I was on one of the other forums (White Ox) and somebody mentioned that they trained with a 17 year old that had only 6 weeks training. I thought this strange, and so asked how GKR go about insuring such low grade instructors, and very young ones at that. I wasn't starting up trouble or anything, just an innocent question. To my surprise the thread got locked instantly! So I started another thread asking why this was, and it seems to have been removed, and I can not get on to the forum at all. Why such a fuss over a silly little question like that? It just makes me feel that they only have something to hide. I just asked a question, which is what the forums are for aren't they?

Anyone one on here that teaches for GKR, how do you go about being insured, and who with? What credentials do you need to get insurance?

I won't get banned for asking that will I?

No, you won`t get banned! Most of our Mods and Admin are ex-GKR in one way or another.
I never taught with GKR but I`ll see what I can find out for you....

I'm sorry you were banned for it, although I can understand the defensive stance taken by WO.
I actually wouldn't mind knowing for clubs in general about insurance - what is covered, what are the conditions and such.

Hi Kangeroo, welcome back.

I used to teach for GKR and was over 21 when I started.

There is a small acreditation process that all prospective instructors must go through (eventually anyway) whilst teaching a class.

You are required to be 16 years or over, 8th kyu (yellow belt) or over, be able to provide a recent national police clearance, be first aid trained (either sports or senior first aid), and more recently be able to pass a 'working with children check'.

that is all. you don't take out any extra insurance, you are not required to be a high grade, or to have any formal teaching or coaching accreditation or certificates.

The company has something called "public liability" insurance which covers anyone while on the premises of a dojo. most school or community halls require this before they will hire out the place for use.

Apparantly they have negligence insurance for all instructors that volunteer for them which is supposed to cover the instructor for injuries caused to the students should there be negligence on the instructors part.


As a qualified dance instructor I already had a background in coaching and body mechanics so I should have been fine. But so many instructors are teaching 'karate' with no knowledge of how the body works, why we do an exercise a certain way, or how to change an exercise to suit a person who can not do it the way it is supposed to be done due to injury, disability, age, etc.


Hope this clears things up a little. If anyone has more up to date and accurate info please jump in and offer your ideas.

I`ve not heard of the "working with children" check before now. I think maybe over here that would be covered by the CRB police check.

Ah of course...

a 'working with children check' is an australian thing which issues a card that basically says "this person has no prior criminal convictions for indecent dealings with a child"

all people working with children, whether they're part time, full time, casual or volunteer workers must be able to present the card if working in an area that may have children.

Insurance seems to be typically public liability, professional indemnity and accident cover. In general terms the PL is for damage resulting from negligence. PI covers the instructor in the event they get sued for their negligence. It also covers them for stupid people - you know, the ones who will do something they know they're not supposed to because they have an existing injury or condition and then blame the instructor for aggravating it. While there are clubs and instructors who demand students do exactly as instructed no matter what or face punishment, we need to not lose sight of the fact that we're all responsible for our own actions.

Accident cover is for sports accidents. My own is designed such that you claim through public/private health system first and then claim against the insurance for any of those costs not covered by your own health insurance.

I'm constantly surprised by the people who engage in MA training and become astonished or outraged when they get hit or receive minor injuries (bumps, bruises, the occasional sprain).

I also don't know why it can be so hard to find out if/what insurance a club has. Surely it should be one of those things the clubs and instructors should be up-front about the same as the other important stuff like costs and the qualifications and training history of instructors ?


Mick

Oh yeah, the "working with children" check is what you get now instead of a police clearance. Pretty much the same as a CRB I guess. Not that a parent would dream of dropping a child at a class and never so much as set foot inside the door.


Mick

Is the age (16 and over) the same in England? Which insurance company do they use in England? 16 seems quite young. I guess in theory you could still be at school and yet run a class? So each instructor within GKR has their own certificate of insurance? I would imagine they have to prove they are insured to hire halls do they? And would insurance companies not be worried about insuring people with so little experience? If you look at it from the view point of the insurance company, I would imagine insuring someone teaching something as potentially dangerous as Karate with only a few months training, in some cases from what I've heard a few weeks, would be a bit of a worry wouldn't it?

