups may decline to take on more liability than they can afford to cover. 

But mountain bikers have developed a mentality that because we are the new kids on the block -- and because we really, really want to build the particular kind of trails that we want to ride -- we need to do everything possible to convince the land manager to say yes to our offers to help with trail work. That strategy created many successes. But the price of our user-group's generosity is rising very steeply. IMBA's goal is to offer solutions that will allow our groups to continue creating trail work success stories, but some serious reworking of the insurance element has to be put in place first.


----------



## pmdishwash (Jun 4, 2010)

Thanks for clearing up this occurrence/claims-made differentiation. I'm sure a lot of clubs are going to be very relieved to hear that work done in the past (while under the insurance plan) is still covered.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

I talked to USA Cycling today, as well as their insurance carrier, Willis Insurance for more details of the policy. They (Willis) do not cover anything that leaves the trail any different than you found it in any way. When I pressed for details, it would seem that this would include maintenance.


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

The original post says:

"IMBA insurance ending
A place to share situations, solutions, questions, etc. for dealing with the potential end of a national IMBA insurance program."

Understanding solutions includes finding insurance but does not exclude evaluation of the circumstance and how it effects a relationship with IMBA. This begs discussion and critique and can reveal some interesting fundamentals. And that is challenging.

Part and parcel of the IMBA insurance issue are issues of faith, goodwill, business models, and an appreciation of things going forward. These are all vital to making decisions about continuing a relationship with IMBA or not, especially if new sources of insurance effect that relationship. Examination of perceived frailties _are_ disturbing.

To suggest that ideas which are not totally supportive of IMBA or not simply Insurance sources is "complaining or gloating" is disrespectful of the process of discussion and dismissive of opinions valuable to understanding and critique. Sneering is not constructive.

I find this forum's tendency to guard against total support for IMBA disturbing. *Advocacy is much larger than IMBA* and advocacy has to meet the challenges of building community often amidst resistance based in burn-out, disappointment, isolation or ignorance.

IMBA is losing member groups and chapters by its own admission. There is nothing good about that. Understanding the resistance that causes that, key to bringing more folks into (or back into) the tent, only happens if we get to hear about it. To denigrate and dismiss input because it is inconvenient is to give us _all_ short shrift in managing the challenges of advocacy.

If advocacy were simply making nice and kumbaya it would be much easier. Working with land managers is one thing but getting mtb'ers to step up and help out is quite another. If we had the 40,000 mtb-ers in the Bay area solidly behind our work things would be quite different. Understanding the resistance and how to manage it, this is the really hard work.

Sneering at those at the margins of advocacy is destructive to our work.


----------



## noreastn (Jun 27, 2009)

I called for more information about USA's Cycling Insurance. It doesn't cover trail work. Here is the email I received when I asked specifically about trail work: 

The underwriter is not comfortable with the trail construction part of your club’s operations. This is not a ‘typical’ club activity and the insurer is not willing to extend coverage under this program for those operations. The program offered through USAC is a very specific program with respect to activities and coverage available, and as such is very inexpensive. The pricing is on the application that USAC posts on their website.

Nick
Pocono Bike Club


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

Berkeley Mike said:


> The original post says:
> 
> "IMBA insurance ending
> A place to share situations, solutions, questions, etc. for dealing with the potential end of a national IMBA insurance program."
> ...


This sort of input is quite valuable. So much so that there is another thread created just for it. Such contributions will be welcomed with open arms.
http://forums.mtbr.com/trail-buildi...ut-imbas-insurance-problem-thread-900347.html


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

It is back-handed and the effect of the form's disposition is clear. My point has been made.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

So we are getting censorship as advocates and dirt workers as to what is ok and not permitted in a thread? 

This loss of IMBA insurance affects all of us affiliated in any way with IMBA, as members, IMBA clubs, IMBA chapters. We have many reasons why we joined IMBA on any level, and why we may leave, even when we prefer to stay, but giving money to IMBA when we do not get equal support and benefits is silly.

How do we understand this whole concept? By only leaving part of the picture here? Pfffft..........


----------



## Visicypher (Aug 5, 2004)

slocaus said:


> So we are getting censorship as advocates and dirt workers as to what is ok and not permitted in a thread?


Last I checked, I haven't deleted any posts. And yes, I am the moderator for this Trail Building/Advocacy Forum.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

Visicypher said:


> Last I checked, I haven't deleted any posts. And yes, I am the moderator for this Trail Building/Advocacy Forum.


Sorry, I meant @kapusta attempts to move posts to the Complaints / Gloats thread; frequently linking to that thread instead of letting this one run. That seems to be attempted moderation / censorship by someone not a true moderator.


----------



## HypNoTic (Jan 30, 2007)

I don't know if this apply to the States, but Oasis Insurance is still effective in Canada and cover all the needs of bike clubs, including paid staff doing trail work with machines. This was confirmed 21/02/2014 with the broker and the issuer.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

slocaus said:


> Sorry, I meant @kapusta attempts to move posts to the Complaints / Gloats thread; frequently linking to that thread instead of letting this one run. That seems to be attempted moderation / censorship by someone not a true moderator.


Censorship?

I built you a stage.


----------



## noreastn (Jun 27, 2009)

I just sent them an email. I'll post their response. Thanks.


----------



## pinkrobe (Jan 30, 2004)

HypNoTic said:


> I don't know if this apply to the States, but Oasis Insurance is still effective in Canada and cover all the needs of bike clubs, including paid staff doing trail work with machines. This was confirmed 21/02/2014 with the broker and the issuer.


That was expected, but thank you for confirming it. My club is still looking for alternative insurance options just in case. I'll post whatever we find.


----------



## El Gringo Guapo (Aug 8, 2007)

I spoke to a broker yesterday who has given me one of the most valuable analyses to date. He is familiar with bike parks, clubs, etc. and indicated that there is little financial incentive to cover a club for trail building/maintenance activities. His advice was to get another "aggregator" to pool as many clubs as possible under a tent and then approach the carriers for a policy with a higher premium (based on the numbers) to be spread across the clubs.

As of this morning, we still have not found a solution. We would certainly be open to grouping together with other clubs. Maybe THAT should be another thread? The opt-in insurance thread?


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

El ******, this is the purpose for this thread. You, I & others are actively seeking a solution to find an alternative insurance policy that will allow us to work un-interupted. I have been contacted by 2 potential carriers and will hopefully have info to share on Monday. I'm also sending emails to many other companies this weekend and will call them on Monday.

There's no censorship going on in this thread. I'm not an IMBA fanboy. But I'm trying to find insurance, not just for my association, but for everyone else that may benefit. Having to read through countless posts that are not focused on finding immediate insurance just makes this task more difficult, that is all. Cheers.


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

I contacted 7 agents/agencies last week. Received a proposal late Friday. Not too sure about it. They asked for all sorts of documentation and the third line in the proposal is Re:Hiking. The rest of the policy reads more like it is for a softball team. Like exclusion for cheer leading pyramid higher than 2 1/2 people. Just doesn't sound right. That was from Pachner & Associates which I found on the IMBA spreadsheet. I may question them some more on Monday.

There is also some kind of conference call Monday by an agency on the IMBA spreadsheet.
Associated Agencies Inc

Call Monday Feb 24 2pm Central Time - Option for chapters and clubs for individual policy and can bind by March 1

Call in number: 888-755-5687 code 8474273501#


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

Boulder Pilot said:


> Having to read through countless posts that are not focused on finding immediate insurance just makes this task more difficult, that is all. Cheers.


The task _is_ more difficult than just finding insurance. It encounters faith, commitment, trust, risk, donated dollars, and all around a task replete with other administrative difficulties. It is not a simple mechanical process.


----------



## noreastn (Jun 27, 2009)

Oasis Insurance does not provide coverage in the U.S. I just received an email from them.

Nick


----------



## CharacterZero (May 19, 2004)

old_MTBer said:


> I...ike exclusion for cheer leading pyramid higher than 2 1/2 people.


This is just bullshit. We all know that a cheer leading pyramid of 2 people is fine for beginners, but for more advanced participants, we want higher pyramids. 
This should be non-negotiable and a deal breaker if they cannot comply.

Honestly, this entire situation is a bummer. Good to know good people are on it. Keep up the good work, ******, boulder and all.


----------



## El Gringo Guapo (Aug 8, 2007)

What IMBA spreadsheet? We never received anything.


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

El ****** Guapo said:


> What IMBA spreadsheet? We never received anything.


This was not sent, it is on the IMBA web site. Log in and go to resources. Click on Liability and Insurance and a 2014 Update will be in the menu. Once in the update page look for "in this document" and click there and the spreadsheet will open.


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

The info in the Google spread sheet is being updated today and will be sent to all chapter/club leaders in e-mail form tomorrow.


----------



## El Gringo Guapo (Aug 8, 2007)

Weird. Is this only available to Chapters? I'm in there right now and I don't see a 2014 update. I really wish IMBA was more proactive in helping the affiliate clubs figure this out. Good grief.


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

I am looking at it now and we are not a chapter. I am an IMBA member and our club is an affiliate. But that is not required as far as I know.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

The conference call with the rep from Associated Agencies, Inc. left me in a pretty good mood. Sounds like this might well be what we are looking for, including trail building.

Chapters should be getting the information about this soon. If you don't have this by tonight, get on your regional director about it, it is being disseminated primarily through them. Turn around time on this needs to be pretty fast, March 1 is the Sat.

I does look like it will be more money. With the ballpark range he was giving (nothing firm as it will vary a bit from chapter to chapter) sounds like our rates will roughly double. But every case will be different.


----------



## noreastn (Jun 27, 2009)

Does anyone from today's call have Lee's email address? I wrote it down but it must have been wrong. I received an email back saying it was undeliverable. 

Thanks,
Nick


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

That anyone is coming forward to take this on is a positive step. The cost doubling is within what some folks predicted. Next, is getting our heads around adjusting costs to membership and dealing with that fallout.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

noreastn said:


> Does anyone from today's call have Lee's email address? I wrote it down but it must have been wrong. I received an email back saying it was undeliverable.
> 
> Thanks,
> Nick


PM sent.


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

The cost is very near what our club has been paying through IMBA ($9/member). That coverage included trail maintenance. Clubs reporting rides only without trail maintenance got a lower rate.

I received the information from Lee. The application has a lot of questions that do not apply to MTB clubs. Have to be creative filling it in.

[email protected]


----------



## Megashnauzer (Nov 2, 2005)

the cost doubling is out of our price range. what options are there if you opt out of insurance? disband the club?


----------



## c0nsumer (Mar 17, 2008)

Megashnauzer said:


> the cost doubling is out of our price range. what options are there if you opt out of insurance? disband the club?


I don't completely know your situation and I don't speak with any more authority than an individual who is an IMBA chapter board member, but your chapter charter likely requires you to hold insurance. Thus, you risk being kicked out of the IMBA chapter program without insurance.

If you have MOUs with land managers, they likely require insurance. Those could be invalidated.

All of your board members / volunteers would no longer be covered by the insurance, and thus any work that you've done can't be continued unless you're willing to work / operate without insurance. This could get really, really expensive personally.

We're fortunate that we can absorb a doubling in cost, but we don't want to do it for long. I'm working on putting in applications today.


----------



## Megashnauzer (Nov 2, 2005)

we had heartburn about getting insurance initially but our club was growing and our trails were getting more expansive. we did a couple of events to help foot the bill but most of us were not in it for the money. we just wanted to keep it simple: ride and work on trails. we've had the club going for 14 years but i'm all about shutting it down and going back to having a loose group of anonymous people that do tm. it sucks but i guess that's the way of the world.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

Megashnauzer said:


> the cost doubling is out of our price range. what options are there if you opt out of insurance? disband the club?


Does your club do trailwork?

If the answer is a definitive "NO", then you might not need trail-building coverage, which would save you a lot of money.

However, answering that question of whether your club is "doing trailwork" can be a little nuanced. Advertizing and promoting other (legitimate) groups' trailwork days is not trailwork. I think that making donations is OK as well, or so I have been told. Our club does a lot of this. However, anything beyond that and you are getting into murky territory, and you need someone who really knows the ins and outs to make that call for your specific club.


----------



## redhawk (Nov 9, 2009)

For Californians following: NIAC is on the IMBA spreadsheet https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...b2pvYkk5NlpoRGR1ZTluNmN4QWc&usp=sharing#gid=0

as a possible insurer. Here is their response to the non-profit specialist broker our club has been consulting: _NIAC has just informed me that they will not be able to provide a quote because they feel that the mountain biking exposure is outside of their comfort zone of underwriting._


----------



## dirt (Jan 30, 2004)

This has been brewing for quite a while, and I'm sure that there were many who were expecting this boot to drop.

This really started back in late 2009 when McKay, who most clubs used up till that point, decided that the new 2010 policy would NOT cover trail work. That's when IMBA stepped in and helped secure RJF as a new insurer. But, I know there was quite a bit of discussion at Santa Fe 18 months ago that insurance was an issue, and IMBA expected it to become a bigger issue.

Unfortunately, MTB advocacy and club are still a 'new' industry, and we'll seeing the results of growth and what is being seen as a higher then previously expected risk. I think we'll be playing this insurance shell game for a few years till the insurance industry becomes comfortable with our amount of risk, and we learn how to operate in a way that makes insurance companies not feel as exposed.

But, what is happening now isn't much different then what happened in 2009, and both times, IMBA was the cohesiveness that allowed clubs and chapters to work together to fine a solution to this. Without IMBA, we'd probably still be in the same boat, but we wouldn't have the crowd sourcing working together to find a solution for all of the clubs and chapters.


----------



## Ridnparadise (Dec 14, 2007)

dirt said:


> This has been brewing for quite a while, and I'm sure that there were many who were expecting this boot to drop.
> 
> This really started back in late 2009 when McKay, who most clubs used up till that point, decided that the new 2010 policy would NOT cover trail work. That's when IMBA stepped in and helped secure RJF as a new insurer. But, I know there was quite a bit of discussion at Santa Fe 18 months ago that insurance was an issue, and IMBA expected it to become a bigger issue.
> 
> ...


Looks a little like cohesion via silence from here.


----------



## Megashnauzer (Nov 2, 2005)

c0nsumer said:


> I don't completely know your situation and I don't speak with any more authority than an individual who is an IMBA chapter board member, but your chapter charter likely requires you to hold insurance. Thus, you risk being kicked out of the IMBA chapter program without insurance.
> 
> If you have MOUs with land managers, they likely require insurance. Those could be invalidated.
> 
> ...


we aren't imba charter members and we don't have any mou's. we don't use any heavy machinery for trail work/maintenance. we just like to ride and build trails. i guess it's all fun and games until someone loses an eye and then they sue you for all you're worth.


----------



## c0nsumer (Mar 17, 2008)

Megashnauzer said:


> we aren't imba charter members and we don't have any mou's. we don't use any heavy machinery for trail work/maintenance. we just like to ride and build trails. i guess it's all fun and games until someone loses an eye and then they sue you for all you're worth.


Or, more realistically, someone gets hurt and their medical insurance -- looking for a way to recoup costs -- comes after whoever built those darned trails that caused the injuries. I, personally, want insurance to help ensure that I'm not up against that alone.


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

Here's the copy from an e-mail message that IMBA is sending to chapter leaders and contacts from other groups that have participated in the soon-to-end national insurance program.

Looks like the links have been stripped out of the message. I'll see if I can re-post with the links intact.

-- Mark

Dear Mark Eller

As most of you realize, the chapter/club insurance program that IMBA endorsed in recent years is no longer viable and will cease to operate after February 28.

IMBA has every intention of replacing the outgoing national insurance program with a better one. Unfortunately this is not something that can be achieved immediately.

Many local groups are searching for insurance brokers and other sources that offer replacement policies. The following list of resources is meant to support those efforts.

