Comments on: Drivers On The Hook For Their Own Insurance http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/2009/01/21/drivers-on-the-hook-for-their-own-insurance/ A blog by insiders for outsiders Thu, 09 Feb 2012 00:03:01 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Todd http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/2009/01/21/drivers-on-the-hook-for-their-own-insurance/comment-page-1/#comment-37953 Todd Thu, 07 Jul 2011 03:44:54 +0000 http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/?p=914#comment-37953 The NASAR insurance covering drivers while at an event is a joke! My friend and driver was injured in the pits by anouther driver and now has to live with the pain of a seperated sturnum a seperated clavical a brused lung and a concussion. He has to go hire an atorney and sue the track. NASCAR claims that it was the fault of the other driver and thus his responsibility to pay for the injurys he suffered. The track claims no responsibility... It will be years before this gets setteled but whats someone to do who has been a life long NASCAR member/driver, puts on a show each week for the race track and then gets told nope we cant help you out, eventhough we told you that your were fully protected. NASCAR, what a joke! The NASAR insurance covering drivers while at an event is a joke! My friend and driver was injured in the pits by anouther driver and now has to live with the pain of a seperated sturnum a seperated clavical a brused lung and a concussion. He has to go hire an atorney and sue the track. NASCAR claims that it was the fault of the other driver and thus his responsibility to pay for the injurys he suffered. The track claims no responsibility… It will be years before this gets setteled but whats someone to do who has been a life long NASCAR member/driver, puts on a show each week for the race track and then gets told nope we cant help you out, eventhough we told you that your were fully protected.

NASCAR, what a joke!

]]> By: Larry http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/2009/01/21/drivers-on-the-hook-for-their-own-insurance/comment-page-1/#comment-4930 Larry Fri, 23 Jan 2009 07:53:24 +0000 http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/?p=914#comment-4930 I remember reading a couple of years ago that Bobby Allison had just paid off his medical bills from his 1987 (?) crash. The same article said that top tier NASCAR drivers were paying upwards of $500,000 a year for comprehensive medical insurance. I remember reading a couple of years ago that Bobby Allison had just paid off his medical bills from his 1987 (?) crash. The same article said that top tier NASCAR drivers were paying upwards of $500,000 a year for comprehensive medical insurance.

]]> By: Neon http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/2009/01/21/drivers-on-the-hook-for-their-own-insurance/comment-page-1/#comment-4928 Neon Thu, 22 Jan 2009 23:33:34 +0000 http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/?p=914#comment-4928 Windowlicker-I think we're on the same page here buddy! Windowlicker-I think we’re on the same page here buddy!

]]> By: windowlicker http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/2009/01/21/drivers-on-the-hook-for-their-own-insurance/comment-page-1/#comment-4927 windowlicker Thu, 22 Jan 2009 21:03:36 +0000 http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/?p=914#comment-4927 Ross, I'd rather run into a pole than be stuck hanging upside down from a lift car with my pants around my ankles and dozens of people taking pics of me with their camera phones. Shrinkage. Neon, I don't watch racing either expecting a wreck, I'm just saying in a legal sense that it is not unreasonable for a driver to expect serious harm or possible death by driving a race car. He assumes that risk. As far as restrictor plates, I think that's the most dangerous aspect of today's NASCAR racing. I think a driver would have a good case against NASCAR in a suit for forcing teams to use restrictor plates when NASCAR (and everyone else) knows that restrictor plates put the driver in a needlessly dangerous situation. Hell, we even have a name for that situation "the big one." I think NASCAR's restrictor plate rule is 100% negligent. But, then one says, superspeedway races without the plates are super boring. My answer, superspeedway races with the plates are boring too, until the last 10 laps. Take the plate off & shorten the race. 500 laps of Daytona is a waste of time & we wouldn't have to deal with the big one every year. I hate the big one & I hate seeing someone get hurt in the big one because of those stupid plates. Ross, I’d rather run into a pole than be stuck hanging upside down from a lift car with my pants around my ankles and dozens of people taking pics of me with their camera phones. Shrinkage.

Neon, I don’t watch racing either expecting a wreck, I’m just saying in a legal sense that it is not unreasonable for a driver to expect serious harm or possible death by driving a race car. He assumes that risk.

