BPA membership vs USPA membership
Ranger
Does this include 3rd party insurance?
If so, how does the USPA manage to provide a service that includes 12 color
magazines per year and membership benefits (3rd party insurance) for
approximately a 1/3 of the BPA cost?
baseMan
I wonder how many people would be put off joining the BPA this year after
the mammoth rise in membership?
"Ranger" <ran...@neoPat.net> wrote in message
news:c17hrm$f2h$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
Gary McGuinness
You do NOT have to have 3rd party cover to jump in the states, although any
DZ can insist on it, some ask for BPA cards, which is actually pointless coz
it says, not covered in USA or Canada on it (DOH !)
They have about 35 000 members, thus economy of scale for
insurance/magazines prevail.
I am covered under it's 3rd party liability cover here in the UK, as long as
the DZ I am jumping adheres roughly to USPA safety requirements.
But here is the crux of the argument, any claim must be made through USPA
and thus American courts, and American (I guess) law.
Yes USPA membership does include 3rd party insurance, you should also have
public liability insurance under you household building/contents insurance
policy.
I think the BPA however it could, should have kept membership under £100.
Gary
"Ranger" <ran...@neoPat.net> wrote in message
news:c17hrm$f2h$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
Ranger
'I think the BPA however it could, should have kept membership under £100.'
If the BPA charged £99 then it would be £50 too much.
It's time for the BPA to look seriously at the how members will react to
this. I know of several people that are not going to renew there membership
as most of the skydiving they do is overseas. They will join the USPA that
allows them to jump in all countries apart from the UK.
I think that if £105 is indicative of BPA performance then either internally
its skill set should change or it should change the type of service it
offers. At what price do we say enough is enough?
At what price do the BPA members simply refuse the renewal., and at what
point would the BPA readdress their actions as a result of say a 25 per cent
drop in membership.
I just want to turn up at a dropzone and jump. As far as I'm concerned the
colour magazine could be axed, and the 3rd party liability I would prefer to
get from the USPA if it saves me £60-70.
Can an experienced British skydiver join a cheaper foreign
association/organisation and jump in the UK?
Gary McGuinness
> association/organisation and jump in the UK?
NO !, the BPA oversee (on behalf of CAA) all 'sport' parachuting in UK.
The answer would be to look at cost of European associations and see if they
were having the same problems, looking at USA for an example, would not be
the best comparison, that could be found.
The BPA (in it's wisdom) a few years ago chose a higher insurance premium,
coz it believed the on-going continuation of that policy for the years
ahead, much to the annoyance and objection of the membership at the time.
One year later that very 'special' insurance agent/broker, pulled out
leaving us to go 'cap in hand' back to the other policy.
Somebody made a good point about expert witnesses, thus fuelling the
sue/claim bandwagon, I know a forces DZ had a student who used a certain
part owner of a northern DZ as an expert witness, although I don't know the
individual issues surrounding this case, but when somebody hurts themselves
sometimes they want to blame somebody else, and we as a sport are helping
them do that.
Will that person make more money encouraging/retaining students over the
years to come, or taking the £250 a day payments ?
Although I strongly object to the insurance rise, and don't now see the BPA
offering value for money, in the scheme of things it is a very small
proportion of the money I spend each year jumping, but I believe it will put
off new people into the sport.
These are the issues which I would like to see addressed (but never will be)
1) Is S/L jumping as safe as it could be ?
2) Would Tandems before AFF, be better ?
Gary
"Ranger" <ran...@neoPat.net> wrote in message
news:c1a01e$16c$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
charles ross
expert witness
It is known I have a lot of contact with the British Mountaineering
Council (they have a much better Sports Council relationship), but
something is going wrong when they are asked to be witness to
incidents in our sport
What should we do - let the BMC influence the outcome of action
brought against us: they openly admit that they do not have specific
awareness of our matters! They were asked because 1) they are a
'dangerous' sport too 2) they use webbing manufactured to their own
spec for their gear 3)their sport takes place in open weather
conditions & at altitude
I do not agree with the line of thought that associates the BMC to be
an expert witness to our sport, any more than asking the BHPA to make
a ruling; but if no-one from our sport was going to accept the work
then so it will happen. Can someone explain what is the hang-up with
being an expert witness as long as they tell they truth? From the
cases I have seen even a brilliant rigger or CCI can not be the entire
resource for an expert witness (they have required medical experience
too)
We are never going to be able to stop someone in our sport from having
a nice little earner, but if they are reporting the truth what have we
to worry about? We have an acclaimed set of SOPs - everywhere that I
know sticks to them - what is the problem? If I came across a DZ not
working by its SOPs then I would report it - I want our sport to be as
safe as possible, don't we all?