Sorry Susan. Just read one of your posts and you already answered one of my questions. I'm amazed that no coaching qualifications are needed. Even in something as simple (as compared to Karate) as football they have to under go proper coaching courses. I find that rather worrying. I'm not sure I would leave my child with an unqualified instructor. Are parents made aware of this? Mind you I guess most don't even think to check.

Many parents weren`t aware (In my experience) that the instructor, in some cases, wasn`t a black belt. I know of one case of a woman seeing a newly B+W belted instructor who she`d previously seen at a regular class a few week ago as a green belt, and promptly withdrew her children from the class.
To be honest, you automatically think that the person teaching the class is gonna be a black belt - I know it never crossed my mind to ask when I first started either, or to ask about insurance etc.

I think GKR in the UK are still insured under the Governing body NAKMAS.

I recall being told "as long as you follow the class format the club will cover you - if you deviate from it then you are on your own." Insurance doesnt work that way however - you cant selectively choose what behaviour to cover (if you dont follow the format you are being negligent anyway - and thats what the cover is for). This was I believe just a scare tactic to make one 'toe the line'.

However - regardless of what cover a club has the instructor is always potentially liable. Lawyers however (dont start me again....) always go for the one with the most money or the insurance policy, so it would be highly unlikely an individual would be affected.

...and no, no thread has ever been closed or deleted for anything other than spam. Bring it on

So if you was to ask a low grade GKR instructor for proof of insurance, they couldn't provide it? How do they hire halls then? Most sports centres, schools, etc, ask for a certificate of insurance from the person actually teaching do they not? So if I am teaching for say Bob's Karate club, I still need my own insurance don't I? If Bob isn't there I am the one held responsible, so surely I need my own insurance?

Hi again kangeroo


no.

instructors are not individually covered. the regional manager does the hall hiring and they produce the clubs insurance certificate to hire the hall. the hall doesnt care as long as it's got the cover.

Nah the individual doesn't need their own cover, the organisation is the body which needs to hold the insurance because then any employees (including volunteers) should be covered under the policy. Plus, like Matt said, if something happened is a lawyer going to go after the guy who was teaching or the company he's working for? It's clear which is likely to have more money to pay up, especially when the company has to have PL insurance...


Mick

Ive been doing some research about this recently due to getting my bb and the possibility of being asked to take a class and this is my understanding of it - please remember I am a blonde Essex gran so I might be incorrect about certain things.

The two primary insurers of martial arts in England offer two types of cover: member to member cover which your association has and is part of the amount you pay when you buy your licence and covers you up to specific amounts for injuries caused to you by another student or if you cause injury to another student; and instructor liability insurance which can be purchased individually or through your association (to get a discounted rate) and covers the instructor for any injuries caused during his class. However, to get this you have to be 18 and either a dan grade or have a valid coaching certificate from a recognised body. The policy only covers the person named in the document. If you have assistant instructors, they are covered so long as you are in the dojo also and they are teaching what you have instructed them to teach. If you are running late and the assistant instructor starts the class without you, they are not covered. There is also a distinction that you need to understand between certain types of policy 'claims made' and 'claims occurring'. 'Claims made' covers you for incidents that occurred prior to the period of your current insurance cover but for which claims are made during the current period of cover. 'Claims occurring' does not. This means that you would have to try to get the claim sorted under an expired policy with could lead to problems especially if you changed insurance providers in the interim.

When I was with GKR, I showed MrKB (a solicitor) a copy of the copy of a sort of certificate of insurance that I had been given by GKR and he said it was pretty much worthless without being able to see the policy document that it referred to so he could read any exclusions or caveats. We never seemed to be able to get hold of a copy of that. I remember there being talk of bws being insured on the basis that there was a black belt (the RM) keeping an eye on our progress - which I guess is a very loose interpretation of the black belt/policy holder being in the building, which of course he never was. It was one of the reasons I stopped running my own class and I was very loathe to have my name at the top of a class sheet. I like my house.