As far as restrictor plates, I think that’s the most dangerous aspect of today’s NASCAR racing. I think a driver would have a good case against NASCAR in a suit for forcing teams to use restrictor plates when NASCAR (and everyone else) knows that restrictor plates put the driver in a needlessly dangerous situation. Hell, we even have a name for that situation “the big one.” I think NASCAR’s restrictor plate rule is 100% negligent.

But, then one says, superspeedway races without the plates are super boring. My answer, superspeedway races with the plates are boring too, until the last 10 laps. Take the plate off & shorten the race. 500 laps of Daytona is a waste of time & we wouldn’t have to deal with the big one every year. I hate the big one & I hate seeing someone get hurt in the big one because of those stupid plates.

]]> By: Neon http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/2009/01/21/drivers-on-the-hook-for-their-own-insurance/comment-page-1/#comment-4926 Neon Thu, 22 Jan 2009 20:36:04 +0000 http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/?p=914#comment-4926 By its very nature, racing is an inherently dangerous sport. Whether it be for monetary gain, recreation, or both, participants assume the risk involved. Personally, whether it’s in person or on TV, I don’t watch racing with the expectation or desire to see wrecks or any bodily harm. But let’s be honest here, if racing was 100% safe for the driver (which it is heading that way), we would (will) be bored out of our skulls. The element of risk, speed, ability, competition and color are what brings us to watch. Now, notice I said “for the driver”. A fan, or even a crew member, doesn’t fully anticipate being injured in an event. The area of fan safety is where NASCAR walks on “pins and needles”. Things like restrictor plates, as result of Bobby Allison’s 1987 Talladega wreck, and pit road speed limits are not intended to protect the drivers first and foremost, but the fans and then the crew. I say, dump the restrictor plates, move the fans back a few, make bigger pit stalls and let ‘em rip… By its very nature, racing is an inherently dangerous sport. Whether it be for monetary gain, recreation, or both, participants assume the risk involved. Personally, whether it’s in person or on TV, I don’t watch racing with the expectation or desire to see wrecks or any bodily harm. But let’s be honest here, if racing was 100% safe for the driver (which it is heading that way), we would (will) be bored out of our skulls. The element of risk, speed, ability, competition and color are what brings us to watch.
Now, notice I said “for the driver”. A fan, or even a crew member, doesn’t fully anticipate being injured in an event. The area of fan safety is where NASCAR walks on “pins and needles”. Things like restrictor plates, as result of Bobby Allison’s 1987 Talladega wreck, and pit road speed limits are not intended to protect the drivers first and foremost, but the fans and then the crew.
I say, dump the restrictor plates, move the fans back a few, make bigger pit stalls and let ‘em rip…

]]> By: Ross http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/2009/01/21/drivers-on-the-hook-for-their-own-insurance/comment-page-1/#comment-4925 Ross Thu, 22 Jan 2009 20:24:58 +0000 http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/?p=914#comment-4925 Licker, The guy ran into a pole at the bottom of the ski run. He was a seasoned skier (held season passes for years) and was allegedly skiing like...well...like Todd Bodine drives. This was before it was common practice to pad lift poles. (I'm sure this is the reason that poles are now padded.) But why stop there? Why not pad all the trees on the slopes? Licker,
The guy ran into a pole at the bottom of the ski run. He was a seasoned skier (held season passes for years) and was allegedly skiing like…well…like Todd Bodine drives. This was before it was common practice to pad lift poles. (I’m sure this is the reason that poles are now padded.) But why stop there? Why not pad all the trees on the slopes?

]]> By: windowlicker http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/2009/01/21/drivers-on-the-hook-for-their-own-insurance/comment-page-1/#comment-4924 windowlicker Thu, 22 Jan 2009 19:34:45 +0000 http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/?p=914#comment-4924 Ross, The skier, his attorney, the judge & the jury should be shot. How was the ski resort negligent? That's the key. If he was a new skier & mistakenly went down a double black diamond because it wasn't marked well or he was hanging upside down buck assed nekkid from a lift because the bar in the car wasn't secured properly & he slid through then yes, you may have a case of negligence. I could understand if you got killed on a roller coaster at an amusement park, you'd have a case. Even if the ride might be "dangerous" you still have a reasonable expectation that you won't get killed while riding it. Now driving a race car, I think there is a reasonable expectation of death every time you go out on the track. I think Jeff Gordon even brought this up in the divorce because the bulk of the money Brooke got was gained by him risking his life, therefor she really didn't deserve it. It depends on the situation. Ross,

The skier, his attorney, the judge & the jury should be shot. How was the ski resort negligent? That’s the key. If he was a new skier & mistakenly went down a double black diamond because it wasn’t marked well or he was hanging upside down buck assed nekkid from a lift because the bar in the car wasn’t secured properly & he slid through then yes, you may have a case of negligence.