The SOPs are there for our safety. If there was bad practice (& I have
seen cases brought to STC) I would want the individuals stopped. All
this concern over our more experienced members being slated for being
expert witnesses I think is unfair; I think we should aim to elimate
any bad practice that would increase the odds on accidents happening -
that should be our main concern: stop the accidents before they
happen, hence no-one sues us!
Is this too simple? What have I over-looked?
regards
charles ross
david
Gary McGuinness wrote:
>
> These are the issues which I would like to see addressed (but never will be)
>
> 1) Is S/L jumping as safe as it could be ?
>
> 2) Would Tandems before AFF, be better ?
>
> Gary
>
no
one yes.
baseMan
memberships and how they compare to the BPA in term of cost and performance?
I calculate nearly £200.00 before you even climb into an aircraft.
when do we say enough is enough ?
"david" <rick...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:403A21FD...@ntlworld.com...
John Page
Static Line Jumping is quite safe, as safe as it could be well I don't think
so. If you look at the design of a rig you would understand that a standard
piggyback system was never designed for use with SL a safer system would
have the main at the top and the reserve at the bottom. If your on the
subject of RAPS they're still using rounds at some centres I'm told and in
my humble opinion I would say that although injuries were more common it was
a far safer system with less potential for problems.
Your second question I ponder and ask why? Have we got problems with our
current AFF system I dont think so. Tunnel time would benefit would be AFF
students far more than a Tandem. There was an idea to have people undergo
Tandems but to be honest it lacked much merit then.
I've given you my own opinion here and people may disagree but thats the
beauty of democracy.
Ranger
to the point.
Start a new thread if you want to change the subject!
I don't think the answers to my questions above were answered in any
particularly helpful way. Outside of 'baseMan' does anyone feel sick of the
rip-off Britain attitude being passed into the skydiving community.
As for Gary's:
'It's a small portion of the money I spend on skydiving'
That is hardly a useful answer relative to the BPA members as a whole.
£20 is a small proportion of the amount I spend on booze each year. I
certainly woudn't pay £20 for a pint!
Useful answers relative to the Subject greatly appreciated.
John Carter
is quite different. While I haven't checked the most up to date figures,
the last time I looked USPA provided only $50,000 worth of cover which
leaves you virtually unprotected against all but the most minor of claims.
The BPA provides £2,000,000 worth of cover which leaves you, your property
and dependants protected against all but the most exceptional of claims. A
70 fold difference in the level of cover may go some way to accounting for
the difference in the insurance component of the membership fees
"Ranger" <ran...@neoPat.net> wrote in message
news:c1dji9$m8s$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
Gary McGuinness
third-party liability insurance premium, which gives us each up to $50,000
in coverage if we hurt someone on the ground, ding a flap on exit or hit a
car on landing, is $427,898. That's about $13 per regular member out of our
$49 annual dues. That's up from $192,250 in 2000, when it was $6 per member.
Or put another way, the cost to members for our annual insurance has
increased $7 per member in just three years, while the dues to pay for that
increase have gone up only $5.*******
USPA $427,898 of cover (£237,721) for $13.00 (£7.22) based on exch rate of
1.8
OR
BPA £2000 000 of cover for £55.57
You get 8.4 times more cover with BPA
Equivalent USPA £ for £ - £7.22 X 8.4 = £60.48
So slightly cheaper cover £ for £ cover with BPA (I think I've worked it out
correctly)
Gary
"John Carter" <j...@doctors.org.uk> wrote in message
news:c1e5i5$2b5$1...@thorium.cix.co.uk...
james
> association/organisation
As I spend 95% of the year outside of the UK this was indeed my "cunning
plan". Get the Spanish skydiving insurance - which covers you all over the
world (except the US I believe) - last year annual subscribtion was about
EURO60.
I enquired yesterday about getting Insurance from April - this years membership
- EURO140.
Perhaps our situation is not isolated. Will check France and Germany.
> and jump in the UK?
I'll come back to you on that one.
Blue Skies,
j
neo
members more choice and lower the cost, making it more affordable for those
skydives that only jump in the summer.
Who wants to freezes there ass, spending 20 minutes to altitude in a piston
aircraft !
"james" <unclec...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:58502f86.04022...@posting.google.com...
Gary McGuinness
run.
Gary
"neo" <n...@dropzone.org> wrote in message
news:c1fj4c$mbt$1...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
Gary McGuinness
When will people understand, you do not have to ask the BPA if you can
joining the Spanish organisation and then jump here.
I think if anybody could do that then we all would have been doing it 15-20
years ago.
Gary
AndyC
>
> I'll come back to you on that one.
Not possible!
It is not the 3rd party cover that you need to jump in the UK, it is BPA
membership (which includes 3rd Party cover).
--
Andy
www.skyworld.freeserve.co.uk
stick boy
insurance ?