IMBA has not vetted the policies that these providers offer. Local groups should consider this list as a starting place for their research on replacement insurance plans.


Associated Agencies Inc. Contact Lee Lazar. Note: May be able to bind new policies for chapters/clubs by March 1. 
Alliance of Nonprofits for Insurance. Visit ani-rrg.org. Note: Commercial general liability coverage that possibly could be tailored to fits club/chapter needs. Contact and they will refer you to the appropriate broker for your state/region.
ESIX. Contact Trish Beyer. Note: Offers general liability policies for independent groups. Working on policies for mountain bike chapters/clubs. 
League of American Bicyclists. Visit website. Note: Coverage intended for group rides and social events.
Marsh & McLennan Agency. Contact Scott Chapin at 715-634-6513. Note: Oversaw the IMBA-endorsed national insurance program, now working with groups individually.
Nicholas Hill Benefit Group. Contact Nathan Nicholas. Note: Coverage for events only. 
Pachner & Associates. Contact Don Pachner at 914-234-2228, or visit website. Note: Specializes in risk management services. 
The Unity Group. Contact Andrew Olive at 360-734-8025 ext. 238 or via e-mail. Note: General liability options for clubs/chapters. 

For more information, visit this online spread sheet, and read IMBA's insurance update and FAQ (requires login).

Once again, on behalf of myself and IMBA, I sincerely apologize for the concern that this is causing many of our local groups.

Thanks for your attention, and please stay tuned for additional updates.

Sincerely,

Michael Van Abel
Executive Director


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

Mark E said:


> Here's the copy from an e-mail message that IMBA is sending to chapter leaders and contacts from other groups that have participated in the soon-to-end national insurance program.
> 
> Looks like the links have been stripped out of the message. I'll see if I can re-post with the links intact.
> 
> ...


A list of options is great, but isn't Associated Agencies Inc the *only *one offering trail building coverage? Along with being able to start coverage my the 1st, THIS is the option that nearly everyone is looking for. THAT is the information that needs to be going out to the chapters.

Am I missing something, here?


----------



## c0nsumer (Mar 17, 2008)

kapusta said:


> A list of options is great, but isn't Associated Agencies Inc the *only *one offering trail building coverage? Along with being able to start coverage my the 1st, THIS is the option that nearly everyone is looking for. THAT is the information that needs to be going out to the chapters.
> 
> Am I missing something, here?


You read it as I do.

I'm starting to give thought as to how we manage the arrival of Saturday without insurance. I don't fault IMBA reps for not engaging in these threads, as they'd be a net loss productivity-wise.

Unfortunately if Saturday rolls around without coverage a you-must-stop statement will trigger a bunch of really unpleasant conversations.


----------



## Loren_ (Dec 3, 2006)

I believe the former IMBA underwriter is still making trail building insurance available to chapters, at a price.


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

Some chapters/clubs are just as concerned about coverage for upcoming group rides and social events, not just coverage for trail work. And, several of the these brokers offer general liability coverage that could include trail building. I've tried to note the ones that only offer coverage for rides/social events. 

Some of the listed groups that seem willing to offer general liability include Alliance of Nonprofits, ESIX, Marsh and McLennan (though possibly just for large groups with 5,000+ members), Pachner and Associates and The Unity Group. But each local group has to, for the time being, find out if these brokers can offer suitable policies that would cover trail building.


----------



## c0nsumer (Mar 17, 2008)

Loren_ said:


> I believe the former IMBA underwriter is still making trail building insurance available to chapters, at a price.


I just received a reply from them saying that they are completely backed up with quotes, asking how many members we have, and sending along their FAQ about insurance being dropped.

I'm really interested to see what the pricing is. If they'll even get us any.


----------



## redd4573 (Apr 15, 2012)

I would say alot of Regional Reps are working hard to figure this out because when clubs start droping out of the Chapter program thier jobs are likely on the line?


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

Our treasurer just talked to Pachner and Associates. Sounded like they are OK with trailbuilding, and took the application over the phone. We'll see what the price is.


----------



## c0nsumer (Mar 17, 2008)

Ridnparadise said:


> Looks a little like cohesion via silence from here.


If clubs drop out of IMBA Chapter Program then they'll have a lot more things to handle than just needing to find insurance[1]. I don't think dropping out would be a very wise idea over just this.

[1] Handling 501(c)3 acceptance, membership management, email communication, land manager communications, PR for getting out, etc...


----------



## c0nsumer (Mar 17, 2008)

Mark E said:


> But each local group has to, for the time being, find out if these brokers can offer suitable policies that would cover trail building.


...and this is what really sucks. Most group is a collection of volunteers with day jobs who are doing their best to keep their organization going and trails nice because they like riding bikes in the woods. Adding a wrinkle of needing to shop for a very detailed policy is, to put it mildly, quite frustrating.

At least we have the benefit of this being a downtime for trail work throughout much of the US...

</grouse>


----------



## TiRyder (Mar 8, 2005)

c0nsumer said:


> If clubs drop out of IMBA Chapter Program then they'll have a lot more things to handle than just needing to find insurance[1]. I don't think dropping out would be a very wise idea over just this.
> 
> [1] Handling 501(c)3 acceptance, membership management, email communication, land manager communications, PR for getting out, etc...


I hear what you are saying, but some groups consider these things a "part of doing business" and have figured out how to handle this, especially smaller localized groups. If those smaller groups are organized and have members, preferably BOD members, that are willing and able to handle these functions, the load is dispersed and not as hard to handle.

For larger clubs, or even smaller clubs managed by folks that cant or don't want to handle the housekeeping side of things, IMBA does provide a valuable service, however, not all clubs use the same criteria in evaluating the actual or perceived benefits IMBA provides.


----------



## c0nsumer (Mar 17, 2008)

TiRyder said:


> I hear what you are saying, but some groups consider these things a "part of doing business" and have figured out how to handle this, especially smaller localized groups. If those smaller groups are organized and have members, preferably BOD members, that are willing and able to handle these functions, the load is dispersed and not as hard to handle.
> 
> For larger clubs, or even smaller clubs managed by folks that cant or don't want to handle the housekeeping side of things, IMBA does provide a valuable service, however, not all clubs use the same criteria in evaluating the actual or perceived benefits IMBA provides.


Of course, and it's exactly those self-sustaining clubs which I would have found most reluctant to become IMBA chapters in the first place.

I am curious to see what the short and long-term fallout of this is. Personally, I'm expecting it to be just a wrinkle, but being right in the midst of it, it's fairly painful.


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

No argument here that this is a sucky situation and a real burden to local groups. Many IMBA staff members, including the executive director, have put everything else on hold to work on this. As with pretty much anything that has to do with insurance of almost any kind, the roadblocks and frustrations have been manifold, but we are continuing to push for better solutions.


----------



## Shep Huntwood (Apr 29, 2008)

Consider our club one of those that had most of the housekeeping stuff handled and were on the fence about becoming a Chapter. In fact, the main "benefit" of handling memberships has actually turned out to be slightly less desirable than when we were doing it ourselves.

No, our main reasons for becoming a Chapter were to show support for IMBA, have better access to TCC and the regional director, and to reap the promised eventual benefits (despite them being pretty unspecific at the time). We believed that this was a fledgling program that would get better and better and be worth the money eventually. We also found it reassuring that the literature we were presented promised a more favorable revenue split once the program was more established.

Despite being turned down for a TCC visit, not seeing as much as hoped in the way of support, and not seeing any recent mention of a change to the 60/40 split, we're not yet ready to throw in the towel on the Chapter program. How this insurance issue is handled, though, both regionally and nationally, will definitely play a big role in whether I personally support continuing as a Chapter.



c0nsumer said:


> Of course, and it's exactly those self-sustaining clubs which I would have found most reluctant to become IMBA chapters in the first place.
> 
> I am curious to see what the short and long-term fallout of this is. Personally, I'm expecting it to be just a wrinkle, but being right in the midst of it, it's fairly painful.


----------



## c0nsumer (Mar 17, 2008)

Mark E said:


> No argument here that this is a sucky situation and a real burden to local groups. Many IMBA staff members, including the executive director, have put everything else on hold to work on this. As with pretty much anything that has to do with insurance of almost any kind, the roadblocks and frustrations have been manifold, but we are continuing to push for better solutions.


If I may make a suggestion, I think that it would do IMBA very well to make a public statement about what is actually being done. I understand that a lot of work is being done on this, but from a chapter perspective I feel like we're mostly just hearing that "it's being worked on". I think it'd be very nice to hear concrete examples of what is being done.

This would also be a great service to the leaders of IMBA's chapters who, should the need arise to tell their membership to stop work, will need to explain why we are suddenly without insurance to their membership and land managers.


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

Let's see some numbers for trail building insurance.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

Berkeley Mike said:


> Let's see some numbers for trail building insurance.


Hard to say what the trail building part is, for the quotes we have seen, trail building it is part of the general liability.

Going to vary a lot club to club, and what kind of coverage you want. I have seen numbers ranging from ~$6.50 - $10.50 per member.

Only way to know is call someone who is offering: Either Pachner & Associates, or Associated Agencies are the two I know of so far.


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

IMBA has been sending multiple e-mail updates to chapter/club leaders, including the one I posted above. More public-facing statements will follow, but there may some advantage to not sounding the alarm bells too broadly for at least a few more days, as this can be off-putting to potential insurance agents/underwriters. Of course word is filtering out, but hopefully we are preserving the opportunity to describe our insurance needs to potential providers without them perceiving a crisis mentality. 

So ... mum's the word! I'm kidding, of course. There is good reason to think that we will have new options for a suitable national-level insurance program in the weeks ahead. But it needs to be thoroughly vetted and some existing issues need to be sorted out thoroughly.


----------



## Queen Bee (May 27, 2004)

Thanks Mark E for your quick response to the email problem. Much appreciated!


----------



## CHET HUNTLEY (Nov 27, 2013)

Below is the letter our mountain bike club sent our land manager last Sunday.

This letter is to inform the City of Fort Worth that as of midnight, Saturday, March 1, 2014 the Fort Worth Mountain Bikers' Association (FWMBA), a 501c3, non-profit mountain bike club will no longer have a general liability insurance policy to indemnify the City from FWMBA's operations within Gateway and Marion Sansom Parks. FWMBA was informed by their insurance agent, Marsh & McLennan Agency of this news last Saturday, February 15, 2014. This decision to not renew the policy was not the result of any claims filed against FWMBA. FWMBA has a spotless run/loss statement. FWMBA is actively seeking a carrier to secure insurance. However, insurance agents have stated that it will be impossible for FWMBA to retain a new general liability policy before the March 1 deadline. Therefore, per our license agreement with the City, which requires the club maintain a general liability insurance policy, FWMBA will not be in compliance with the agreement.

Unless some breakthrough happens, on Wednesday, February 26 at 7:00pm FWMBA will inform our membership and the general public via our website forum and social media outlets of this news. FWMBA will cancel their planned trail building day on March 1 and will cease all sanctioned maintenance activity in the parks in which they operate until this issue is resolved. Of course, FWMBA desires to see our trails remain open through this crisis. *FWMBA is requesting a statement from the City before Noon this Friday, February 28 regarding whether or not the mountain bike trails are to remain open so that we can advise our membership.
*
Marsh & McLennan Agency and the International Mountain Bicycling Association (IMBA) work together to provide insurance to their chapter and affiliated clubs (FWMBA is an IMBA affiliated club). Through a "master policy" written to IMBA, the insurance underwriter and IMBA provided a means for mountain bike clubs like FWMBA to purchase insurance at a discounted rate. Unfortunately, Marsh & McLennan Agency and IMBA were unable to come to terms as to how the 2014 "master policy" would be structured. As a result mountain bike clubs across the country like FWMBA were summarily dropped by Marsh & McLennan Agency with less than two weeks to find insurance elsewhere.

IMBA is actively seeking an underwriter to secure insurance. IMBA executive director, Mike Van Able writes, "IMBA staff is working very hard to find suitable replacements for a national insurance program. We have already interviewed nine potential brokers, with several additional interviews scheduled in upcoming days. However, it's not likely a new program will be in place in time to avoid a lapse in coverage, given the current policy's expiration on Feb. 28."

FWMBA is in negotiations with two insurance agents to secure a policy. Unfortunately on Friday, February 21, 2014 FWMBA was informed that it was unlikely that the club could secure insurance before the March 1 deadline. McKay Insurance wrote, "Our agency has been contacted by many IMBA clubs seeking coverage for their operations. We are working to develop a solution as quickly as we can but unfortunately we do not expect to have a viable solution in place before your current policy expires on March 1st."

The long and the short of it is that there are a lot of mountain bike club presidents like myself scrambling to find insurance in order to meet the obligations of our agreements with land managers. FWMBA is optimistic that we'll be able to secure a new general liability insurance policy. However, our inquiries to insurance agents have revealed that the premiums will be much higher than those charged by Marsh & McLennan Agency. Marsh & McLennan Agency's Scott Chapin wrote, "Without the IMBA master policy renewal, we are not able to offer affordable individual policies; minimum annual premiums will average about $5000 - $7500."

FWMBA deeply regrets the news from Marsh & McLennan Agency and IMBA to discontinue general liability insurance coverage to FWMBA. We remain committed to our partnership with the City and are open to explore any suggestions the City may have that will enable us to continue our trail building mission. As always, please do not hesitate to contact me if you would like to discuss this further. This is a matter that requires urgent attention. We look forward to hearing from you this week.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

One of the reasons for this insurance debacle is due to organizations taking it upon themselves and indemnifying local governments. I hope IMBA clearly states that no organization has the authority to indemnify any local government entity without prior approval from any new insurance carrier.

I have personally regected two offers to create bike parks due to our City demanding we indemnify them. That is utter BS.

Any Chapter/Affiliate that indemnifies local governments should be dropped from any group policy.


----------



## El Gringo Guapo (Aug 8, 2007)

Boulder Pilot said:


> One of the reasons for this insurance debacle is due to organizations taking it upon themselves and indemnifying local governments. I hope IMBA clearly states that no organization has the authority to indemnify any local government entity without prior approval from any new insurance carrier.
> 
> I have personally regected two offers to create bike parks due to our City demanding we indemnify them. That is utter BS.
> 
> Any Chapter/Affiliate that indemnifies local governments should be dropped from any group policy.


I don't know the details of the claims, but simply agreeing to indemnify any land owner doesn't change the club's contract with the insurance company. A club can't obligate the insurance company to any more obligations than were contracted for in the policy. The obligation of indemnification rests with the club, and perhaps with the insurance company, but only to the extent contracted for in the policy. Even in the absence of an indemnification provision, the land owner would most likely be sued anyway, then cross-claim against the club.

Folks might be confusing "indemnity" with listing a land owner as an additional insured. But it is common for the land owner to be listed as an additional insured, entitling the land owner to the benefits of the policy, REGARDLESS of an indemnification provision. Any contracted indemnity obligations that exceed the policy coverage for an additional insured would rest on the club, not the insurance company.

The wrinkle I see here is that if a CHAPTER (not a club) agreed to indemnify any land owner, that obligation might flow back to IMBA from its subordinate organization. Thus, IMBA may have found itself being obligated for liabilities it didn't anticipate. Furthermore, IMBA proper may have a different policy than was available to the clubs, so yes, there is a chance that the underwriter may have agreed to greater coverage for IMBA and its Chapters.

Just speculation, based on limited knowledge of the claims.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

Our MOU with the City for a Skills Park was only to have liability insurance, inform the local EMTs about access to the area, keep first aid kits available and stocked, and not build outside the designated area. We entered this as an IMBA club about three years ago.

Now that Skills Park, that took four years of hard work to get approval, will be closed, hopefully temporarily. Should we be dropped from IMBA insurance because of that MOU to have insurance? Come on..........