Clearly from what KB is saying it seems inconceivable that GKR have actually got the level of insurance for instructors that other martial art organisations have. Not only do the insurers require holders of this level of cover to be a) over 18 and b) qualified to dan grade or equivalent but (as far as I am aware) each holder needs to be individually name and paid for - does anyone seriously believe that GKR pays the better part of a hundred pounds for each and every B&W belt that takes a class!

I suspect that the way they do it is by having a much lower level of cover that hinges on the use of the term 'non-contact karate'. If GKR assures the insurers that there is never any contact at all during a karate class then that puts it in a whole different category, similar to a yoga or aerobics class - there is in fact no need for martial arts specific insurance at all.

So I would guess that if, as a UK GKR instructor, as soon as you have students sparring and anyone gets hit (even lightly) then you are already operating outside of the insurance cover provided.

I can't prove that, but only sight of the insurance certificate would confirm it one way or the other.

Mike

Banned after 14 posts, not bad!

In short, you asked dumb things which were off-topic, and lack common sense.

Personally I just want to talk about karate training.

I think this is a valid topic here. Insurance is a very important thing, especially in this age of No-win No-fee litigation culture we seem to have got.
When I train I want to know where I stand with things like these.

I find it very much on topic. I might say it's more on topic than your post which is a tad personal. Please keep any personal attacks off the board.

The insurance matter was such a concern to me and Susan when we taught that we actually got students to sign disclaimers when they started. They arent that much good but better than nothing - especially adding 'voluntary assumption of risk' clauses explaining likely potential damage. Lawyers have their uses - handy when your brother in law is one. The reason for this was due to the complete inability to get anything in writing from the club stating what our situation and potential exposure to liability was - or even if they had a policy.

My TKD school stopped insuring and self insured. I was astounded at this but it seems they just got all the dojo/jang (about 8 of them) to put a certain amount each month into a fund to cover anything that may happen. It seemed claims were so rare it was better to self insure.

Bradt, if you want to talk about Karate training, why answer to a topic on insurance? If you train with GKR (maybe you don't) surely you must find it worrying that instructors do not seem to be insured?

So no one has actually seen GKR's insurance policies? Karatebarbie, who was it that you asked for the policy document that you never got to see? Was it just your instructor, or someone higher up? What was their reason for not providing it?

I did some delving into this too a while back. GKR has a basic member to member club policy, which covers students against eachother; it does NOT have an instructor liability policy, which means the simple fact is, GKR instructors are NOT insured whilst teaching. Should a student make a claim against the instructor, they can take them to the cleaners. All it takes is a student to be injured as a direct result of something they were told to do in class, and said instructor is up a very smelly creek without a paddle.

Don't believe me? Ask to see the instructor policy. I did, and they sent me a many times photocopied member to member policy certificate, without the policy document that it referred to. When I said that the document sent wasn't the one that covered the instructors, I was told that it was. They obviously thought I was stupid.

In other words, GKR as a club are covered, but the unpaid instructors are not. I actuall find this on topic, very sensible and alot to do with karate training. Black and whites beware.

kangeroo and others,

Sorry, my post was uncalled for.

I think the way he did it though was kinda threataning... I got the impression he has been in a while and just felt like stiring some crap. I'm likely to be wrong though.
However, in that forum, there had been alot of this sort of thing talked about. And I brought much of it up too with me telling how I left GKR and some of my reasons.
One reason was because of the harm that could be made if an accident did happen. Because, no, I wasnt insured and I had my own class! And the fact that I was only a green belt with less than a year of training did no sit well with me.
Frankly, I think the whole black and white thing is folly. Dan grade. Thats what should be teaching. Not kyu, with little experiance.


Si

Obviously this should be of great concern to GKR instructors. They are clearly very vulnerable to any litigation that might occur. But there's a further issue beyond that, less dramatic perhaps but still important. And that is... ...honesty. The hierarchy of the organisation knowingly misleads you. And when you dig deeper, as Mark did, they simply tell blatant lies.