"AndyC" <An...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:c1fn14$3tv$1...@hercules.btinternet.com...
AndyC
"stick boy" <stic...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c1fv6o$hp5$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
Does it *really* matter ;-)
--
Andy
www.skyworld.freeserve.co.uk
Andrew "Sweep" Coulton
say is that their premium as an organisation is $427,898 - giving $13
a head. But the max payout for any one claim is $50,000 (£27,777)
where as our payout is £2,000,000.
So on that basis for them to have the same level of cover as us would
be £519 a head (though bear in mind that usually the level of cover
isn't entirely proportional to the premium, you tend to pay less for
each extra pound as the payout rises so in fact theirs would be less
than that).
But it still makes their equivalent cover significantly more expensive
than ours - unless I've got that wrong...
Sweep
Andrew "Sweep" Coulton
Sweep
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 16:42:20 -0000, "baseMan" <bas...@baseMan.org>
wrote:
Andrew "Sweep" Coulton
it's time to write the cheque. But as a proportion of the money I
spend on motoring in a year it's not massive.
My business liability insurance is currently £1150 a year and that is
always very sore. But as a proportion of my business expenses and
income it's not too bad.
But the BPA as a proportion of what I'd spend on jumping leaves me
much better off either of those two examples.
If we paid a pound a jump and jumped 20 times in a year it'd be
expensive. But in fact the rise against last year is £33.50 which is
around 2 and a half lifts to altitude and that's at fairly cheap jump
prices.
As it is yes it's sore, yes it's a shame it's gone up so much this
year, yes it's not something we want to see regularly. But it's what
it costs and that's just the facts. We can work on trying to stop it
rising at this rate year on year (and people are) but I don't think
you can call it a rip-off... The main problem here is that the rise
has taken us over the magic £100 boundary....
As to your original question, see my post later in the thread about
the financial comparison between here and USPA.
Sweep
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:16:23 -0000, "Ranger" <ran...@neoPat.net>
wrote:
Andrew "Sweep" Coulton
ISTR) :
Insurance £55.67 (two and a half times last year)
Membership £31.83 (up 3%)
Mag £17.50 (no change)
Sweep
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 16:47:39 -0000, "stick boy" <stic...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Dave Lewis
Intresting point's of view, what is your feeling about there being just One
Insurance? for instance in the example below, you show £600 and £1150 for
motoring and business liability insurance respectfuly, what if the bill was
£1750 and not only that all your customers have the same Insurance policy.
So if anyone claims againist the insurance, everybody has to pay the
increase in premeun, and I wonder what your customer would say, if after
taken a few months of somewhere they discover someone has tripped up on your
office floor, and sued for £80,000 . Now everyone has got to pay twice as
much lets say £3500.
Reading your break down of costs I suppose we have had pretty good all these
years, but I cant help feeling with a bit more control and monitoring it
could have been still pretty good! and what does the year ahead offer? if we
carry on as if nothing has happened, how long before this current Insurance
Company pulls out?
Regards
Dave L
Andrew "Sweep" Coulton
from around £600 to £1150. Have I had any claims? No. Has my business
got more risky? No. In fact over the last year or so I've started to
get more design and management work so I now spent more time at a
computer and less up a ladder than I did last year. My estimated
turnover went up a few K but I was on minimum premium before so it
wouldn't have affected things much. What has happened is that the
underwriters have paid out on a lot more policies year on year and
they need to get that money back.
In essence all insurance is on a handful of policies offered by the
big underwriters, and claims on one policy do affect other people's
premiums. Who remembers household insurance going up across the
country after the big storms a few years back? Everyone's car
insurance has been going up because there are more claims. Everyone's
business insurance is going up because there are more claims. That's
all regardless of whose policy is making the claim. At the end of the
day insurers take premiums from a wide variety of risks to get their
pot to pay out of. Of course they increase your premium if you make a
claim, but they can't increase it by the amount of that claim or
there'd be no point in having the insurance. So they make yours more
expensive and get the rest of the money back from all their other
customers. I'd love to be an insurer - you never lose money!
It's just that the premiums are divided a little more proportionally
with cars and businesses than they are with BPA members. But it's easy
to gauge a risk factor for a particular type of driver because there
are millions of them and so you can calculate a percentage likely to
crash quite easily.
You can't do that for an Advanced Instructor or an Instructor Examiner
because there aren't enough of them to produce a meaningful statistic
and so you'd end up with a significantly higher premium because when
insurers don't know how risky something is they charge a lot more just
in case.
And, as has been pointed out before, ultimately if our instructors or
our students or our tandem masters pay more, then so do we. Either for
our own instruction or for jumps because there is less money coming
from students and tandems to subsidise ours.