----------



## El Gringo Guapo (Aug 8, 2007)

insguy 2 said:


> I am assuming that possibly the indemnity agreements and additional insured requests by certain clubs for landmanagers has created a higher liability exposure than what Navigators intended.


Again, I didn't see anything in our policy that would allow us to bind an underwriter to cover indemnification agreements outside the scope of the additional insured.

Additionally, we were told that we had to have an agreement with the land owner in place prior to getting them named as an additional insured. We were also required to submit a copy of our agreement.



insguy 2 said:


> I assume the insurance carrier wasn't told by IMBA that many Chapters do more than maintenance and that they may construct a whole trail which is covered by the completed operations portion of a general liability policy after the work is finished.


I have no idea what IMBA told to whom, but the application we submitted to MM asked in at least 4 questions on the RFQ if we "build and/or maintain" trails, trails with TTF (teeters specifically excluded), and dirt jump areas, slope style courses, or pump tracks. There was also a question asking us to quantify how many miles of trails we "build and/or maintain," as well as a question regarding whether we own, operate, or maintain a bike park." My understanding is that each club had to update the application each year as well. With this amount of specificity, its difficult for me to believe that Navigators wasn't on notice.



insguy 2 said:


> The problem with an insurance company writing group general liability coverage with non-restrictive completed operations liability for a BUNCH of Chapters is that there is no way (so far) to have an effective risk management program for each Chapter to build uniform trails that are safe to ride by Joe Blow Public.


Somewhat. Our club answered "yes" to all of the above questions. I'm not sure your typical XC rider would call us "safe." But we are fanatic about safety and risk management. Our trails are gated (not one you can easily hop over), and with rare exceptions, only members may ride there. Additionally, EVERYONE must sign a release of liability before riding. Then, they are required to have a tour of each feature and walk each line prior to riding. None of these factors were ever taken into consideration in generating the quote. Maybe a tiered policy based on risk management procedures, control over access, etc. might provide a solution.

I still wish IMBA would release at least a general profile of the claims to help the clubs understand the issues and further refine our risk management strategies.



insguy 2 said:


> I believe the insurance company (Navigators??) who MM placed the coverage with hoped that they would be making a profit on this account.


No issue for me there. We're mature adults who understand you have to pay to play.


----------



## ridingthebuff (Jul 9, 2009)

Expect further de-teching of the trails to meet insurance companies level of risk acceptance.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

ridingthebuff said:


> Expect further de-teching of the trails to meet insurance companies level of risk acceptance.


I would not be so sure of that. Of course, who knows what an insurance underwriter thinks, but I think as the market for this gets more mature and they get their heads around the type of risks involved, they may find that more tech does not equate more risk.

Of course stunts (jumps, drops, teeter totters, skinnies, etc) are a bigger risk, I think that goes without saying. And in fact many policies already exclude that. But I question whether more technical (as in rough, rooty, rocky, steep) are a higher risk. Easier trails tend to attract less skilled riders (proper signage is key). Also, less tech trails tend to be faster. All of my worse accidents have been on easier (as in less technical) trails.

Also I think that the headaches involved for them trying to communicate and determine what is "technical" (beyond man-made "features"), is going to make such a policy unworkable. My guess is they will just base premiums on the assumption that trails vary from easy to technical.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

I understand that an insurance policy covers exactly what is stated within such policy and will not cover anything that is not specifically included in the policy. 

When an organization willfully enters into a contract and indemnifies any other entity, the organization is responsible for defending and paying all losses should a lawsuit be filed and judgement be found against an organization.

When an organization chooses to "additionally insure" another entity, the organizations insurance provider must be notified and it is the insurance company that determines whether or not they will "additionally insure" anyone else, and whether there will be a cost to additionally insure.

In California, local & State entities enjoy immunity from prosecution from injuries resulting from an individual participating in any "hazardous recreational activity" defined in CCR. 831.7, which mountain biking & bicycle dirt jumping are included.

Unfortunately, CCR. 831.7d clearly states that no other party, even if there is a contract, will enjoy immunity as defined in CCR. 831.7.

Slocaus, I don't know where you got the idea that I or anyone else believes your organization should be dropped because you have an M.O.U. You do not say you agreed to indemnify anyone.

P&RD's are in the business of providing, building recreational facilities. Volunteer nonprofit organizations can assist P&RD's by offering knowledge, funding, volunteer labor. Nonprofit organizations must carry appropriate insurance if they want to get involved with any project that exposes the organization to any liability. I will never enter into any agreement that forces my organization to indemnify a government entity. I personally am negotiating a Bike Park with our County and made it very clear during the first 10 minutes of our first meeting that under no circumstances will SDMBA imdemnify the County. We are moving forward.


----------



## El Gringo Guapo (Aug 8, 2007)

kapusta said:


> Of course stunts (jumps, drops, teeter totters, skinnies, etc) are a bigger risk, I think that goes without saying.


I would respectfully disagree. I agree they are higher PERCEIVED risk, and there is of course physical risk, but I believe lower liability risk.

Many clubs who build those features are fanatic about calculating risk and making sure we document assumption of the risk, etc. Also, my experience is that free riders (in general) tend to take more accountability for their actions and expect injury as a part of progression, as opposed to someone who wanders into the sport and endos off a ledge or the veteran XC rider who collides with an access gate, sues, and is awarded $2.9M: MTB rider crashes into locked gate, is awarded $2.9 million


----------



## Shep Huntwood (Apr 29, 2008)

As I continue to follow this thread, it occurs to me that neither IMBA nor our insurance provider has asked to review our various MOUs/land agreements. Moving forward, wouldn't it make sense for IMBA to offer more support in this area, to avoid major issues arising from poorly executed agreements made by the Chapters? With all the resources at its disposal, IMBA should know better than we do what an agreement should and shouldn't say.


----------



## Shep Huntwood (Apr 29, 2008)

The land managers our Chapter works with are extremely easy to work with and are very reasonable in what they ask for from us. My concern is more an issue of Chapters shooting themselves in the foot by including unnecessary language that, according to IMBA's recent communications, unwittingly portrays us as something we're not (or shouldn't be).

It was frustrating to sit through an IMBA Regional Summit this past year and hearing IMBA's attorney say our MOUs are probably bad without also hearing advice on how to make sure they're improved. I'm feeling the same type of frustration now, but I'm hopeful more direction will come about as IMBA gets its ducks in a row.

We've been doing this long enough that we don't need help with how to build trails, how to market our club or member recruiting and retention. We need help with the intricacies of the stuff no normal person could ever possibly understand on his or her own (i.e., insurance, taxes, legal agreements, etc.). I know those things were never promised as part of the Chapter program, but those are certainly things we'd rather have our money going toward.



insguy 2 said:


> To offer that support would cost more money and would create a lot of negotiation that the company doesn't want to be involved with. The landmanger wants the moon and the insurance company says no way are we going to cover everything the landmanager is asking for.
> 
> Now that the current insurance company (for one more day) understands what they are being asked to do and cover exposure wise they may be saying we aren't getting enough premium for the potential exposure and work needed to manage this account.
> 
> ...


----------



## centaur11 (Jan 26, 2011)

Well our new policy is about $1100 vs the M&M policy which was about $600. Same coverage etc. Through Associated Agencies, inc


----------



## rideit (Jan 22, 2004)

Mark, I should know this, but does this insurance issue affect non prof 501c clubs that work on FS land? 
(Hopefully we will have a few paid diggers for the club this year).
Curious if the FS element trumps this.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

centaur11 said:


> Well our new policy is about $1100 vs the M&M policy which was about $600. Same coverage etc. Through Associated Agencies, inc


I think we are going with Pachner and Associates (the policy looks like it is from Sports.com). Their price came in at about half of Associated Agencies for us. The only significant difference that I could tell was that it excludes built stunt features, and loading/unloading, but we determined that neither of these are going to be an issue for us this year. Pachner asked a lot more detailed questions about our club and our activities. I have suspected that we were a lower risk club for several reasons, and I think this worked in our favor.

Anyone else look at these guys? Thoughts?


----------



## Woodman (Mar 12, 2006)

Loading/Unloading? What is this?


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

Woodman said:


> Loading/Unloading? What is this?


To the best of my knowledge (which is not saying much), it refers in our case to taking machinery on and off a truck or trailer. Also refers to using a truck or trailer to haul stuff, like if you were moving stone or dirt. I think this has something to do with auto liability, but I really don't understand it.


----------



## centaur11 (Jan 26, 2011)

kapusta said:


> I think we are going with Pachner and Associates (the policy looks like it is from Sports.com). Their price came in at about half of Associated Agencies for us (~$6.50 per member vs ~$13 per member). The only significant difference that I could tell was that it excludes built stunt features, and loading/unloading, but we determined that neither of these are going to be an issue for us this year. Pachner asked a lot more detailed questions about our club and our activities. I have suspected that we were a lower risk club for several reasons, and I think this worked in our favor.
> 
> Anyone else look at these guys? Thoughts?


yes we did look at Pachner but we have TTF's and need the loading and unloading so we have to bite the bullet and pay the "man" to stay on track building trails.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

Boulder Pilot said:


> Slocaus, I don't know where you got the idea that I or anyone else believes your organization should be dropped because you have an M.O.U. You do not say you agreed to indemnify anyone.


Thanks. Someone, might have been you, stated something about IMBA should drop any club for entering into any MOU with the LM. I missed the "indemnify" clarification.

I'm way toi rankled over this, especially since the critical board members have not been getting IMBA notices about this insurance issue since day one. I forwarded the first one to their attention about the time drewp started this thread, when there was only two weeks until expiration.

Sorry to be all bristly porcupine. Thanks for the statement on this.


----------



## dan4jeepin (Apr 9, 2007)

We just got a Letter of agreement from the city to continue to maintain and build trails and it has the following indemnification section in it. The other officers were ready to sign it until I pointed out that we won't even have insurance as of tomorrow. The more I read this thread the more I think we need to look at getting this changed before we sign it even if we have insurance. The other officers don't think about liability because they just want to get things built and ride. 

XI.	INDEMNIFICATION
The CLUB shall indemnify, hold harmless and assume the defense of the City, its agents, employees, and officials, from any and all liability, expenses, or claims which may be recovered from, or sought to be recovered from the City its employees, officials, and agents by reason of or on account of any property damage, injury or death of any person arising from CLUB’s use of park property. In discharge of this obligation, CLUB agrees, at its expense, to obtain and keep in full force and effect at all times during the term of this agreement, comprehensive public liability insurance in at least the amount of $1,000,000 combined single limited coverage against general public liability for injuries to or death of persons or damage to property. Such insurance policies shall also name the City, its employees, officials and agents as insured parties. The CLUB shall furnish the City's Risk Management Division with a copy of said insurance policy or certificate showing the insurance coverage to be in full force and effect before accessing the Bikeway. Such insurance policy or certificate shall contain provisions providing that the City shall be given 30 days prior written notice of any cancellation or reduction in the required coverage. The insurance required hereunder shall be primary and any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City shall be in excess of and shall not contribute with the insurance provided by the CLUB under this agreement. Any deductibles or self-insurance retentions applicable to the required coverage shall be paid by the CLUB and the City shall not be required to participate therewith. All rights of subrogation against the City shall be waived. Maintenance of the coverage required hereby shall fully satisfy the CLUB obligation to indemnify the City of XYZ, and its employees, officials and agents and the City expressly agrees that so long as this coverage is kept in force, the CLUB shall have no obligation to indemnify the City outside the coverage provided by the policy.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

dan4jeepin said:


> XI.	INDEMNIFICATION
> The CLUB shall indemnify, hold harmless and assume the defense of the City, its agents, employees, and officials, from any and all liability, expenses, or claims which may be recovered from, or sought to be recovered from the City its employees, officials, and agents by reason of or on account of any property damage, injury or death of any person arising from CLUB's use of park property. In discharge of this obligation, CLUB agrees, at its expense, to obtain and keep in full force and effect at all times during the term of this agreement, comprehensive public liability insurance in at least the amount of $1,000,000 combined single limited coverage against general public liability for injuries to or death of persons or damage to property. Such insurance policies shall also name the City, its employees, officials and agents as insured parties. The CLUB shall furnish the City's Risk Management Division with a copy of said insurance policy or certificate showing the insurance coverage to be in full force and effect before accessing the Bikeway. Such insurance policy or certificate shall contain provisions providing that the City shall be given 30 days prior written notice of any cancellation or reduction in the required coverage. The insurance required hereunder shall be primary and any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City shall be in excess of and shall not contribute with the insurance provided by the CLUB under this agreement. Any deductibles or self-insurance retentions applicable to the required coverage shall be paid by the CLUB and the City shall not be required to participate therewith. All rights of subrogation against the City shall be waived. Maintenance of the coverage required hereby shall fully satisfy the CLUB obligation to indemnify the City of XYZ, and its employees, officials and agents and the City expressly agrees that so long as this coverage is kept in force, the CLUB shall have no obligation to indemnify the City outside the coverage provided by the policy.


Wow.

That's one big wall of text with "BEND OVER" painted all over it.


----------



## Woodman (Mar 12, 2006)

The club could agree to indemnify the city, meaning the club never sues the city for anything. The club can not act on behalf of other individual riders who might have an accident and get hurt.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

I, like the rest of you, am still trying to obtain trail building insurance. I have spoke with AA and have an email conversation with Panchard (sic?).

It's raining as I type, 3rd time since March 2013. Bummer but whatever.

This said, after reading examples of what some organizations are willfully committing themselves to, I have to say if "I" was responsible for insuring all of you, "I" would tell you all to go seek your own damn insurance.

I realize the majority of us our responsible, are intelligent and work damn hard to create and maintain TRUE partnerships based on trust & respect. There seems to be quite a few that have not earned the respect of land managers but are willing to compromise by being ignorant of the situations and just sign off on anything put in front of them.

Yeah, a national policy will probably be cheaper. But how do you manage the ignorant that keep undermining our situation?


----------



## gt2brew (Mar 23, 2006)

Perhaps if an effort was made to give a clear understanding of what our policies entailed, we could all have made better decisions. I am currently getting an all-to-real education on insurance and I don't like it.


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

An outline of factors from IMBA would be more helpful than just a 2-week warning on the termination of insurance.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

Totally agree with you Mike. As we all move forward, we all must demand the information we all need to successfully continue what we do while knowing we are as protected as possible.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

A free, online "_Mountain Bike Club Insurance for Dummies_" course would have done a world of good, I believe.

I'd have signed up. I still don't get what the heck is so special about "loading and unloading".


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

We must be living right. Of the 5 land managers we work with there is only 1 written agreement. It is just a very basic who will do what with no mention of indemnification. The other 4 we work with on a handshake. 

We went with the Associated plan. Seemed to offer the best protection for what we are doing. Price came in about $2 / member more than the IMBA plan was. So not too bad. We are an IMBA affiliate so if we need to bump the dues up a few bucks we can. Chapters don't have that power locally.


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

I'm a little curious about the "loading and unloading" thing too. I can think of a few situations where that could come into play on our activities. 

One of our members has a big DR mower that he brings for various trail jobs. If that 350 lb machine got away while going up or down the ramps to his truck it could be serious.

We had to replace 2 small bridges over creeks with longer ones due to erosion. There was about 1,000 lbs of lumber on my truck including four 16 footers on top of the bed topper. Those tend to get away if the truck is parked on any kind of sideways slant.


----------



## PMK (Oct 12, 2004)

I have read most of this topic word for word and I am throwing the BS flag on some of the opinions posted here.

In regards to these agreements that have been entered into, this talk of it being stupid on the clubs part, or if I were the insurance agency I would not have let this happen is closed minded and wrong.