My website tells anyone who cares to know, exactly what our insurance arrangements for members are. See www.headingleykarate.org/costs.htm which links to our insurers website - showing details of the member to member cover and also the professional indemnity cover which all our instructors are obliged to take out.

There should be no need to be secretive about insurance arrangements. Secrecy on this subject can only mean that you've got something to hide.

Mike

Brad, pleb - if someone is just trolling then fine, by all means tell them what you think. However posts can only be viewed in the context of this particular forum and not any other one. Theres no problem with Mal and myself - we have co-operated on several occasions when needed due to splits with members, malicious posts etc. However we dont visit nor post on each others forums so we dont know whats been happening there and are unable to take posts in context of whats been said elsewhere. We have different ideas on how a forum should be run and thats a bloody great thing - it would be so boring if all forums were the same.

Feel free to drop me a PM or email if youd like to chat about this issue...especially feel free to do so if one of your trolls comes over here.... It would save our mods a lot of time deleting spammers


back to topic, and thanks for being understanding Brad.

Bradt - no problems.

Mike you're right. The fact that no one answered my question made me think eactly what you said - there must be something to hide. I find it incredible that a group of this size can take this issue so lightly. With the thousands of members involved, surely the risk of accident is fairly high? It only takes something silly doesn't it? And surely they can afford the cover needed?

A student of mine who was a ballet dancer and a pianist dislocated his finger during a sparring session and one of my assistants drove him to the emergency room.

Needless to say since he was trying out for professional ballet companies, he did not return as it made things difficult for him and he ended up having several months off his piano classes and some considerable amount of time lapsed in his ballet training.

Luckily for me he was a very decent gentleman and didn't take it anywhere. He came in and apologised for leaving the class explaining his reasons and also apologised for putting himself in that position and making it hard on me for having an injury in my class. He took complete responsibility.

He could have been a (insert preferred expletive) about the whole thing and sued for loss of income or future income but took it on his own error. Next time I might not have been so lucky. Except I was lucky enough to have such a decent class base that the second time it happened that student also took it as his own error.

It was enough to make me think very hard about what I was doing in class, and was very thankful that Matt and I had brought out those disclaimers he spoke of earlier. Just in case.

In hind sight... it's not the best situation to be in.

Wow.

It seems that insurance varies from country to country, which I suppose is not really all that unexpected.

My membership forms are modelled on others as far as a disclaimer goes. As I think has been mentioned, it's not worth anything if someone does get injured. You can't absolve an instructor or official of their obligation for duty of care. About all it does do is offer some means to stop someone claiming they never knew they might get hurt.

I would have to re-read my policy to be certain but I'm reasonably certain that it covers anyone who steps up to run a class if I'm absent. That's slightly different to being a regular instructor anyway. You would expect (and hope) that if someone is filling in on what is clearly a temporary and short-term basis that they would be covered to the same extent as the regular instructor.

You're learning a martial art. You might practice with a partner to a greater or lesser extent, depending on the club. You have two people both moving and practicing techniques at the same time. From this it's obvious to everyone except those with no commonsense (and the sort of people who phone up talk-back radio shows ) that the possibility of an accident exists. Someone might get hurt. But people still come out and say they didn't expect they might get hit or hurt. "It's supposed to be non-contact sparring" is one I've heard more than once.

The worst injury I've had was torn ligaments, which took me out of training completely for 3 months and took another 12 months to get back to nearly where I was prior to the injury. That was with taking care with the injury and not overstressing or trying to push harder. I never thought of trying to sue anyone, or even blame anyone. The guy I was partnered with at the time felt awful about it, but to me it was just one of those things that happen and you accept the risk when you choose to train.


Mick

But are you absolutely sure about that? Don't they have to be individually named and in possession of the relevant qualifications as stipulated by the policy?

I'm now retired from practising shiatsu massage. But when I did it professionally I had professional indemnity cover to the tune of several million pounds. Legally speaking this is basically the same sort of cover that martial arts instructors take out in the UK (my martial arts professional indemnity covers me for claims up to £5million if I remember correctly). But if I took a night off at short notice and asked my mum to step in and do a treatment, the insurance company would not cover her for acting in my place. My mum might do a mean massage but she doesn't have any professional qualifications and therefore wouldn't be able to get her professional indemnity cover in the first place. But even if she could, my policy certainly wouldn't cover her, she'd need her own policy.

