Jump to content

Damage to models


John  Tee
 Share

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, spudsy said:

You can only wonder what would have happened if they had a mid air.

Agreed spudsy

this is a flying field loss incident.

If you allow me a little sarcasm, reading through

The message could be:

You can now be careless with your models and gear as the BMFA will pay out for it ! ! ! !

My belief is that modelling gear is expendable and can be lost in an instant.

This wing was lost due to carelessness on somebody's part and is gone !

Careless owner left the part in harms way, then it was destroyed. How is the BMFA responsible?

If the BMFA payed out on this, would the flood gates open as we cash in our less popular models under car wheels?

It is just Wrong, a model lost is gone.

 

 

Edited by Denis Watkins
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There seems to be a consensus, based on the OP’s account, that the car insurer may well resist the claim, impose the excess and punish the insured at renewal.   BMFA ought not to be paying out for this, it’s a dangerous precedent and will tend to increase the premium and therefore the subscription to the rest of us.

 

The points are well made about expulsion etc and the soft touch on the tiller by the Chairman.   However, one suspects that the reason for the OP is that it is or may be creating friction within the club.  If that is the case then, as most clubs are unincorporated members’ associations, the buck will stop with the committee and they will need to man up and intervene.

 

Thereafter, I concur with the above post suggesting that this is not at first instance a discipline or expulsion issue, although it might be in the worst instance.   Therefore, it is undoubtedly a job for the chairman to get them together, invite each to state his case without interruption, then reciprocate, and if there is no ground given in 10 minutes, take each one aside and invite a compromise.   If they meet in the middle, or close, then get them together, recite the terms and all shake hands on it.   If not, then be Zeus, withdraw for a day and require both to put their best position to the chairman within 24 hours on a strictly confidential basis.

 

Etc.

 

There you are, mediated.   It costs me £4,000 to be taught that.   Giving it all away.

 

possibly it reinforces the premise that a club chairman ought not to be the best flier, trainer, builder or socialite but should have core negotiating skills and the wit to know when to stick and when to twist.

 

or, prevail on a nearby club chairman to either mediate or arbitrate (they are cousins).   Then, a binding decision can be made which is remote from the committee by one important step.

 

BTC

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all your comments. I would add that we park along a hedgerow and all models are unloaded and placed on the flying side of the access route, about 20  feet from the cars so in theory the model should not have been where it was. At the time there were no vehicles apparently  to the right of the model owners car and so the car owner pulled into the next space and didn't see the model. I've not hear.d any updates today as I have not been around.  I don't think that it will go to extent of removal from the club, but it is a first for us in 50+ years .

 

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From your profile picture, you'll appreciate this Paul.

 

As a motorcyclist, the consequences of accidents can be very high. I have always taken the view that you can't fight a court case from a wooden box. As such, whilst riding my bike I am constantly looking for my killer, and mitigating the risks. In other words, if something COULD happen, then do something to prevent it being any more than very unlikely. Why would I put my life in someone else's hands?

 

to put this into this situation, If you model means that much to you, put it where the accident can't happen. Don't rely on someone else's vigilance. The rights and wrongs won't change the facts that a model airplane is no match for a car.

 

It won't resolve this issue, but a few words in the club rules or handbook to clarify the responsibilities may help others in the future.

 

Graham

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Graham, you make an excellent point but these days everything is everyone else's fault. The whole concept of taking responsibility seems lost these days and in fact you are rewarded for not accepting responsibility.  

 

Where there's a blame there's a claim etc. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gentlemen, this thread is straying into areas where it doesn't need to go. 

 

It doesn't really matter who is or who isn't responsible for the accident. 

The bottom line is how the two parties resolve it. 

If their belligerent, entrenched attitudes are souring the atmosphere at the club -- and it sounds like they are -- then they are ruining the peaceful enjoyment of the hobby for the rest of the club. 

 

It is a situation which cannot be permitted to continue. 

So if they cannot agree to an amicable solution which leaves them both smiling and shaking hands, then they should be given their marching orders. . . And sooner rather than later, preferably before they come to blows. 

.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Brian Cooper said:

Gentlemen, this thread is straying into areas where it doesn't need to go. 

 

It doesn't really matter who is or who isn't responsible for the accident. 

The bottom line is how the two parties resolve it. 

If their belligerent, entrenched attitudes are souring the atmosphere at the club -- and it sounds like they are -- then they are ruining the peaceful enjoyment of the hobby for the rest of the club. 

 

It is a situation which cannot be permitted to continue. 

So if they cannot agree to an amicable solution which leaves them both smiling and shaking hands, then they should be given their marching orders. . . And sooner rather than later, preferably before they come to blows. 

.

The problem is between the two people involved in the incident. In what way is that "ruining the peaceful enjoyment of the hobby for the rest of the club" ? It's bad feelings between them not towards anyone else. It is not the club's problem.

If the club simply does not get involved & lets them sort it out (or not) it will, in time, blow over. OTOH if the club kicks them out friends of both parties will probably feel aggrieved which will lead to a worse situation all round.

Also talking about ejecting them from the club is no more than short sighted macho rhetoric which may not be as easy to put into effect as imagined.

One positive thing the club can do is to look at the circumstances that led up to the accident & see what can be done to avoid a repetition.   

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those who know the exact circumstances are best to make any judgement in this particular instance but a request to settle the issue mutually with an observation that the club cannot tolerate overt aggression at the field might be in order.  
 