Sorry to inform you, without all this insurance and agreement stuff many of the trail systems now in place never would have had a chance without this wording. Our club was one of the early clubs that underwent this wording style. In fact, the original agreement was so extreme and one sided in favor of the land manager that the Club was responsible for many additional items including hazardous waste previously placed before the trails were constructed. The agreement underwent several versions but was impossible to overturn the wording entirely.

So why do I throw the BS flag, in simple terms, the club was required to provide a copy of the agreement to the insurance company. Based on the insurance company accepting the agreement or not accepting the agreement, determined if coverage was able to be purchased. 

Yes these agreements are written by lawyers that work for the land managers. 

Yes they can be very one sided.

Yes we have been grateful to have insurance in place.

It becomes a balancing act of should a club that builds trails and maintains them even exist. Well it needs to in many cases or there would be no trails. The flip side becomes, just try and have the agreement rewritten to be less one sided, the land manager would rather have the land sit unused with no liabilities or minimal liabilities).

Those clubs that have been fortunate or are fortunate to have well worded and fair agreements, or better still, have been placed onto the land managers own insurance are fortunate. Most of the clubs entangled in these agreements have land managers that will not place volunteers as part of their insurance.

Now a FWIW, our land manager is a Parks and Rec Department. They have many other user groups and those groups have very similar worded agreements. Some of the groups have also been able to secure the property to control the persons that utilize it. Years ago, I requested that our club be given a similar agreement, where unless you were a member, you had no access to the trails. Basically overturning the intention of the agreement as it relates to the general public. Try as we might, there was no way our asset of trails was going to go private.

Fast forward to today, the trails have remained open after the land manager was notified of the insurance cancellation. The club is now exempt from liability as is the non existent insurance company. The trails have no custodians to ensure they remain safe and maintained.

As someone involved in this wording, having been in discussions with our previous insurance company and knew all along this silent volcano would eventually erupt, it is sad to see, but also welcome. With a good fight from IMBA, maybe they can accomplish a well accepted written agreement that can be presented to the land managers that provides consistency, fairness to the clubs or chapters, fairness to the land managers and fairness to the insurance provider. Sadly though, I expect with this will come strict guidelines on how basic a trail must be when on public lands.

Without agreements, without insurance, what comes next...

PK


----------



## PMK (Oct 12, 2004)

From experience, I would highly recommend that any club, chapter or whatever group that does accomplish trail work of any kind obtain a second policy in addition to your liability policy. he second is specific for you club or chapter Officers and Directors. This protects the leadership in the event of a lawsuit.

Do not rest on the assumption that if a trail is properly marked and maintained, that a beginner or less experienced rider will be smart and not ride the difficult feature when a go around exists. Riders tend to be dumb and have big egos...heck they are only riding a bicycle, how hard can it be.

You want proof, search you tube under mtb crash.

Also, be very careful what is posted on a clubs forum, and if possible you tube...this stuff could become a permanent record in the event of an injury, or on the flip side, could prove that the trail was well maintained. 

Just consider all angles. 

PK


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

As of Friday we are now insured! lot of work and many kudo's to our BAMBA Chapter President and financial officer but good for this year anyway! is everybody good now?


----------



## Walt Dizzy (Aug 18, 2003)

PMK said:


> I have read most of this topic word for word and I am throwing the BS flag on some of the opinions posted here.
> 
> In regards to these agreements that have been entered into, this talk of it being stupid on the clubs part, or if I were the insurance agency I would not have let this happen is closed minded and wrong.
> 
> ...


I see no alternative to the bad outcome that a lot of trail simply isn't going to get built because nobody is going to pick up the insurance cost, and some number of land managers won't bend on the principle they aren't going to face the exposure risk alone.

It may work out that existing trails will mostly remain open, but that's going to be up to the individual land manager.

I haven't seen any numbers for what it would cost our club to self-insure but it won't take much to shut off the trail building operations completely. Our finances are marginal enough to begin with, I don't think we can continue operations if our insurance costs double. We can probably manage as a social/race sponsor organization.

If this continues along the present trajectory, I may have to resign from our IMBA chapter in order to do trail work at "my" park, perhaps as an affiliate of the park Friends group if they are willing.

(Not speaking as an official club representative.)

Walt


----------



## Trail Ninja (Sep 25, 2008)

Walt Dizzy said:


> If this continues along the present trajectory, I may have to resign from our IMBA chapter in order to do trail work at "my" park, perhaps as an affiliate of the park Friends group if they are willing.
> 
> (Not speaking as an official club representative.)
> 
> Walt


I do all my work as an individual volunteer for the parks department. This REALLY restricts what I'm allowed to do and what equipment I'm allowed to use, but trails get built and maintained.

I say "all" but actually on a couple of occcasions I've done some building as an "unpaid" employee of the land manager on private property.


----------



## noreastn (Jun 27, 2009)

Our group secured a policy through Associated Agencies. Lee was our contact person and was the person who led the conference call that was posted earlier in this thread. Lee's phone: (847) 427-3487.


----------



## trailmap (Jan 11, 2005)

PMK said:


> From experience, I would highly recommend that any club, chapter or whatever group that does accomplish trail work of any kind obtain a second policy in addition to your liability policy. he second is specific for you club or chapter Officers and Directors. This protects the leadership in the event of a lawsuit.
> 
> Do not rest on the assumption that if a trail is properly marked and maintained, that a beginner or less experienced rider will be smart and not ride the difficult feature when a go around exists. Riders tend to be dumb and have big egos...heck they are only riding a bicycle, how hard can it be.


I looked into the D&O insurance. By "looked into" I mean google search and reading a bunch of the search returns. My conclusion was that D&O was mainly applicable to lawsuits over hiring and money management. It is the general liability protection (as opposed to D&O) that protects the club (including leadership, especially if you are incorporated) from the rider-crashes-on-the-trail lawsuit.

Anyone with experience in insurance think I came to the wrong conclusion? I don't know.

Here are a couple of the search results I reviewed:
Directors and Officers Liability Insurance
Nonprofit Directors and Officers Insurance: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Again, I am not an expert on this, so don't rely on anything I say.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

Our D & O policy basically protects us, say, if we have to remove someone from the Board. Also other aspects of managing the association. We need both policies.

We may be securing a policy from Lee (AA ins) tomorrow. Our rate will be double our previous rate, which after the IMBA 60%-40% split means we will be losing money for every member we currently have and for every new member.

It will be irresponsible for an organization to operate in such a manner. We will have to cut costs. Do the math.


----------



## Loren_ (Dec 3, 2006)

Without getting into specifics, our average membership as an IMBA chapter is significantly above the minimum. I've run the civicrm reports and done the math, and and while we're not excited about the increased cost, we still have a fair amount of membership income left after insurance (from Lee). We lose a little on some memberships, especially the $20 youth memberships, but the number of members who contribute at the $250 Jersey or $100 T-Shirt level way more than make up for it. 

We're in the Detroit area - it's hard to imagine that our members are uniquely generous or enthusiastic in their contributions.


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

So only your "premium" membership packages make the Chapter arrangement work. What that illustrates is that in real-world dollars the Chapter program is pretty costly. That is, the value of the services they can provide, along with associates options, has fair market cost. 

This, in turn, expresses the value of volunteers who do this work for us. For that we say thanks for all you do.


----------



## trailmap (Jan 11, 2005)

Berkeley Mike said:


> So only your "premium" membership packages make the Chapter arrangement work. What that illustrates is that in real-world dollars the Chapter program is pretty costly. That is, the value of the services they can provide, along with associates options, has fair market cost.


You are forgetting that for many clubs, certainly the one I belong to, many of the members purchased individual IMBA memberships before becoming a chapter. Probably many of them purchase "premium" memberships now, but it is no more cost than what they were laying out before.

Also remember, that the cost for insurance was always borne by the chapters. It was already eating up a significant amount of the membership fees. Now it will take a larger bite.

Old_MTBer has a point in that if you are a not a chapter you have more flexibility in trying to recoup these increased costs from members. It might be a good idea for IMBA-Boulder to consider some mechanism for chapters to do this rather than the default split specifically to soften the blow of this insurance crisis. One example would be to keep the default split, or to have the backend offer the memberships at rates, say, $2 higher with those extra $2 going to the chapter.


----------



## Walt Dizzy (Aug 18, 2003)

Trail Ninja said:


> I do all my work as an individual volunteer for the parks department. This REALLY restricts what I'm allowed to do and what equipment I'm allowed to use, but trails get built and maintained.
> 
> I say "all" but actually on a couple of occcasions I've done some building as an "unpaid" employee of the land manager on private property.


Good point.

The issue with equipment cuts both ways. I've been pressed repeatedly by other club members about bringing in machinery to speed up the work. The class of machine we can hope to obtain (cost) and what we are competent to use is pretty much limited to a Ditch Witch or similar.

Most of the projects we have under consideration are in terrain loaded with rocks. I've not been impressed with the ability of a Ditch Witch to grub out rocks over 50 lbs or so, especially ones in soil loaded with other rocks. Even more so in hard clay. Then there's the usual considerations of costs and taking vacation time from work to keep the machine busy.

So...combine the unsuitability of "my" trail to machine work, the general lack of turnout by the club for work days, now add in a possible major escalation of club insurance costs to cover trail building. It may be this adds up to a parting of ways between me and the club. I'm not convinced we're done as partners yet, but change may be afoot.

Walt


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

Was stressful but happy that our chapter was insured again last Friday,we have a big skills line starting in spring with only one more meeting for approval,to close to the bone on this project with many hrs invested,but all is good for this year!


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

trailmap said:


> You are forgetting that for many clubs, certainly the one I belong to, many of the members purchased individual IMBA memberships before becoming a chapter. Probably many of them purchase "premium" memberships now, but it is no more cost than what they were laying out before.
> 
> Also remember, that the cost for insurance was always borne by the chapters. It was already eating up a significant amount of the membership fees. Now it will take a larger bite.
> 
> Old_MTBer has a point in that if you are a not a chapter you have more flexibility in trying to recoup these increased costs from members. It might be a good idea for IMBA-Boulder to consider some mechanism for chapters to do this rather than the default split specifically to soften the blow of this insurance crisis. One example would be to keep the default split, or to have the backend offer the memberships at rates, say, $2 higher with those extra $2 going to the chapter.


Of course the pricing conundrum is a stress. My point, though, is about the value of the tasks.


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

Ours quadrupled,but we added extra for board members coverage which added to a quarter of the total.


----------



## c0nsumer (Mar 17, 2008)

techfersure said:


> Ours quadrupled,but we added extra for board members coverage witch added to a quarter of the total.


We're probably going to add this D&O coverage, but because we didn't have it before we weren't in a rush to get it, like we were the GL and Accident coverage. We got a policy through Associated Agencies and coverage wasn't a ton what we had previously, maybe 1/3 more? (I don't have the numbers in front of me at the moment.)


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

We went from 610.00 to 1700.00 plus 700.00 for D&O and coverage is better too overall according our Chapter Pres.


----------



## trailmap (Jan 11, 2005)

I still haven't seen a good argument for getting D&O coverage. From all I have read, this would never come into play if there was a lawsuit stemming from an injury on the trail or during a club function. It specifically does not apply to bodily injury claims. It only applies regarding hiring staff, mismanagement of money, etc.

Not saying it is wrong to get it. When I was on a board of another non profit we got it because we hired staff. But I have trouble seeing the need for an all-volunteer organization.


----------



## indytrekracer (Feb 13, 2004)

trailmap said:


> Not saying it is wrong to get it. When I was on a board of another non profit we got it because we hired staff. But I have trouble seeing the need for an all-volunteer organization.


It depends on how much money you have in the bank and how much you trust your fellow board members. What if money disappears from your bank account? How do you explain that to your donors?

In some cases grants and larger donors will require it to ensure there funding is safe.


----------



## trailmap (Jan 11, 2005)

That makes sense. Unfortunately, we don't have grants and large donors. If we did, perhaps we should consider it. We keep trying to get grants and large donors, though!


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

We operate with a upper five figure account. You're damn right we have D & O insurance.


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

Latest notice from IMBA 3/5/2014, 5:44 PM CST.
---------
IMBA has scheduled two upcoming conference calls with K&K Insurance. I have completed a preliminary vetting of their general liability policy and I believe it may provide a good option for groups that have not found replacement insurance policies.

The two upcoming calls will include an overview of the K&K Insurance policy for IMBA chapters and supporting groups, including a review of features, pricing information and a question and answer period. I'm encouraged by the information they have provided so far. Perhaps best of all, they have offered to enroll new policy holders in a very short time frame.

The representatives that will lead the calls are Rich Englehart, Risk Manager, and Nick Davey, Underwriter. The call times and dialing information is as follows:

Thursday, March 6, 1:30-2:30 PM MST 
Monday, March 10, 1:30-2:30 PM MST 
Dial 1-866-692-5721 Enter 6634382 
It is important to note that while K&K Insurance seems well positioned to deliver quality insurance at reasonable prices for local groups, this is IMBA's first interaction with the agency. I'm hopeful that they will offer solutions that many of you will find attractive.

Sincerely,


Michael Van Abel
Executive Director


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

Nice!


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

old_MTBer said:


> Latest notice from IMBA 3/5/2014, 5:44 PM CST.
> ---------
> IMBA has scheduled two upcoming conference calls with K&K Insurance. I have completed a preliminary vetting of their general liability policy and I believe it may provide a good option for groups that have not found replacement insurance policies.
> 
> ...


Thank you!

Now if IMBA could just get this info to someone, anyone, in our chapter! There are 11 official board members and many more of us well over our head in trail advocacy and this insurance boondoogle and no one, NO ONE, can get email about this.

C O M M U N I CA T I O N S


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

insguy 2 said:


> When checking out their applications I noted the Activities and Social Clubs application best suited an IMBA Chapter. The application ( https://www.kandkinsurance.com/apps/Individual Applications/1569-Activity-Socialclubs_2-13.pdf ) was mainly for clubs that had no completed operations exposure (Bird Watching, etc.) and no questions were asked about construction activities, so this maybe a sticking point since most of the Chapter claims costs seem to be coming from that exposure.


I have doubts about the Activities and Social Clubs category. All the listed activities are quite mild and low risk. Sports teams, leagues or associations or sporting events/activities is listed in the operations not eligible for this program.

Even in the Amateur Sports- Teams, Leagues & Associations section Amateur Sports-Teams, Leagues & Associations - K&K Insurance Group, Inc. the following activities are specifically listed as ineligible.
-BMX/Stunt Cycling
-Cycling

The closest match seems to be in the Amateur Sports Associations section. Amateur Sports Associations - K&K Insurance Group, Inc. However in this category there is $3,500 minimum account premium. If IMBA is going to work with K&K on a master policy then the cost to affiliates and chapters could be lower.


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

Slocus, the last insurance e-mail was successfully delivered to 100 percent of the recipients on the list -- 745 of 745 delivery attempts. EDIT: Bear in mind that only the people identified as the chapter/club leaders for a given group are on the delivery list. We also refer to them as the "primary contact" for these groups. Frustratingly, a good deal of these contacts have not bothered to create an account at imba.com, and/or have set their account e-mail preferences to "do not receive mail." 

That doesn't mean, however, that messages aren't going into people's junk mail folders. One easy step is to make sure that infoATimbaDOTcom and presidentATimbaDOTcom is an approved e-mail address by adding these to your contacts folder. Or, e-mail sallieDOTHoeferATimbaDOTcom and we will work with you to resolve the issues.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

Mark E said:


> Slocus, the last insurance e-mail was successfully delivered to 100 percent of the recipients on the list -- 745 of 745 delivery attempts. That doesn't mean, however, that messages aren't going into people's junk mail folders. One easy step is to make sure that infoATimbaDOTcom and presidentATimbaDOTcom is an approved e-mail address by adding these to your contacts folder. Or, e-mail sallieDOTHoeferATimbaDOTcom and we will work with you to resolve the issues.