I'm reasonably certain the same is true for professional indemnity cover for martial arts instructors, at least in the UK.

Mike

I've checked my policy, and it should be pretty much the same for other clubs here as it's a generic martial arts insurance policy. Instructors/coaches/officials don't have to be named nor does the policy stipulate qualifications. They basically just have to be appointed by the club and have qualifications deemed appropriate by the club. This is possibly the big difference between GKR operations here and the UK, like what markp was talking about. Regardless, if someone asks about whether/how they're covered by insurance and get the runaround instead of "yes, here's a copy of the policy if you want to read it" I'd be worried too.

The Public Liability insurance covers payment of compensation for injury or property damage and the legal fees and court costs involved in defending any claims. This is where someone wants to sue for injury beyond the costs of medical treatment because that is covered under the accident insurance. The policy covers any officials and employees as well as any registered member of the club or voluntary worker acting in connection with club activities.

The Professional Indemnity covers claims arising from breach of professional duty - negligence - including legal costs. It covers qualified persons appointed by the club to act as a coach or official. "Qualified" means they have the appropriate qualifications or registration or accreditation or authorisation from the club. The advice I have is that this means if someone who is qualified fills in for me from their own initiative they are covered if they are appropriately qualified (e.g. black belt or sports coaching quals). e.g. if I haven't arrived to start a class. If I ask someone to fill in then they're also covered, but if I've asked someone and I know they're not competent then any negligence is on my part and not theirs. Someone might have a different take on that?

Although if I can't make it to a class and can't get a suitable person to teach it for me then I'd choose to cancel the class for that night. Because, with all due respect to my students and their abilities (and they are a great bunch), you can practice with others without an instructor because how else will you improve without putting in time outside of classes, but you need someone more advanced to be able to teach you properly.

Delegating someone in class to help someone else is not the same because they're still all being supervised. Having someone teach without supervision is what we're talking about here. I guess this is why the PL/PI insurance premiums are so much higher than the accident insurance.

I guess in the end you'd have to be able to defend your choice of instructor with some form of independent verification that their qualifications or grade met some sort of standard accepted level generally rather than just what you do in your own club.


Mick

Thanks for that Mick. It seems there are some subtle differences then in the insurance markets in Oz and the UK.

What is most impressed upon me though is that when asked you, like any other conscientious instructor, were able to check your insurance and give a clear, conscise answer. The fact GKR cannot / will not do this speaks volumes in itself. We don't need to see the details of any insurance as exists to be able to smell something fishy here.

Mike

They have let me back on there! I've posted another question on the insurance thing. Looking forward to the answers!

I wouldnt go back if I'd been treated that way.

A little touchy on this matter aren't they? The respose didn't really make sense either. Where I come from you get certificates for any sort of insurance, whether it is for your car, your work, anything. Otherwise where is the proof? If I have a car crash and it is my fault I'm sure the police won't swallow a "Well I am insured, I've just never had a certificate" excuse. It just leads me to believe there is something not quite right there.

Well that was quick....

Closed already - after 4 minutes

http://www.gkr-karate.net/forum/showthread.php?t=6572

Here is the post from the other forum..kangeroo
8th Kyu

Join Date: May 2005
Location: South East
Posts: 15
vCash: 1000
A copy of a certificate of insurance

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

White Ox says that if GKR weren't insured then they would be breaking the law. Well could the low grade instructors that teach in England on here show us a copy of their insurance please? Not someone else's, THEIRS. So if your name is Bob and you teach in wherever, put a copy of your insurance certificate on here. Going by another forum I've been on, most of the instructors on there say they were not insured by GKR at all - they were just told they were. It's not that I don't believe you - just prove these people wrong, and show that EVERYONE that teaches GKR is insured.
Frankly, Roo, I think your entire aproach is evasive, childish and really bitter. In short, I think your a bit of a wanker.
Quite a few people, including myself have issues with GKR, but we can get answers in other ways.