I could understand if you got killed on a roller coaster at an amusement park, you’d have a case. Even if the ride might be “dangerous” you still have a reasonable expectation that you won’t get killed while riding it.

Now driving a race car, I think there is a reasonable expectation of death every time you go out on the track. I think Jeff Gordon even brought this up in the divorce because the bulk of the money Brooke got was gained by him risking his life, therefor she really didn’t deserve it.

It depends on the situation.

]]> By: Ross http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/2009/01/21/drivers-on-the-hook-for-their-own-insurance/comment-page-1/#comment-4923 Ross Thu, 22 Jan 2009 18:47:46 +0000 http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/?p=914#comment-4923 While it's true that most State law says the participant assumes the risk, anyone can sue and win. This has been especially true in lawsuits filed against ski resorts. Signing a waiver doesn't mean anything. I remember a case back in the 80s(?) where a guy was hurt skiing and he sued the resort and won. The resort argued that (1) he was skiing recklessly and (2) he signed a waiver when he got his season pass. The guy argued the ski resort was negligent but let's face it, so many things in dangerous sports could be considered negligent after the fact. While it’s true that most State law says the participant assumes the risk, anyone can sue and win. This has been especially true in lawsuits filed against ski resorts. Signing a waiver doesn’t mean anything. I remember a case back in the 80s(?) where a guy was hurt skiing and he sued the resort and won. The resort argued that (1) he was skiing recklessly and (2) he signed a waiver when he got his season pass. The guy argued the ski resort was negligent but let’s face it, so many things in dangerous sports could be considered negligent after the fact.

]]> By: Nan http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/2009/01/21/drivers-on-the-hook-for-their-own-insurance/comment-page-1/#comment-4922 Nan Thu, 22 Jan 2009 18:37:13 +0000 http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/?p=914#comment-4922 I feel for the driver(s) and understand their problem of high insurance premiums, however there are many everyday working people that face the same problem and earn much less to begin with. It cost me almost 4 grand a year to have my minor daughter on my policy at work on a income of less than 20K before taxes. Now with her off my policy I pay less than $144 a year for my health insurance. Why don't the drivers get together and get insurance companies to give them quotes on a group plan. I know where I live small business owners can get health insurance cheaper through a county business owner group. They can buy (Cue the duck) AFLAC on their own - something is better than nothing. I feel for the driver(s) and understand their problem of high insurance premiums, however there are many everyday working people that face the same problem and earn much less to begin with. It cost me almost 4 grand a year to have my minor daughter on my policy at work on a income of less than 20K before taxes. Now with her off my policy I pay less than $144 a year for my health insurance.

Why don’t the drivers get together and get insurance companies to give them quotes on a group plan. I know where I live small business owners can get health insurance cheaper through a county business owner group.

They can buy (Cue the duck) AFLAC on their own – something is better than nothing.

]]> By: windowlicker http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/2009/01/21/drivers-on-the-hook-for-their-own-insurance/comment-page-1/#comment-4919 windowlicker Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:52:51 +0000 http://www.thenascarinsiders.com/?p=914#comment-4919 Tara, I'm sure there's a disclaimer the track has that drivers compete at their own risk. Racing is inherently dangerous so the drivers assume the risk. The only way a track could really be held responsible is if there was some type of negligence on the track's part. Such as having walls or fences that they know are unsafe for crowd protection or dangerous to a driver. Or knowing the track surface is unsafe. That being said, I would think any wall would be dangerous to a driver but that's the assumption of risk. Tara,

I’m sure there’s a disclaimer the track has that drivers compete at their own risk. Racing is inherently dangerous so the drivers assume the risk. The only way a track could really be held responsible is if there was some type of negligence on the track’s part. Such as having walls or fences that they know are unsafe for crowd protection or dangerous to a driver. Or knowing the track surface is unsafe. That being said, I would think any wall would be dangerous to a driver but that’s the assumption of risk.

]]>