Thanks Mark E. I cut and pasted this last night to key people, because I did not get this one or the other conference call. No one got this one or the other conference call. I usually get all (?) Mike Van Able emails. No one else got this. At least two people have emailed you and Sallie and still do not get emails. Everyone knows about Spam folders and addresses, so that is not the issue here. A couple of us have gone through CiviCRM with a fine tooth comb, on our accounts and others, everything it ticked. It is not getting sent, or dies before arrival.


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

Not everyone realizes the issue with spam/junk folders. See my additional edits above. Feel free to contact me with your account info too -- Sallie's better at remedying problems but I can try. markDOTellerATimbaDOTcom


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

I hope they are either flexible on the start date of full year policies or can pro-rate a year's premiums.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

*Numbers game*

Hey Mark E!

How many members does IMBA really have?

The web site variously lists 30,000, 35,000 and 80,000.

WTF???

The relevance is that based on this the new cost (based on $400k premium) of the group insurance per capita is respectively $13, $11.42 or $5.

Me thinks that if five bucks was the true figure IMBA just should have went with it and not caused all the drama by leaving so many clubs in the lurch with no insurance. Maybe $11 or $13 ain't so bad either?

Maybe used it later as a justification of bumping up the dues structure?

Besides trying to be an engaged IMBA supporter, I took notice of this topic because I've recently been involved in a similar insurance drama at a state park I volunteer at. The cooperating association's liability premium sextupled; not so much because of a rate increase but because we were vastly under-insured. This works out to a premium of about $38 per member for $1M general liability plus D&O. (not all members are volunteers so it works out to around $62 per head of those actually incurring a risk)

I should add that this is exceptionally high because we had asked for coverage including equestrian events.

BTW our membership dues are $20 so based on that alone we have a faulty business model; fortunately fees from events and contributions covers (so far) this shortfall.

Yes we're still looking for a better policy.


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

IMBA has about 35,000 active individual members, although this number is always a little fuzzy because many members are in some phase of near-lapsed or about-to-lapse status. We know that most of them will renew or are in the process of renewing. 

We often point to 80,000 supporters -- this is common in non-profit talk -- because that reflects the current number of members, plus people who have signed up for e-newsletters or donated to fund drives. An increasing trend for us is people who donate to a fund, say the Legal Access Fund, but have not purchased a membership. Many of them assume that when they donate to a fund they become members but that is not the case. 

Also, many people join an IMBA club and mistakenly believe that makes them an IMBA member. That's a big part of why we rolled out the chapter program, which makes it possible to support both your local advocacy group and national advocacy efforts with one membership.


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

For anyone who could not get on the call with K&K Insurance today because the conference call capacity was overloaded, we are working with the call hosting service to increase the capacity for Monday's call.

I just sent this e-mail to chapter leaders and leaders of clubs that have previously participated in IMBA's insurance program:

Dear Mark Eller

Thanks to everyone who participated in today's conference call with K&K Insurance.

If you were unable to join because we exceeded the conference call capacity — sorry!

We are working with the conference call provider to increase the number of callers, and to eliminate the notifications when individual callers join or leave the group.
Here's the call info for our next session:

Monday, March 10, 1:30-2:30 PM MST
Dial 1-866-692-5721 Enter 6634382

I'm hopeful that Monday's call will accommodate anyone who could not join us today. Again, thanks to all who did participate.

Sincerely,

Michael Van Abel
Executive Director


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

I can't answer -- I couldn't get on the call! I bet some folks that attended the call will post their initial reactions here soon.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

Mark E said:


> Not everyone realizes the issue with spam/junk folders. See my additional edits above. Feel free to contact me with your account info too -- Sallie's better at remedying problems but I can try. markDOTellerATimbaDOTcom


I meant everyone at CCCMB on the spam folders. Our membership guy does not get any emails from IMBA and has spent months with Sallie trying to resolve it. Seems something has gone wrong somewhere. In the mean time, please keep us updated here. Thank you.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

Initial feedback I have received about the policy being discussed from K&K is that it is inadequate for our club and far inferior to the coverage offered by AA ins. I'll know more later this evening.


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

I listened to the call and have a page of notes. I was writing as fast as I could so there could be some inaccuracies. Here goes.

General Liability. $1M / occurrence with unlimited general aggregate.
Chapter price $500.
Affiliate price $750
Additional per occurrence coverage is available for additional $1750 / million.

Education for non-members $300 / event. This would be for things like skills clinics and other events where the general public participate.

Participant liability coverage for members in events is excluded. (My notes are a little hazy on this.) I think this means your club members should not sue the club. Medical coverage under separate policy.

Completed works coverage is excluded. Example. There is coverage for members while building a bridge. Injury by public use is not covered. Most of the claims have come from this area and the thinking is that if there is no coverage the lawyers will not sue because there is no payday in it. (There were many questions and concerns about this.)

Spectator liability is covered. If someone is watching an event and is injured by a collision with a participant, the spectator is covered.

Trail building is covered but this only applies to the actual time of the trail building.

Participant Accident Coverage.
$4.75 per member. 
Non-member volunteers can be covered for an additional $4.75 each. Example. The club holds a trail work day that there may be some non-member volunteers. That coverage must be purchased in advance based on the expected non-member volunteer count. That coverage is good for 1 year. Name list is required to be reported. The same applies to club sanctioned rides and events. 

Equipment coverage for things like trail tools, loaner bikes, and other such items is $250 for $10,000 coverage.

D&O was discussed a little. There should be more information in the Monday call. Currently it is $750 per board.

This is the best I could do with my quickly scribbled notes. I think it is correct but if you have questions be on the Monday call.


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

All good questions. Some of them were covered but are not in my notes and I will not work from memory on this.

Sometimes it was difficult to hear because the presenters were not real close to the phone. Lots of echo. Every time someone joined or left the call the system would interrupt with a message saying that occurred. They say this will be corrected for the Monday call.

They were quite clear that completed works or completed operations (whatever you want to call it) *are not covered*. Thoughts are that once something is finished it belongs to the land manager and they should cover the liability. Of course, because there is no coverage there is also no defense provided in case an ambitious lawyer decides to sue the club anyway.

There is a short information page and application on the IMBA web site. It is in the RESOURCES section under liability. IMBA site log in is required to see the information. The company is working on a brochure with more information. They have to run it past their lawyers to be sure they got everything correct. Should take about 10 days.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

insguy 2 said:


> It is not my intention to drive people crazy about completed operations insurance coverage for completed work projects, but if there is further interest how an occurrence policy like what I think the IMBA g/l policy provided this article ( The Hazards of Products and Completed Operations: Understanding the Fundamentals ) explains when coverage is provided.


What I find interesting in that link is that it's explanation of an "occurrence based" policy (which our previous policy was) as it applies to completed operations (in our case, trails) is critically different than what I outlined earlier in this thread.

I find it frustrating to no end that I keep getting conflicting information from knowledgeable sources on this rather critical issue.


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

I've had a chance to ponder the IMBA / K&K insurance proposal. They said that removing completed operations coverage is being done so clubs are not insuring the general public. However, under the participant accident coverage a club is providing accident coverage one person at a time. This will be a record keeping nightmare.

The insurance people said that a club hosting a trail day where volunteers may come from the general public should purchase accident coverage for $4.75 per person. The coverage is active for one year. The club also has to anticipate how many general public volunteers may show up to facilitate purchasing the necessary coverage in advance.

[Edited for clarity. As I reread my remarks I saw it would be easy to misinterpret some statements. The information below is strictly my thoughts on how a club would have to track all the additional information on non-member volunteers. This was not discussed in the call by the agency or IMBA. I just want to be clear on this.]

*The latest new trail work tool - a laptop computer.*

The non-member volunteers being insured have to be tracked in a database. These people will show up incrementally through the year, which means every non-member volunteer can have a different accident coverage date. This database of non-member volunteers would have to be maintained and be available at all trail work days. Each time a non-member volunteer attends a trail day the database has to be checked to determine if this is a first timer or a returning volunteer. If someone is a returning volunteer, the database will show if his coverage is still in force.

Suppose that a club anticipates that 10 non-member volunteers may show up for a trail work day and purchases that coverage. If only 5 new people show up, there are 5 unused slots in the participant accident coverage. That has to be tracked too. If on the next trail day 3 more new non-member volunteers show up the club has to know that those 5 spare slots are available.

That brings up a question about the 5 spare slots. Does the coverage on those begin at the purchase date or when a name is assigned to them? Do these non-member volunteer names have to be submitted elsewhere? If so, where? IMBA? The insurance company?

This is about the most ludicrous system I can imagine. :crazy: There has to be a better way.

It would be easier to make trail work days members only. However, many of our new members start by being non-member volunteers. They start by lurking on our forum. Then register and start posting. Then show up at a trail work day to see what we are all about. Then decide that joining the club is the way to go. Making trail days members only would cut out gaining membership this way.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

old_MTBer said:


> I've had a chance to ponder the IMBA / K&K insurance proposal. They said that removing completed operations coverage is being done so clubs are not insuring the general public. However, under the participant accident coverage a club is providing accident coverage one person at a time. This will be a record keeping nightmare.
> 
> *The latest new trail work tool - a laptop computer.*
> 
> ...


Our policy with Pachner and Associates is just a marginal amount higher than the K&K policy, and includes coverage for trailbuilding (TTFs excluded) without all of these headaches.

I am just not seeing what the advantage of K&K policy is. I would like to know the reasoning behind this. This may be due to my insurance education starting only three weeks ago.


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

Wow,glad we found out own carrier,2M per occurrence,members and non members covered plus any special events,only additional is if we supply alcohol for fundraiser or event,which would be per event or lump sum yearly for all events no limit.this is the gist of our coverage according to our Chapter Pres who made this happen.


----------



## trailmap (Jan 11, 2005)

What Kapusta just said.

We went with Pachner.

However, all of our insurance education started three weeks ago, too.

We got some free advice from brokers some of our members knew (e.g. members who had their own businesses and thus knew brokers) and it seemed the Pachner coverage did the trick. However, free advice is worth every penny you pay for it


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

I shared the comments above with a few folks here who are working on this issue. Here are their notes:

- Completed operations is INCLUDED in the K&K general liability policy. The K&K policy did NOT remove that coverage.

- Participant bodily injury/accident coverage is excluded. In IMBA's view, the optional participant/member medical coverage is sufficient to keep chapters/clubs protected from frivolous claims of the everyday trail user, whether hiker, equestrian, etc.

- IMBA's FAQ answers many of the questions being raised on the MTBR discussion board. It's already a little dated but worth reviewing for anyone who has not read it yet.

Frequently Asked Questions: Chapter/Club Insurance

Posted 2/13/14

Q: What are some options for my organization?

A: There are stop-gap, short-term insurance options for which IMBA is actively seeking and sourcing for individual chapter policies. Those options are captured and will continue to be updated/added to this document. Please add any suggestions to this document-IMBA encourages chapters and clubs to help in sourcing other options.

Q: This seems like a last minute decision to end the national program. Why so last minute?

This decision regrettably is last minute although IMBA and its broker have been working for more than six months to find solutions. Complicating the issue is a change of how the premium for renewal is to be paid, requiring full payment (about $400,000) to bind coverage. That's a big price tag for IMBA to pay up front with the hope of chapters and clubs later paying their share of the full premium. Add to this the fact that, just recently, several large clubs have gone out to find their own coverage--for good reasons--and thus are leaving the national program. IMBA decided this week that the outgoing national program was no longer viable. We regret the timing. However, there are options IMBA is sourcing for chapters and clubs to pursue coverage on their own.

Q: Why are insurance costs going up?

A: Our immediate problem of escalating cost is the convergence of three things: 1) being dropped by two different underwriters, and thus being forced back out to shop the insurance market for an underwriter; 2) a "hard insurance market" coupled with some large claims currently pending which, combined contribute to the rapid rise of the cost of liability insurance. Of course, in the mind of an underwriter any pending claim is an indicator of higher risk. Our national program premium is increasing nearly 200% of our current policy's premium, from average of $8 per member to over $15 per member; 3) the likelihood that chapters and clubs will not be able to reimburse IMBA for their share of the national program premium.

Q: What is the timeline for this change of doing away with the current national liability insurance program? Is this change forever?

A: This change is immediate, however this is not a "forever" decision. IMBA will continue to look at a new and restructured national program informed by improved risk management that limits our liability exposure. Our current national program policy expires at the end of February. Chapters and clubs should immediately take steps to secure their own liability insurance policies based on current local program needs. In some cases, chapters and clubs may find comparable coverage at affordable premiums, although it's more likely that a chapter or club policy will have proportionately higher premiums than a national program. IMBA will help its chapters in sourcing brokers for the chapters' liability insurance needs.

Q: What has IMBA been doing to find more favorable insurance rates?

A: IMBA, via its current broker Marsh and MacLennan, has been actively shopping and pursuing a new liability insurance underwriter since August 2013. It was then that our current underwriter, Navigators, notified us that they would not renew our policy. As chapters and clubs are aware, our broker was successful in getting two, 60-day extensions of the current policy. The second of the two extensions expires this month on Feb. 28, 2014. Additionally, IMBA is currently in conversation with five other brokers looking for a way forward with a national program.

Q: Why does the whole program suffer the impact of claims and then higher premiums?

A: The answer is partly a structural one. The current insurance program is structured as a shared-risk pool where IMBA owns the policy and each chapter and club is a named as additional insured. When our policy is impacted by claims of liability, everyone under the IMBA program and policy is affected because of the shared-risk pool approach. Please be mindful that the current claims are not legal judgments whereby a court of law has determined negligence and thus found liability (or blame) resulting in some large payment to the injured party. These claims are pending and most likely will be successfully defended whereby there is no liability and payment to the injured party.

Q: In the longer term would it be better to not have a shared risk pool and separate my chapter's or club's liability from other chapters and clubs? Should my chapter or club go out on its own and shop for a stand-alone liability insurance policy?

A: This is a good question and we are doing our research. The answer is dependent on so many variables. For example, some states like Washington have nonprofit insurance programs with very favorable rates for liability insurance. However, only Washington-based nonprofits are eligible. In general, IMBA believes that a national program, when properly structured with good risk management, will ultimately be the most cost effective approach for chapter and club liability insurance.

Q: Without a national program option, what can IMBA do to help my club or chapter find new coverage?

A: As of Feb. 13, 2014, IMBA has found at least two brokers willing to sell directly to chapters and clubs a stopgap insurance product. In one case, this coverage will be for just events. In another case, it would be a general liability insurance product. And we continue to ask for another extension of the current program in order to buy time to restructure our national insurance program.

Q: What coverage should we look for when shopping for our chapter's liability insurance?

A: This question is in many ways the core issue and question even for IMBA and our national program. The answers are not as straightforward as we'd like. This is another reason why we don't intend to go forward with the current policy; there are too many unanswered questions about the type of liability policy we need. That said, here is some guidance for your organization to consider when shopping on your own: it covers what you do as a trail building and advocacy organization.