GKR's insurance situation in the UK (it may be different in Oz) seems quite simple. It has in place public liability "member to member" insurance. It cannot and does not have instructor liability insurance, because in the UK you have to be a dan grade and be named on the policy to be covered.

Similar to the old black and white debate, GKR are very clever in their phrasing of the answer to the insurance question, because they do say that instructors "are covered". Well yes, they are; but as normal club members. As instructors, they are not and are wide open to litigation.

Pleb, kangeroo's initial phrasing of the question may not have been to everyone's liking, but the question remains pertinent. If the instructor insurance is in place, then where's the certificate and policy document? My instructor even told me how much his policy cost. Anyone with proper insurance in place would be gagging to show people. Pleb, you call kangeroo "evasive", but I think that accusation seems more appropriately laid at GKR's door in my experience.

Thanks Pleb, love you too! I'm sure the kids that read this forum will be impressed with your language. And you call me childish! If you don't like me then ignore me. No need to come on here swearing. You haven't exactly shown yourself in a very good light. But I won't hold it against you. I'll just assume you've had a drink or something and felt like a rant.

It is a simple question, which really should be easy to answer. Why the big deal? Are GKR's instructors insured, yes or no? It seems no. No one on either forum has come up with any evidence at all that they are infact insured. That must be a major worry for anyone training with them. Bitter? No. Amazed? Yes. I just can not believe it. Why do others have to be insured when GKR aren't?

Can we keep personal attacks down please? We don`t want to have to start editing posts.

Going back to the topic.... It seems to me that GKR students are insured whereas the Instructors aren`t.

Maybe the differences in insurance between the UK and Aust is because the likelihood of being sued for negligence is different? Although it may also be because here we have many sports with "grass roots" development programs and it wouldn't otherwise be practical to cover all the parents etc who help out?


Mick

The way it was explained to me it sounded like once an instructor is accreditted then they get some minimal insurance, similar to the third party insurance you automatically get with your car registration. Not sure about non-accreditted instructors. I think Matt and Susan would probably have a better knowledge of this though so *shrug*.

Accredited by who? Accreditation doesn't mean you are insured it may reduce premiums but that is about it.

In simple if you are teaching and running a club or organisation, you are better off for your own piece of mind to have your own insurance policy. You should just put it down as a cost of teaching the same as hiring a place to train.

I would not rely on anyones elses policy. You want your name on that policy in black and white saying YOU are insured.

No matter what organisation you are part of. Get your own policy, because when it comes to the crunch its your assets (ie home etc) on the line. Your chief Instructor etc is not going to lose his house/assets for your benefit.

The students are insured but the instructors aren't? I don't understand.

Come on pleb, kangeroo is asking a legitimate question. Yes its repetitive, yes its all been discussed before, but it is very important. It is entirely legitimate and appropriate for a potential customer to ask any professional anything about their qualifications and/or insurance.

I got asked such questions quite often when I worked as a complementary therapist - any sensible customer should ask such questions before placing themselves in your care. And any sensible therapist/teacher/coach/whatever will be only too happy to provide the relevant details. I know its been said already but clearly it needs saying again (sadly it needs saying rather more on that other forum than it does here) - failure to produce details or evidence can only mean GKR has something to hide. You don't have to be as anti-GKR as I am to see that.

kangeroo said:


For details of how this works in the UK see the website of Perkins Slade, the company that provides my insurance. They do quite a lot of martial arts insurance in the UK.

http://www.perkins-slade.com/martial-arts.htm

GKR presumably has in place some kind of member to member liability protection, as discussed in the 'Members Cover' section on that page. Whether it is as good as the Perkins Slade cover I couldn't say. What GKR evidently lacks (as demonstrated by their repeated refusal to share the details) is the professional indemnity cover for instructors (also mentioned on the same page). I have the £5 million cover myself. It costs me about £100 a year. An organisation the size of GKR could get a significant discount for bulk buying. But no doubt no British insurer would touch them with a bargepole as regards professional indemnity for low and mid kyu grade instructors.