We do have a rule which states that membership may be terminated should someone behave in a way which “promotes a disharmonious atmosphere” - a bit of a catch all which happily has never even come close to being applied.  Should it be invoked, the member(s) affected have the right of appeal to an EGM. 
 

Maybe something for other clubs to consider?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many years ago when I was attending a small gathering as a guest of a local club, a chap reversed his car into my model - the exhaust pipe went right through the leading edge sheeting, the entire tailplane was ripped out and the model was quite badly damaged. The model was the prototype of the Webbit - a sort of mini Wot-4 sports model, with which I was having great fun at the time. The chap was very apologetic, but I took it as just one of those things that happen, an unfortunate accident, nothing more than that. It did however have two outcomes.

 

Firstly it gave a good story and a grand opportunity for a wee bit of gentle ribbing every time I saw the chap- who I'd never met before - which seemed to happen quite often after that. Gentler ribbing than I had to replace in repairing the model. Secondly the wee Webbit was a bit of a poster child for the sticky mess that small glow powered models end up like, when it comes to repairs and I resolved to convert her to electric power, after the onerous task of stripping off all the icky, sticky Solarfilm. The result was a nice clean throw in the car model, rather than throw under the car model,  which gave several years of good service, before succumbing to pilot error in my first foray into 2.4Ghz module use. I've still got the wing ?

deadwebbit.jpg

webbitflyby.jpg

webbitblackpool.jpg

glowwebbit.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you put your model aeroplane on the ground where cars are parked (a car park) even for a moment, sooner or later you can expect it to be run over by a car. I think a motor insurance company would find someone making a claim for damage to personal property under these circumstances hilarious and reject any liability. People are expected to take reasonable care of their possessions.

The club chairman should make clear the committee’s position that his behaviour is unacceptable and that he must put it down to experience and get over it, or move on. No if’s or buts.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes . Take responsibility for your own actions ,both model owner and driver. Not taking responsibility for your own actions seems to be a growing problem these days .  However there are two sides to every situation.  If  the car was driving into the car park moving forward then one would expect the driver to see any obstacle or model  or person in their path and brake or take avoiding action, as you would be expected to do while driving on the road. Just because your in a car park you are not excused your obligations while driving.

If cars are not allowed onto the flying field and have to be loaded and unloaded in the car park then it's reasonable to expect models to be in that area and driver should have been more careful.

If on the other hand the model was placed behind a parked vehicle and subsequently run over when it reversed  then its probably the model owners fault although the driver of the car still has  the obligation to ensure the way is clear. 

As far as the club is concerned it should be sorted between the two people involved amicably without interfering with the smooth running  of the club.

Ask the model owner to contact the  BMFA  to se if the insurance will cover this .

If either members cause the smooth running of the club to be seriously disrupted then give the offender/s a verbal warning . If they continue causing disquiet then issue a written warning. If they still persist in upsetting the club then suspended or expel them from the club.

If your club constitution doesn't have any clauses to deal with such situations then it's time to make an ammendment at your next AGM,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you substitute 'child' or ' person who tripped'  for model being run over in this discussion then it's obvious the driver is at fault.  So why should the responsibility be different if it is a model plane?   It's clearly the driver who should compensate for the loss.  It would not really be worth claiming on car insurance if it means losing a no claim bonus, so the driver probably needs to pay out of his own pocket.   But of course a negotiated settlement might be possible - offer to repair or replace with another model might work.   

Having a reversing camera on your car is really necessary these days with cars having poor visibility through the side windows ( higher than the car 'waistline' ) and rear.  

 

Edited by kc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Come on KC where did you get that idea from ?it was a few bits of wood on the floor not a child, Elephant  or a pushchair with twins in it,,

 

It's a MODEL FIELD car park so change your "'child' or ' person who tripped" to a bit of wood, an Ant or even a worm,,,

 

As for cameras oh come on back to the Real world where modellers often have cheap old cars and vans without cameras,,,,

 

 Ps;  I Voluntary censured this last bit,,,,?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, kc said:

Paul it's the principle!   You cannot just reverse your car without checking it's clear behind.  If you fail to check- it's your fault!

 

 

It's a model field car park, there should not be any planes in the grass, they should be flying ( preferably ) in the starting zone on a table being put together or in your car or trailer,,,

 

I put my planes in my car, close the boot say goodbye while walking to the drivers seat, get in and belt up start the engine have a look in the rear view mirror, , no kids  or elephants so I reverse back, if some one decides to put a wing or other toy in the grass behind my car, it's their hard luck.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we're in danger of overanalysing this if I'm absolutely honest. 

If I park in a supermarket car park and put my shopping on the floor in the adjacent space, it is likely to get squashed. Yes, I could say that the driver should have looked more carefully but in all honesty, the onus is on me to put my shopping (model, child, whatever you like) in a safe position. 

We look both ways when we cross the road to make sure it's safe, we don't just blithely walk out and assume that the traffic will avoid us. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, kc said:

It's clearly the driver who should compensate for the loss.  

Not from the description of the incident given in the OP.

Further info given states ...

On 16/06/2022 at 22:40, John Tee said:

I would add that we park along a hedgerow and all models are unloaded and placed on the flying side of the access route, about 20  feet from the cars so in theory the model should not have been where it was. At the time there were no vehicles apparently  to the right of the model owners car and so the car owner pulled into the next space and didn't see the model. 

... which strongly suggests that it was the model owners careless actions that are to blame.   

 

Of course if you witnessed the accident perhaps you know something the rest of us don't.

Edited by PatMc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...