The policy classification should reflect what you are and what you do, e.g., most chapters are NOT a professional trail building organization. Most chapters are a mountain bike organization conducting trails conservation, advocacy and stewardship activities under the auspices of a land manager. This is a distinguishing element. Think in terms of other trail stewardship groups like the Youth Conservation Corps. Is the chapter more like that in its trail activities or is it actually doing professional, paid trail design and construction services? Trail stewardship is very different from construction of trails in the minds of insurance underwriters.
And to contradict the above, there are a growing number of chapters that are doing professional, fee-for-service trail building and construction projects and may need to bolster general liability that is expressly written for a trail building organization and with professional liability.
Most chapters are also doing events, both riding type events and non-riding (fundraising) events. General liability policies may or may not include events as part of a general liability policy.
Personal Injury/Advertising Injury should be included especially so for trail building organizations. Members must be included and protected from liability for trail construction (if applicable).
Policy should say that premises owned or leased are covered as in many cases chapters have MOU's/agreements with the landowner.
Members of the club should be included, and any member of any IMBA club should be included. (Trail Building Liability)
For trail building organizations, there should be no restriction on the definition of "loading and unloading". Since that happens quite a bit with trail construction equipment.
The athletic or sports participant exclusion needs to reflect the race environment (most GL policies don't cover races) and not be broad enough to not cover other ride type events.
Products/Completed Operations, which is the basic hazard for the contracting exposure, should be covered for trail building chapters. (Trails, Technical Trail Features (TTF's) are considered products).
They shouldn't necessarily redefine "insured contract" to remove tort liability
Inclusive of assault & battery, punitive damages and liquor liability (including host liquor).
Q: If there is a gap in our chapter's or club's coverage, what is the impact on our programs and activities? How can we manage our risk exposure?

A: We are working diligently to be sure there is no gap in coverage. However that is a possibility. It will then be incumbent upon local chapter leaders to determine how to manage their liability exposure. In the worst case, activities or events may need to be postponed. (Keep in mind, IMBA has found some solutions/brokers willing to cover events on a one-off basis.) Many trail work events can limit their liability via the landowner. Many if not most landowners will extend their coverage to volunteers trail workdays. Also, any claims made for incidents/injuries that occurred during the time the chapter's insurance was in force will have coverage.

The longer-term problem and possible solutions:

IMBA's current chapter and club insurance program challenges are not merely a function of an underwriter's current view of the risks and liability they are insuring. Our current program's strain is also highly impacted by how all of us, IMBA, and chapters and clubs manage our risk. These risk management issues must be addressed in advance of shopping for a new national liability insurance underwriter.

The following are components of a comprehensive and cohesive risk management program.

MOU's or land partnership agreements: Many current Memoranda of Understanding that local groups have signed have added to their risk exposure. It's imperative that chapters and clubs recall and rewrite such MOU's so as not to take on greater risk and thus higher liability exposure. In general it's imperative to remember that mountain bike groups are, in most cases, not the landowners. Therefore we should not assume responsibilities of a landowner. Many existing MOU's go too far in assuming landowner-like responsibility and those should be recalled and rewritten.
Other protections from liability risk should be understood and in the mix of an overall risk management approach, e.g., statutory (state level legislation and law) recreation immunity laws must be reviewed and in some cases improved to afford proper defense of claims of negligence by visitors claiming injury on trails that we steward. Some states, e.g., Illinois, have seen a weakening of this level of liability protection. Others, e.g., California have very good laws that limit liability of volunteers and organization's doing stewardship work on natural surface trails.
A duty to warn is another important risk management tool. Mountain biking is a challenging activity and full of risk of personal injury. It's important to not diminish this fact even in our PR efforts. While we may strive for being safe and encourage overall safe experiences, it is still an activity where one can be seriously injured or killed. Duty to warn is really the landowners responsibility however when done on behalf of the landowner it can be bolstered via chapter websites, standard language with all events, help with proper trail signage, and trail head signage, etc. When done well, these risk management strategies bolster a defense against claims of liability. (see www.imba.com/resources-liability/designing-risk-management-program-mountain-biking) for more guidelines on risk management).
In concert with the above statutory protection from liability, a new IMBA sanctioned nationwide insurance program and policy will likely need to restructure our policy for risk of liability for professional trail development in contrast to that of volunteer trail stewardship - possibly having two different policies. There are protections for volunteers that are not extended to trail development "professionals" or those paid for their services for trail planning, design and/or construction. A growing number of chapters are delivering more "professional" trail services.
Volunteer Protection Act of 1997 is a federal law with another "shield" of protection for limiting liability for individual volunteers acting under the auspices of a not-for-profit. This would include volunteer led activities like trail stewardship work, leading rides, providing instruction. This federal law has no protection from liability for the nonprofit organization, however. It only offers protection to individual volunteers.
IMBA is also at the beginning stage of looking at more of a self-insurance program. We have much to learn about this possibility, as there are some laws and insurance industry regulations to understand. However, given the rapid rise in insurance cost, (nationwide annual premium rising from $230,000 to likely over $400,000) IMBA is motivated to look at the financial strategy of much higher deductibles, as well as a nationwide "self-insurance" defense fund.
Tightening up risk management of events is also critical for limiting liability exposure and rising insurance costs. There currently exists good guidance and tools for this, e.g., event waivers and informed consent forms that must be consistently utilized and signed by chapter sanctioned event participants. This includes group rides, trail work days, ride clinics, etc.
There are of course, distinctions between projects that move dirt around, and those that involve construction of man-made things like built structures. A conservative risk management approach going forward would avoid or defer liability exposure as much as possible to the landowner for any man-made structures. This is a big area of risk given some of the most recent claims.


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

I stand corrected. This is on the IMBA page about the insurance.
-General liability includes completed operations/products liability coverage.
-Participants accident liability (bodily injury liability) is excluded.

I reported what I thought I heard. As stated in an earlier post, it was sometimes difficult to hear the presentation. The audio was sometimes very weak. There was a lot of echo. There was background noise from phones that were not muted. And the conference system continually interrupted announcing people joining or leaving the call.


----------



## smeets1 (Dec 30, 2003)

We worked with Linda Paulsen at Van Wyk Risk & Financial Management, a local insurance firm, to obtain insurance for our trail building activities. A breakdown of the coverage and policy limits is below. The total premium for our policy is $1,485 (this does not include our D&O policy). The premium was calculated based on 264 Members, 70 miles of trail maintenance, and 3 special events.

Coverage Description/Limits

Bodily Injury and Property Damage -$1,000,000
General Aggregate - $2,000,000
Products & Completed Operations Aggregate - $2,000,000
Personal & Advertising Injury - $1,000,000
Damage to Rented Premises - $100,000	
Medical Expense per Person - Excluded
Non-Owned and Hired Auto - $1,000,000/
Property Damage deductible per claim - $500	

The policy includes the following:

Club members included as additional insured
Premises and Operations
Products and Completed Operations
Owners and Contractors Protective
Contractual Liability (Indemnity Coverage)
Employees as Additional Insured's
Broad Form Property Damage Liability


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

Looking for a little humor about conference calls? If you have not seen the "Conference Call in Real Life" watch it. It reminds me of the call on Thursday.
'A Conference Call In Real Life' Nails The Worst Part Of Office Life


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

insguy 2 said:


> Participant accidental injury coverage is a tricky coverage so that the insurance company isn't taken advantage of for accidents that happen before the injured person is reported and paid for. You must agree that no one should have coverage before the $4.75 is paid for them. Figuring a good way to report each individual should be pretty easy in these high tech days, but I could be wrong on that one. If reporting isn't easy then it isn't going to be a plus for the program. I am also curious if the accident insurance is excess coverage or primary and is there a limited amount of coverage (i.e. $10,000) or unlimited?


Depends on volunteer participation. We have around 12 trail work days each year. At least four draw over 150 volunteers; one event draws over 200 and next year will likely exceed 300 (Super Bowl Sunday, this was the 27th annual).

We also do weekly half day weekday work at two or three locations that have 4 to 20 people; most of those are regular members, but volunteers are often out on one right on the edge of town.

We have done 3572 hours of volunteer work this season, since Sept. 2013

Tracking these people would be a nightmare, and that alone would keep this broker off our short list.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

insguy 2 said:


> OK maybe you can help us better understand the participant medical coverage as it relates to your club/chapter, you have a lot of volunteer participants. has any chapter volunteer while working on a sanctioned project ever been injured where they had to go to a doctor to be treated for their injury and there was a charge to the injured volunteer by the doctor? We won't even talk about the cost to provide disability coverage while they are off work due to a more serious injury. Who paid for the medical treatment, the volunteers health insurance provider, the volunteer personally out his or her pocket, the chapter operating account or an accidental injury policy obtained through the chapter at a certain premium determined how?


First, thanks for the comments and feedback. This helps all of us.

We are very safety conscious. We do safety talks on how to use and carry tools, all aspects of trail work. We do it every event, and crew leaders are careful to watch and guide anyone doing something not safe. The other detail is that we have done so much prep work beforehand, that basic simple tasks are what gets done on work days, nothing especially tricky or dangerous. We watch and promote tool safety and awareness of those around each other as they work.

The only injury we have had was one university student who stepped off the trail, a rock shifted, and he fell, dislocating his knee. This was on City property, and of course we have had the previous insurance from IMBA for years. We work so closely with the City, the County, and CA State Parks that they would inform us if there was any injury or legal action that might affect us.

To the best of my knowledge, the university coverage took care of student medical expenses. The local university has a mandatory community service volunteer requirement to mitigate some alcohol poisoning deaths that gave some bad press. We do have all volunteers sign waivers, but we all know that an aggressive attorney will try to sue everyone.

That is the only injury accident we have had, most common is poison oak exposure, but we educate, and provide Technu after working, some scrapes and bruises, and some ruined footwear on muddy trails.


----------



## bethjim (Aug 2, 2010)

insguy 2 said:


> Does anyone have a summary of the new K&K program like maybe an IMBA employee who was involved in the development process? The pplication says the program started 3/5/14, so I assume there may be a summary of the program available at this time. It might answer some of the questions I and others might have.


It was stated on the Friday conference call that a "brochure" describing the program was coming. ETA is 10 days after vetting by insurance company lawyers.

You should really try to make the Monday conference call if you're in need of details concerning this coverage offering.

My Chapter went with Pachner & Associates with a start date of 3/1/14 to avoid any lapse in our coverage as we had rides & trail work happening on 3/1.


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

Why are so many of you hesitant to procure insurance on your own as to waiting for IMBA to work out a plan? there are good insurers and policies out there if you take the initiative to be pro active and do the research.


----------



## bethjim (Aug 2, 2010)

techfersure said:


> Why are so many of you hesitant to procure insurance on your own as to waiting for IMBA to work out a plan? there are good insurers and policies out there if you take the initiative to be pro active and do the research.


I think it's just a matter of time and determination. Many Chapters (as mine) looked to IMBA for guidance and possible financial assistance in procuring coverage. My number one reason for being part of IMBA was liability coverage for our Chapter that was vetted and recommended by people who should know more than I do about what's needed. However, IMO that IMBA benefit is GONE! We do a 60/40 split on membership revenues with IMBA HQ. I urge everyone to petition the HQ folks that this revenue split should be reversed - 40% for IMBA/60% for Chapters.

I spent DAYS becoming a poor excuse for an insurance agent. The more I learned the scarier things got. Finally settled on coverage that we HOPE is gonna be good enough for our little operation. Litigation exposure is frightening to say the least!


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

I have been following this thread and the latest information is so welcome. At the same time it should explain why people would rather just hop aboard with a plan supplied by IMBA.

As with many of the services and features offered by IMBA, none of them are exactly rocket science. Yet they take time and resources which are not always at hand for all groups. As for me, all of this detailed information makes my head ache.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

bethjim said:


> I think it's just a matter of time and determination. Many Chapters (as mine) looked to IMBA for guidance and possible financial assistance in procuring coverage. My number one reason for being part of IMBA was liability coverage for our Chapter that was vetted and recommended by people who should know more than I do about what's needed. However, IMO that IMBA benefit is GONE! We do a 60/40 split on membership revenues with IMBA HQ. I urge everyone to petition the HQ folks that this revenue split should be reversed - 40% for IMBA/60% for Chapters.
> 
> I spent DAYS becoming a poor excuse for an insurance agent. The more I learned the scarier things got. Finally settled on coverage that we HOPE is gonna be good enough for our little operation. Litigation exposure is frightening to say the least!


Very well stated.

We have been building and maintaining trail for 28 years, and we just let IMBA handle it. No one in our group is an insurance agent, and business or homeowners insurance is very different than what we now have to learn. It is the old *buyer beware*, so we are shopping, comparing, and waiting to see what comes available.


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

Make sense for Chapters not wanting to take this on,we did not want a lapse in coverage and are less then a week for final approvement for a skills/jump line then to follow suit a pumptrack,and quite frankly our new plan is better with more included coverage.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

Our organization secures multiple grants and we are a member of the SD Foundation, which acts like a clearing house for philanthropy. Our financials are posted on their website. Donors look not only at what we do for our community, but also how we run our organization. Donors of course want to see their donations being applied to community enhancing projects, not to organizational operations.

The grants we receive usually include specifications on how we are to use the grant (tools, education, etc.). They also require an itemized end-of-year accounting of how the grant was spent.

Membership dues cover our operating costs, which of course includes insurance. Our operating costs are now $20-$22/member with the new insurance. Our membership fee is $30/year. The current 60/40% split is no longer feasible. We will be operating unsustainably and financially irresponsibly. One cannot rely on larger membership dues to carry the majority, that is a very irresponsible business practice. One that will eliminate our ability to secure grants.

My question: Will IMBA revise their 60-40 split? We need an answer within 22 days.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

bethjim said:


> I think it's just a matter of time and determination. Many Chapters (as mine) looked to IMBA for guidance and possible financial assistance in procuring coverage. My number one reason for being part of IMBA was liability coverage for our Chapter that was vetted and recommended by people who should know more than I do about what's needed. However, IMO that IMBA benefit is GONE! We do a 60/40 split on membership revenues with IMBA HQ. I urge everyone to petition the HQ folks that this revenue split should be reversed - 40% for IMBA/60% for Chapters.
> 
> I spent DAYS becoming a poor excuse for an insurance agent. The more I learned the scarier things got. Finally settled on coverage that we HOPE is gonna be good enough for our little operation. Litigation exposure is frightening to say the least!


It is sad to say, but I agree with all of this.


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

Boulder Pilot said:


> My question: Will IMBA revise their 60-40 split? We need an answer within 22 days.


They will probably say to convince your members to upgrade to Supporter or Fat Tire Friend level or above.


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

IF we understand that we have been underpaying for insurance, even though we did not know it, than our own model is in error. 60/40 split, or no split, costs have now risen and membership amounts will have to rise.

Some groups may have to curtail what they do; repair, clean-up, but not build. The secondary effect will be to price _some_ groups out of some markets as some communities will be able to afford this and some not.


----------



## Queen Bee (May 27, 2004)

slocaus said:


> Thanks Mark E. I cut and pasted this last night to key people, because I did not get this one or the other conference call. No one got this one or the other conference call. I usually get all (?) Mike Van Able emails. No one else got this. At least two people have emailed you and Sallie and still do not get emails. Everyone knows about Spam folders and addresses, so that is not the issue here. A couple of us have gone through CiviCRM with a fine tooth comb, on our accounts and others, everything it ticked. It is not getting sent, or dies before arrival.


I've emailed back and forth a few times with IMBA and my account is set to receive emails. I have yet to receive any mass emails from them. Too little, too late.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

old_MTBer said:


> Monday, March 10, 1:30-2:30 PM MST
> Dial 1-866-692-5721 Enter 6634382


So is this now 12:30-1:30 *MDT* change from MST to MDT?


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

Maybe slocaus lives in Arizona or Hawaii which do not use DST.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

insguy 2 said:


> I would think the time would still be mountian time, which would obviously differ depending on our individual locations at the time of the meeting.


Yes but is it Mountain STANDARD Time or Mountain DAYLGHT Time since the change yesterday and this was done before the change from Standard Time to Daylight Time and the clock went back one hour. I know how to convert Mountain Time to Pacific Time; I've had 60 years + to practice that.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

1:30 MDT it is!


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

My conclusions:

1. Some need training on mute for conf calls.

2. Biting tongue.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

bitflogger said:


> My conclusions:
> 
> 1. Some need training on mute for conf calls.
> 
> 2. Biting tongue.