Mike

Ok, Kanga goes to the other forum and askes his stuff. No problems. Then he comes in here asking and frankly, I recon by the tone of his posts he knows far morethan lets on and felt like kicking up a stink. Think I said as much, too.
Now, he tells of his thread being blocked or something then asks here. Why didn't he leave it at that? No. He went back there to ask again. Knowing full well they didn't want to talk about it there.
It is a legitimate question. One that I, myself asked. The one question that tipped the balance for me. My deciding factor.
Perhaps its just me, but he's asking the right questions the wrong way.
The way I posted to him, I'm like that with most people most of the time. And they know I'm just barking... No slight intended.

Sorry to cause any ill feeling.

I must confess I didn't get that feeling. Maybe he already knows the answer, but he was being polite. Forthright perhaps, but not rude (as far as I could see).

If he'd been given a clear unambiguous answer in the first instance then that would have been the end of it. But obviously neither GKR nor the moderators of White Ox's forum want to talk about that.

Makes me realise how right I was to decline their offer of getting involved in White Ox's forum again.

Mike

Oh well at least it makes a change from the b&w belt saga. If it had been answered before then someone could point to the topic and tell 'im to go read it and stop trying to stir up trouble. If it eventually does get answered satisfactorily then someone can point to the topic next time.

The only people who ought to be worried are those who should be covered by insurance and may not be. Still, if someone sues will their lawyer go after the poor sap teaching the class or the club? Regardless of whatever sort of waivers they might have signed to say they're not an employee of the club etc they're still volunteers acting as representatives of the club and the club has authorised them to teach on their behalf which means the club has a responsibility towards them. If that's not good enough for an instructor or prospective instructor and they can't get a better answer then they should really either take out their own insurance or refuse to teach.

On the other side of the coin, are there any instructors who do hold their own insurance policy and think that all their students need to know is that they have insurance? Or even whether their students don't need to know, but have insurance so they don't lose their house if they were to be sued?


Mick

Ah, but there's the rub Mick. The company teaches non-contact karate. So if a student injures another student it means, by definition, that the instructor was teaching material not contained in the company syllabus (or surely there would have been no contact!). So the company can quite legitimately claim that the instructor was acting in an inappropriate and unauthorised manner.

Of course, you and I know that that is a fallacy. I've come across more GKR students who've been injured in uncontrolled and poorly supervised 'non-contact' sparring sessions than I've had hot dinners. But on paper at least, the company teaches non-contact karate. Ergo, they can claim that any contact injuries are the result of an instructor knowingly NOT following the syllabus.

If a student is seriously injured their solicitor will, quite rightly, sue everyone involved who may be liable. In the eyes of the law I'm sure it will be difficult to see how the instructor is in no way liable. Of course, the instructor may be able to claim that the company failed to adequately train them as an instructor, but that would not mitigate any claim against them (it just might mean that the injured part sues both the instructor and GKR).

The instructor could be taken to court for millions of pounds in an extreme case. Their only redress would be to sue GKR themselves, claiming that they were inadequately trained. I wonder who can afford the better lawyers - Jo Bloggs 5th kyu Sensei, who's already just been sued for £3million, or GKR?

Mike

What a load of uninformed hypothetical....

I don't disagree really with the intent of anything anyone is saying.

I'd like to know why someone would request a representative of an organisation should produce insurance certification. If somebody wants insurance details they will be told to seek them the appropriate area of any organisation.... Use some intelligence.

Nice guesswork on the minds of lawyers too. Being unfortunate enough to work amongst the legislative assembly and parliamentary council I will add guesswork to this thread which will contend that any intelligent lawyer or barrister will seek maximum damages from the entity from which it is forthright most easily accessed in terms of process and return ($).

You might like to sue Joe Bloggs 5th kyu for all of their $300,00 life investments, but I would suggest that it would be a far easier process to seek damages from the insured agent. Now if that agent doesn't cover it's representatives...you might just be fortunate enough to have yet another case for negligence against that organisation as well.

Guesswork is wonderful in the legal system....

JC