And beyond the hard and fast financial facts, I actually don't mind
paying towards everyone's insurance. As an A licence parachutist I
need instructors, I need AIs, I need there to be IEs to make new AIs.
Without those people I couldn't jump. In order to let me jump, those
people are taking on the risk that I might hurt myself, turn stupid
and sue them. Why shouldn't I contribute to that insurance?
And I need demo jumpers and tandem instructors because I can't afford
to pay five slots on the plane and nobody ever got a lot of fun out of
1-way FS.
Ultimately, the situation is what it is. I don't feel we were
under-informed, the beginnings of this were in council minutes ages
ago. I don't feel its disproportionately expensive in what is an
expensive sport. For the price of 7 jumps a year we get £2 million
pounds of insurance, the magazine and a body which constantly keeps up
to date with our safety, liases with numerous other organisations and
legislative bodies to keep us jumping, organises competitions and
encourages new people to discover how much fun we're having. I can't
see how people can claim that to be a rip off.
We need to work on this for the future and we need to ensure that this
doesn't become a year-on-year rise, of course. We need to look at why
and how people claim, we need to look at whether we are being too soft
on people with questionable cases. Council have a panel working on it
and I'm sure they will be glad to hear suggestions.
But lets not start talking about quitting jumping for a price increase
equivalent to 2 and a half lifts to altitude per year. And lets not
start blaming the entirely voluntary council members that we ourselves
elected for not being able to convince an underwriter to reduce his
price : the way of the world is that insurers have vastly more power
than any other organisation and if they tell you a premium then by and
large, that's what the premium is.
Sweep
Ivan Peters
"james" <unclec...@hotmail.com> wrote
No. To jump in the UK you must be a member of the BPA. If you are just
visiting then you can get temporary membership (1 month) for 24.08.
John Page
"Andrew "Sweep" Coulton" <sweep@proscenia$NOSPAM$.co.uk> wrote in message
news:v78p30hd3ocm2e7hm...@4ax.com...
Dave Lewis
is that people don't have funds to match this kind of increase, well ok they
do, it just means they do 7 less jumps this year, and maybe 14 less jumps
next
year?
I still feel that we need to look at spliting the Insurance across different
companys, yes this may mean that the first time jumper has to pay more,
which puts
them off doing that first jump, but what about their 2nd jump and of course
their
first freefall works out about £140, wonder how many people will be put off
by that?
Whatever people think about the increase, we do need to look to the future.
As for there not being enough of us to produce a meaningful statistic, it
may not
be a case of millions, but it's not a two horse race and I'm sure any
information
gained will be of use.
Dave L
"Andrew "Sweep" Coulton" <sweep@proscenia$NOSPAM$.co.uk> wrote in message
news:v78p30hd3ocm2e7hm...@4ax.com...
Andrew "Sweep" Coulton
£70 for BPA, insurance and mag last year. But we do need to look to
the future.
As regards first freefall, firstly it will only be full price for
people doing it at the start of the year. A lot of people get theirs
later in the year so the conversion membership is less.
Also, some clubs (including mine) already don't charge for the jump on
the first F/F to offset the BPA which might be something worth looking
at.
The BPA came as a bit of news to me on my F/F, I hadn't known it was
coming when I went for the initial S/L course. But after doing the S/L
and D/P jumps I don't think even if they asked for another £200 I'd
have been put off getting my freefall! From looking around the club,
I'd guess that the ones who make it past S/L and D/P are mostly the
ones who are hooked and have already resigned themselves to paying out
all their wages in jump tickets and canteen bills for the rest of
their lives.... :-)
Sweep
On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 21:45:59 -0000, "Dave Lewis"
David - The Freefall University
50,000USD and then only if you jump in the United States at an
affiliated drop zone. You do not have the cover if you jump abroad
even if the DZ is affiliated to the USPA. This was something I checked
last year when our DZ ( Skydive Lillo ) became affilliated to the
USPA.
The Parachute Association of Ireland faced the same issue a number of
years ago and utlimatley due to the smaller number of jumpers in the
'pool' had to give up offering insurance as part of their membership.
Each member in Ireland was then obliged to seek their own insurance
from private companies. One company that was reccomended to members
was www.sportscoverdirect.com/ [ group four policy ] which currently
stands at gbp37 pa . This policy also offers loss of earnings and
medical cover in the event of an injury from parachuting.
My personal observation is that the BPA has little choice in the
matter and is the victim of the way the Western European court system
works in general. It is given high legal fees cheaper for the NGBs
insurers to pay instead of fight. That being said , a friend of mine
who is an actuary in Hibernian says that insurance companies in the UK
and Ireland have never been more profitable.
I know some of this post has strayed off topic , however I wanted to
impart some of the background info above.
Best Wishes and Blue Skies ,
David Cowman
AFF I
The Freefall University.
http://www.freefalluniversity.co.uk