CCCMB is weird in the IMBA world.

- We do not have races.
- We do no have group rides.
- We do not have spectators.
- We only build and maintain trail.
- We have over 75 miles of trail built by hand by volunteers.
- We are building another 10+ miles of trail by hand with volunteers.
- We maintain all those trails by hand with volunteers.
- We have built 7 miles of trail with machines.
- We often get over 100 and sometimes over 200 volunteers.
- We work in public areas with the approval of the land managers.
- There are 100s to 1000s of people who use these public trails daily.
- Waivers don't hold much water in California.

- The new IMBA insurance plan offers nothing we need.

- To get the coverage we need, we probably need to stop sharing membership fees with IMBA; there may not even be a good reason to remain a club, let alone a chapter. Liability insurance was why we joined IMBA initially.

- I almost choked on each example having 6-10 volunteers. I cannot remember ever having a work day event that small.


----------



## bethjim (Aug 2, 2010)

slocaus said:


> CCCMB is weird in the IMBA world.
> 
> - We do not have races.
> - We do no have group rides.
> ...


May I suggest Don Pachner @ Pachner & Associates for a shopping visit.

The only thing we found a problem with the General Liability coverage there was "loading & unloading" not being covered unless you sign up for "non-owned automobile" coverage. But we're gonna work around that to save some cash. Y'all sound big enough that you probably own trucks, trailers, equipment, etc so you probably need some auto coverage anyway.

Pachner seemed experienced in trail building/maint exposures. But all things are different for you since you're part of the Bear Republic.

Good luck and thanks for all the work - maybe I'll ride one of your trails one day!


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

bethjim said:


> May I suggest Don Pachner @ Pachner & Associates for a shopping visit.
> 
> The only thing we found a problem with the General Liability coverage there was "loading & unloading" not being covered unless you sign up for "non-owned automobile" coverage. But we're gonna work around that to save some cash. Y'all sound big enough that you probably own trucks, trailers, equipment, etc so you probably need some auto coverage anyway.
> 
> ...


Thanks for that recommendation. Actually, the club only has a tool trailer, 300 hand tools, 2 chain saws, 3 power hedgers, a power mower. Tables, easy ups, etc.

No vehicles belong to the club, and the only machine built trail was done by hiring another volunteer group who used the money to finance a NEPA to get more of their trails built.


----------



## trailmap (Jan 11, 2005)

insguy 2 said:


> As far as your chapter goes you are 1000% correct about how the K&K program works for you guys. The K&K program does not provide completed operations coverage and that is a good part of what your club needs.
> 
> ....
> 
> Since other insurance companies provide coverage for completed work projects under the completed operations portion of a comprehensive general liability policy the K&K non-comprehensive policy would not serve your potential needs like when the land manger wants you to have that coverage.


So the information that Mark Eller provided is incorrect?



Mark E said:


> I shared the comments above with a few folks here who are working on this issue. Here are their notes:
> 
> - Completed operations is INCLUDED in the K&K general liability policy. The K&K policy did NOT remove that coverage.


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

I just verified this again -- complete operations are covered in the K&K policy.

Trail work is covered under the general liability and completed operations clauses of the K&K policy.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

Mark E said:


> I just verified this again -- complete operations are covered in the K&K policy.


But who is covered, club members, current / previous "participants", or the general public who might be non-residents from another state?


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

The local group, meaning club or chapter, is covered but "participants" are not in the K&K policy. It's subject to debate whether this strategy is sound but there are many groups that feel comfortable with such an arrangement.


----------



## trailmap (Jan 11, 2005)

Mark E said:


> The local group, meaning club or chapter, is covered but "participants" are not in the K&K policy. It's subject to debate whether this strategy is sound but there are many groups that feel comfortable with such an arrangement.


Trying to Grok this...

So the club/chapter is covered. Say some 3rd party "participant" injures themselves and sues the club/chapter. Since the club/chapter is "covered", then the policy pays for the defense, correct (hopefully winning so there is no award to cover)?

If that is the case, what type of coverage would the "participant" get under some other broader/more expensive policy that included "participant" coverage? Would it be that their injuries are covered (medical)? In other words, the only thing that the "participants aren't covered" means is that they have to use their own health insurance if they break their wrist or something?

Finally, did the non-expired RJF insurance exclude "participants"; so the available K&K policy provides coverage similar to what was in effect through 2/28?


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

Let me try the last question first, as it's really at the root of how we got to where we are now. The expired RJF policy was so broad in its coverage for participants liability covering -- including "any and all" participants --that it invited several nuisance claims. This resulted in the former insurance program becoming untenable: Two underwriters refused to write a renewal policy. 

The broad coverage for all participants had to change. 

The K&K policy excludes broad participant liability for the reason stated above. The reason for this is that it reduces the attractiveness of suing a local group. What personal injury lawyer would take on a lawsuit for a mtb'ing injury when there is no path to an insurance payment? 

So, yes, a participant injured on a trail that a chapter has done built/maintained personally assumes responsibility for costs associated with that injury. Isn't that how it should be? And if there truly is a situation of negligence and thus liability for trail conditions, that's ultimately not the chapters responsibility -- trail conditions are the responsibility of the landowner and/or leasee. That is why MOUs need to be better written to avoid the chapter assuming the liability risks of the landowner. Chapters are not responsible for the risks associated with maintaining and operating trails. The landowner is responsible for that risk. 

IMBA does recommend that a chapter include the $4.75 per member medical coverage (optional coverage with the K&K policy) which can augment paying for medical costs for injuries and lessen the likelihood of being sued for injuries and recovering out of pocket costs for medical bills. But that is only a modest amount of coverage, meant to supplement the trail user's ultimate responsibility for their injuries if no negligence can be shown. It's a good-faith measure that helps chapter/club members in particular if they are the ones that get hurt on a trail.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

Mark, thanks for your continued sharing of information in this thread. I have a few questions regarding your last post.

You state,


> The K&K policy excludes broad participant liability for the reason stated above. The reason for this is that it reduces the attractiveness of suing a local group. What personal injury lawyer would take on a lawsuit for a mtb'ing injury when there is no path to an insurance payment?


I do not understand the reasoning of this statement. Is not insurance in place to protect ones assets? I cannot drive without insurance in California. Please explain how having unprotected grant money in our account would not look attractive to a California personal injury lawyer?



> So, yes, a participant injured on a trail that a chapter has done built/maintained personally assumes responsibility for costs associated with that injury. Isn't that how it should be?


You must have heard about the "spilled hot coffee" lawsuit? I agree with your statement, "Isn't that how it should be" but the fact is it is not.



> And if there truly is a situation of negligence and thus liability for trail conditions, that's ultimately not the chapters responsibility -- trail conditions are the responsibility of the landowner and/or leasee. That is why MOUs need to be better written to avoid the chapter assuming the liability risks of the landowner. Chapters are not responsible for the risks associated with maintaining and operating trails. The landowner is responsible for that risk.


On page 166 in the IMBA "Managing Mountain Biking Guide", IMBA states, "If you stay involved in trails for long enough, there is a real possibility that eventually you'll be faced with a lawsuit."

On page 172 in the same book referenced above, IMBA states,"Generally
speaking, every organization involved in the trails design, construction, maintenance and management could potentially be named as a defendant in a lawsuit."

Having personally discussed the issue of nonprofit volunteer trail building/trail maintenance with an attorney, the attorney confirmed the above two passages from your well written book. Mark, can you please explain how having "less coverage" will be beneficial for my organization?

Mark, please understand my intention here is not to call IMBA out, not to hate on IMBA. I'm simply looking for answers.

Respectfully,

Jason L. Showalter
Board Member, San Diego Mountain Biking Association


----------



## trailmap (Jan 11, 2005)

Boulder Pilot said:


> On page 166 in the IMBA "Managing Mountain Biking Guide", IMBA states, "If you stay involved in trails for long enough, there is a real possibility that eventually you'll be faced with a lawsuit."
> 
> On page 172 in the same book referenced above, IMBA states,"Generally
> speaking, every organization involved in the trails design, construction, maintenance and management could potentially be named as a defendant in a lawsuit."
> ...


I am no expert, that's why I was asking questions, too. But my understanding is the answer to your question is that is what the general liability coverage for your club (coverage that includes completed works) does. It covers the club in case someone sues it for getting hurt.

What isn't covered is the third party participants. They can't benefit directly from the insurance policy. They can't make a claim against the insurance policy. They have to use their own health insurance. They could still sue the club for damages, but the club and its funds would be covered by its general liability insurance.

I could be completely wrong on this; just trying to figure it all out.


----------



## smeets1 (Dec 30, 2003)

> And if there truly is a situation of negligence and thus liability for trail conditions, that's ultimately not the chapters responsibility -- trail conditions are the responsibility of the landowner and/or leasee. That is why MOUs need to be better written to avoid the chapter assuming the liability risks of the landowner. Chapters are not responsible for the risks associated with maintaining and operating trails. The landowner is responsible for that risk.


This ignores the fact that contracts are the result of negotiation between the MTB Club and Land Owner. Absent extraordinary leverage contracts should allocate the risk of loss to the party who controls the risk. If a contract states that the MTB Club will maintain technical trail features and rider is injured on a TTF that fails due to rotted wood, the MTB Club probably should be on the hook since if it had upheld its end of the bargain it would have replaced the rotted wood and the injury would not have occurred. The key for the MTB Club is to make sure that its insurance covers its obligations under the contract.

I do agree with your point that contracts can be drafted to better define the MTB Club's maintenance obligations. While many contracts include a general statement that the MTB Club will perform any and all necessary maintenance and repairs, I prefer the following language since it narrows the clubs obligations to things it can control:

MTB Club shall provide at its sole cost and expense, the following items of maintenance and repair ("Routine Maintenance"): (i) annually, de-berm the downhill edge of any singletrack to minimize the pooling of water; (ii) bi-annually, cutback branches that encroach over the tread of any singletrack; and (iii) bi-annually inspect and repair or replace technical trail features, directional and difficulty markers. In addition to Routine Maintenance, if Land Owner or its designee shall give MTB Club notice (a "Repair Notice") concerning any potential defects, hazards or maintenance needs in conjunction with the Improvements, then MTB Club shall promptly investigate and take reasonably appropriate mitigation or repair actions within thirty (30) days following receipt of such Repair Notice, unless the nature of the defect, hazard or maintenance need requires immediate attention and is delineated as such in the Repair Notice in which case the MTB Club shall commence and complete appropriate mitigation and repair actions in a more expeditious manner as is reasonably practical given the circumstances.​


> IMBA does recommend that a chapter include the $4.75 per member medical coverage (optional coverage with the K&K policy) which can augment paying for medical costs for injuries and lessen the likelihood of being sued for injuries and recovering out of pocket costs for medical bills.


Basically, the recommendation is to buy additional insurance to cover the risk that someone could make a claim against the insurance policy that you are already paying for.

My comments aside, given the degree to which clubs rely on IMBA for advice, IMBA's conservative approach to risk management is probably appropriate.


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

You wrote: "You must have heard about the "spilled hot coffee" lawsuit? I agree with your statement, "Isn't that how it should be" but the fact is it is not."

Volunteer groups working on public lands are very different than for-profit corporations. For one thing, federal, state and municipal land managers can indemnify themselves from lawsuits, and they can extend protection to volunteer groups. 

McDonalds certainly can't do that. 

I'll try to post more info later but there are some other pressing communications matters to attend to this morning. 

I'll see if Office Manager Kerri Salazar (keeriDOTsalazarATimbaDOTcom has time to send an e-mail your way today. 

-- Mark


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

Regarding the book passages from Managing Mountain Biking -- those statements are as true now as they were when the book was published. The important thing to realize is that there is no insurance policy -- certain no policy that our groups could afford -- that provides absolute immunity to lawsuits. It's all about managing exposure and risk, and insurance is just one element of that. Waiver forms may play an increasingly large role (and, yes, they can and do hold up in court). Restructuring MOU agreements so that the land manager does not shift a disproportionate share of risk to the volunteer group is another aspect. Insurance continues to be part of the answer, but it's not the entire answer. 

One thing I've learned recently is that IMBA has hired outside, independent legal council to perform a thorough review of the current insurance offerings, and K&K's policy in particular. The work won't be completed immediately, but hopefully in a short time frame (weeks not months).


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

Everyone needs to understand that "M.O.U.'s" are NOT legally binding contracts. M.O.U.'s are basically a "to do list", who is responsible for doing a task, how, when, etc.

Contracts ARE legally binding documents that, in my opinion, require the expertise of an attorney. 

In Cali, Gov. Code 831.7 provides immunity to government entities, allowing these entities to provide recreational opportunities considered "Hazardous Recreational Activities", such as mountain biking, bicycle dirt jumping, skateboarding, etc. 

Cal. Code 831.7d specifically states that any organization that partners with a government entity, even if there is a legally binding formal partnership, WILL NOT enjoy the immunity protection.

Therefore, in Cali, all organizations must understand the consequences of their actions. Furthermore, in my opinion, these organizations, if they choose to participate in creating/maintaining trails on public lands, open to the public, must protect themselves to the highest degree possible.

I understand that all insurance policies state what is covered and what is not, and that any agreement, M.O.U., contract or promises made by any organization will not change the scope of coverage. I think IMBA may want to consider creating a "Trail Insurance Care Crew" that drives around the USA in Subarus, providing seminars to clubs/chapters to fully explain exactly what their liability is, access their coverage, and create a "Insurance Plan" which provides enough coverage for the individual clubs. 

Each club/chapter evidently has different levels of liability exposure and evidently the K&K proposal provides a minimal level of protection, which very well may be enough for certain clubs. I imagine many chapters are faced with the realization that they may have to compromise adequate coverage in order to share their membership revenue with IMBA. This will very well lead to much more serious issues in the future.


----------



## bsieb (Aug 23, 2003)

Mark E said:


> Volunteer groups working on public lands are very different than for-profit corporations. For one thing, federal, state and municipal land managers can indemnify themselves from lawsuits, and they can extend protection to volunteer groups. -- Mark


This has been an important part of our strategy, it's always best to let the LM indemnify your organization from work performed. Even in the construction industry, the state eventually indemnifies the builder by having legal standards that are verified by inspections and issuance of a certificate of occupancy. ROWs and easements issued to govt's make this possible on private land also. Having a local gov't involved in the cash flow will generate some liability protection. It may be possible to operate under the LM's workmans comp insurance in some cases.

Waivers and membership contracts can lessen the organization's own internal risk exposure, but IMBA club insurance was/is a big plus for low cash flow chapters and clubs like ours. We got a recent quote for similar insurance that was more than our annual budget. Our state non-profit corp BOD operates on the every-wo/man-for-her/him self plan currently.
There is a certain exposure to risk that cannot be avoided if you are actually making progress in any endeavor, that is the responsibility of leadership, and why leadership is to be respected.


----------



## old_MTBer (Feb 16, 2014)

insguy 2 said:


> One thing I couldn't figure out during the conference call was why an example of a motorcycle rider on a trail getting hurt was used several times. Why was a motorcycle rider used as an example and not a mountain biker, equestrian or hiker? Very rarely if ever do we see a motorcycle rider doing a back flip on a feature built by a volunteer trail building event. If the example had been a ladder or bridge built over a drainage collapsing due to improper construction while a mountain biker, hiker or equestrian crossed it it would have been more relevant to a chapter work product.


The other statement that was repeated was "someone rides across a bridge we built and the bridge collapses. " I guess they are assuming bike clubs do poor quality construction using toothpicks and popsicle sticks. There was never a scenario that the bridge was built strong enough to drive a Mack truck across but had slippery wet leaves on it. Or the person just couldn't ride a bike worth a damn.


----------



## MartyW (Dec 13, 2004)

*What's a "member"?*

Were taking a very hard look at the K and K policy but we want to know what a "member" for the purposes of insurance is. Right now, a search of IMBA's database for "current" members of our Chapter returns 169 hits. Some live a thousand miles away. Our Regional Rep's name is there even though he lives hundreds of miles away. Rod Judd is on there twice, with a 2020 expiration. Are we expected to pay $4.75 for each one of them for the medical coverage even though many (half?) will never be at one of our events.

Most our trail days draw 10-15 people, mostly paid members, with a total 50 or so (around 35 paid members) different people in the course of year.

Or do we just have to pay for people that actually show up?

And what about guests? If I understood the conference call correctly, events not open to the public are included but once an event is open to the public, the $300 event fee kicks in. So if we have 10 paid members at a work day we're covered, and soon as one guest shows up--$300.


----------



## Loren_ (Dec 3, 2006)

MartyW said:


> Were taking a very hard look at the K and K policy but we want to know what a "member" for the purposes of insurance is.


If you look at your CiviCRM training materials, there's a description of how to do a query for financially contributing members to your chapter. Under the old IMBA policy, you would specify that number as your membership count, ensuring that we did not pay insurance multiple times for IMBA members that were associated with more than one chapter.


----------



## MartyW (Dec 13, 2004)

"CiviCRM training materials"?...We just listened to a webinar..never got any other materials.


----------



## Loren_ (Dec 3, 2006)

Log into the imba site, visit Resources/Chapter Program/Database Quick Start, review the section "Contacts, Memberships and Contributions".


----------



## MartyW (Dec 13, 2004)

Thanks Loren--


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

Our policy includes all members and non members with once a year signed waiver for work days,and they don't have to be specific work days,can be at any time in the year and at there leisure as long as they signed a waiver.


----------



## MartyW (Dec 13, 2004)

techfersure said:


> Our policy includes all members and non members with once a year signed waiver for work days,and they don't have to be specific work days,can be at any time in the year and at there leisure as long as they signed a waiver.


Are you a member of a Chapter or an insurance rep. Whose insurance? Costs? Coverage?


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

Chapter,one of our board members is a drilling contractor and went through his agent,we passed IMBA contact info to him to follow through if he chooses too,1700.00,2 mill events included plus D&O 750.00 we have 100 plus members.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

Tech, are you saying your policy costs $1,700 plus $750 for D&O?


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

Yes.


----------



## MartyW (Dec 13, 2004)

*What is a "member?"*

Just what exactly is a "member", at least for the purposes of insurance?

IMBA has three levels of paid what I'll call "personal memberships"- they are Youth (U23), Individual and Family with pricing at $20, $30 and $50, respectively. https://www.imba.com/membership/individual
With the current 60/40 split, Chapters net $8, $12 and $20 respectively. Assuming each Family has at least 2 people in it, the per person net on Family membership is at most $10 and likely $6.66 or worse.

Right now it looks like any Chapter signing up Youth, which includes college aged members (some of our hardest working volunteers) and Family (some our most consistent and best working behind the scenes volunteers) members will be losing money with every paid membership.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

We have operated the past 19 years using membership dues to cover our operating costs. Grants are used to purchase tools and fund educational programs with partners.

Insurance is just one aspect of operations.

So, if Techfersure's organization has 100 members, the cost of ONLY insurance per member will be $24.50. If Tech's organization is an IMBA Chapter, and their average membership is $30, Tech's organization will LOSE $12.50 for every current member and every future member. How in the hell can an organization operate like this? You cannot.

Even if the average membership is $50, the organization will STILL LOSE $4.50 per member. 

Sorry, it is painfully evident that the IMBA Chapter program no longer is an option for the many organizations that are very actively constructing and maintaining trails on public lands. We paid IMBA over $9,000 to become a Chapter. The ONLY reason we did so was because our Board thought being a Chapter would make IMBA stronger and more efficient. We have a 501.c3 status. We were handling our membership quite well thank you, actually better than now as issues have just been discovered and we seem to be missing over 150 paid members.


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

At our trail work event yesterday I happened to meet the guy who set up our 501(c)3 in 1987 before we helped set up IMBA. I gave him a Lifelong Membership on the spot and thanked him profusely for the independence it has given us throughout our existence.


----------



## Ridnparadise (Dec 14, 2007)

Berkeley Mike said:


> At our trail work event yesterday I happened to meet the guy who set up our 501(c)3 in 1987 before we helped set up IMBA. I gave him a Lifelong Membership on the spot and thanked him profusely for the independence it has given us throughout our existence.


That's a cool thing and a pleasure to hear good coming from sad.


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

If not for the creative and business acumen of our Chapter board members it would have been very difficult to continue as a chapter,we have a full swag line of apparel which several bike shops carry for us and have a sponsor program with several levels of investment that is also very successful with business owners and shops.we are now into our 16th month as a Chapter and it has really helped pave the way and acceptance of several land managers and bureaucrats in our area,hope IMBA can get this insurance issue resolved for other Chapters who struggle financially so as not to loose any.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

Techfersure, what did you used to use all the money from your swag profits and sponsor program for?

As I stated previously, we apply for grants and our financial records are hosted on a Foundation clearinghouse site. Grantors look not only at our Mission Statement, but also how we operate our organization. Grants come with specific language as to how to appropriate the grant. Grantor's want their donations going to programs, not administration.

I also hope IMBA can offer real insurance coverage for all levels of Chapters, not just small chapters or ones that do not perform the level of trail building and maintenance on the scale that many Chapters are currently performing.

Cheers Mike for your act of thanks and for all you do in your neck of the woods. California is a very tough State to advocate in.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

Berkeley Mike said:


> At our trail work event yesterday I happened to meet the guy who set up our 501(c)3 in 1987 before we helped set up IMBA. I gave him a Lifelong Membership on the spot and thanked him profusely for the independence it has given us throughout our existence.


Michael is one of the best humans to walk this earth, gracious, funny, very warm. I have had the pleasure of knowing him for a few years, done numerous bike rides, and shared a few nips from the flask.

We have talked to him a few times getting our heads around this insurance challenge.


----------



## MartyW (Dec 13, 2004)

I like the way you think but I'm afraid it won't matter. Clubs typically buy "excess medical coverage" (that's what K and K's $4.75/person is). That means the policy only kicks in after the member's primary insurance pays out first.


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

Boulder Pilot,in answer to your question,what do we do with our monies from swag and sponsors? so far in our 16 months as a Chapter.

Donated a Patrol bike to the Sheriffs Dept
Purchased canopy's and banners for events
Held two outdoor picnic events for members and member recruit
Support for local race team
Donation to a severely injured local member
Reinvest in swag and add new items
Supply drinks and lunches for trail maintenance and clean up days
Trail Crew shirts for clean ups an maintenance,etc
This year will invest in tools and equipment,as many of us still use our own tools and equip

Insurance cost has definitely effected our funds that could be put to better use,but we have been fortunate with our ability to raise funds,but will also need to be more creative in finding new sources to make up any shortfall for the numerous projects we have on the books so far this season.


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

Bottom line is IMBA failed miserably on this insurance issue and there should be a shake up with there administration,I attended a planning commission meeting to finalize our proposal for creating a skills run,if we would not have found our own source of insurance at approx four times the cost of previous as to have no breaks in coverage we would have had to walk away from the table and throw all of the work to get us there! and yes we got approval! but now thinking why continue a Chapter if IMBA cannot get there **** together? now that we have the eyes and ears of land managers and city leaders,have proven that we are a good,dependable resource and offer our services for free,contract our own insurance,have no need for trail solutions,have to pay for membership with at the cost of insurance our membership dues cut is a drop in the bucket and we have marketed other sources of revenue,why not just start our own local association and pocket all of membership dues! not saying that this the path we choose or want to pursue as of yet but am willing to entertain if at the end this year IMBA doesn't step up and care for the well being of their members,just food for thought.


----------



## trailmap (Jan 11, 2005)

I don't know, I guess I never thought of IMBA as an insurance provider. I have been a personal member of IMBA since the early 90s, and my local club was an affiliate since then, and a chapter for the last year or so.

We never got our insurance through IMBA until about a year before we became a chapter. That was because IMBA was able to line up a real good deal and make it available to clubs (whether or not they were chapters; actually I think it even started before the chapter program started).

Fast forward 2-3 years and it turned out the deal that IMBA managed to secure for the various clubs was too good to be true, and it had to be discontinued and clubs had to go back to what they were doing 3 years ago which was finding their own insurance again.

Yeah, it is true that one aw-sh!t cancels out a 100 attaboys, but still. Imagine if IMBA never reached out and tried to line up an insurance program for the various clubs. All those people and clubs that were 100% (or even 80%) behind IMBA 2-3 years ago would still be behind IMBA, because nothing changed (or I'd even say overall things have been changing for the better).

But they did offer an insurance program for 2-3 years and many clubs benefited from it for that period. Why is that such a bad thing?

Remember it is not IMBA that is dropping the insurance, it is the underwriters that are dropping the insurance.

Our local club was able to go get our own insurance for about the same price as we were paying through IMBA. Yeah it was a pain in the rear, but everything worth doing is hard, and that includes getting more and better trails.


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

Ours went from 610.00 to 1700.00,not all Chapters have the ways or means and or funds to cover themselves,and yes IMBA did fail it's members buy dropping the ball on this insurance fiasco,a couple of weeks notice before coverage is dropped is no excuse for an organization this big,other Chapters like ours and yours found coverage but we are an anomaly or so it seems to me,in our region I know of one Chapter that defunct,curious as to how many others have followed suit! our Chapter will persevere this year but it is to be seen if IMBA is worthy of us and will have to evaluate whether it is in our best interest to continue or go at it on our own.


----------



## MartyW (Dec 13, 2004)

trailmap said:


> Our local club was able to go get our own insurance for about the same price as we were paying through IMBA. Yeah it was a pain in the rear, but everything worth doing is hard, and that includes getting more and better trails.


Great news. Who's the broker.. I'll call him right now.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

MartyW said:


> Great news. Who's the broker.. I'll call him right now.


We went with Pachner and Associates. Our rates per member went up about 10% from the previous policy through IMBA (in other words, very affordable). For our purposes it is very similar coverage.


----------



## thecaulk (May 7, 2010)

RVA-More went with Pachner. The coverage was much better than K&K. I recommend everyone give them a call.


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

Being an insurance agent these days must be crazy.


----------



## MartyW (Dec 13, 2004)

Metro (Milwaukee IMBA) is likely going with Pachner also. Rates based on "active" members rather than just "paid" members. Way cheaper.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

CCCMB got our insurance just in time for this weekend work day.

We have medical coverage during work days for members and our often large volunteer turnout.

We have liability for coverage if any trail user gets injured on any trail we have built or maintained and tries to sue us as a club. Our single MOU with the City for our Skills Park was accepted as well.

We do not have event coverage, but we do no events like group rides or races, so that is not needed.

It is recognized that we have good risk managements processes in place, so we got a nice low cost coverage, about what we paid previously, with the caveat that if there is ever a claim, it will be covered but then our insurance coverage will be dropped and we will certainly have to pay substantially more for coverage.

Contact Andrew if you still need insurance, especially liability if your primary work is trail building / maintenance. He is a mountain biker himself, and proudly rides a Transition, a Bellingham based company, we felt that was a plus.

Andrew Olive, AAI
Commercial Risks
The Unity Group, a Division of HUB International NW
110 Unity Street
Bellingham, WA 98225
(360) 734-8025 x238
[email protected]

The Unity Group was on the list that IMBA sent on the Feb. 25th update.


----------



## ew_perry (Jan 15, 2009)

I had not weighed in on this as I wanted to be sure my club was properly covered and wanted to read the actual policy! But now that I have I am very happy with the coverage we obtained.

I am a licensed agent and would be happy to talk with anyone in the following states: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, and Wisconsin.

My phone number is 309-762-4173 and email is [email protected]


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

insguy 2 said:


> When I spoke with my insurance buddies about the current state of the insurance marketplace at this point and time they indicated it is not a hard market as some have stated previously.


Of course the mtb trails insurance issue is important but I was thinking of something bit bigger: national health insurance. They guys I know dealing with that are losing hair, sleep, and sanity.


----------



## ew_perry (Jan 15, 2009)

Coverage is through regional carrier that has a specialty lines division. This division provides coverage for festivals, races, pony rides, petting zoos, gyms with rock climbing walls, tanning operations, Canoe Rental, Horseback riding stables. In other words they understand risk.
Coverage can be written with or without participants liability exclusion. Each quote is underwritten based on specific information about a club. Even MOU's are reviewed by underwriting.

Just like the last insurance carrier found as clubs we are not very homogenous and therefore grouping us together does not really work to create a group program. The only way that works is to bring each club to the lowest common denominator which the K&K policy does. USA Cycling even does this and takes it to a slightly lower common denominator, and can charge even less.

I believe that my understanding of regional MTB clubs and my relationship with the carrier creates the ability for me to present clubs in a positive AND honest way to the underwriting team gets coverage placed.

As I mentioned before I don't want to see this carrier inundated with bad submissions and rethink the coverage that is currently in place for our club or others that I am working with.

Eric


----------



## RYNOFREERIDE (Feb 26, 2004)

This thread is about the IMBA insurance issue. It had been an important thread and let's keep it on topic. Political discussion about the ACA doesn't belong in this thread. Mods, can we keep this thread on track and the politics out of it?

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## wildh (Jun 20, 2011)

insguy 2 said:


> I was curious if the chapter insurance comparison IMBA was going to complete is still being worked on or did the project get terminated?


Any updates on this? Could use some suggestions.


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

Find your own policy as we did and others as well.it is unfortunate that it/IMBA had failed in this but our Chapter could not function without insurance, as this debacle took place we were into last stages of approval for a skills run,and had events planned.financially this has effected usage of treasury funds that should have gone to better bike related usage.


----------



## tim208 (Apr 23, 2010)

as far as insurance, find a business owner that mountain bikes, approach him\her for a donation. tell them you will like the company on facebook and share some of there events. Give the business some good publicity and you will find the money to go buy insurance. It really isn't that tough to do.


----------



## Satan2 (Nov 3, 2005)

tim208 said:


> as far as insurance, find a business owner that mountain bikes, approach him\her for a donation. tell them you will like the company on facebook and share some of there events. Give the business some good publicity and you will find the money to go buy insurance. It really isn't that tough to do.


Great point. It is not that hard to find very supporting businesses. Here is a crazy thought to go with that. How about asking the users aka mountain bikers to contribute. Is that not the right thing to do to protect the sport we all love?


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

insguy 2 said:


> How is the sport of mountain biking going to be protected? What am I and possibly others missing here?


You can't be fully protected. Your group can do its best, use common sense, have liability waivers, and be a non-stock corporation.


----------



## TwoWheelinTim (Jan 29, 2004)

*Location?*



Boulder Pilot said:


> In Cali...
> 
> Therefore, in Cali...


How did the discussion take a turn to Colombia?


----------



## rellufs (Aug 31, 2011)

I blindly stumbled across this thread and hope it is not too late to possibly be able to assist. My firm, Trinity Consulting, specializes in building insurance programs for athletic-related associations (24 Hours of Booty/LAF, Girls on the Run, etc). I'm shocked, but not surprised, that a solution has not yet been secured for this. It's not at all difficult if you know what you're doing and what coverages are needed. I am a mountain biker so this would be extremely fun and rewarding for me to work on.

Does anyone know the contact(s) at IMBA HQ in charge of the management of the current (former) insurance program for IMBA chapters? I'll reach out.

- Sam


----------



## thickfog (Oct 29, 2010)

I think the mt biking aspect is easy. It's the trail work aspect that throws it.

Sent from my SGH-T999L using Tapatalk


----------

