10-23-2007, 01:22 PM
This will occaision a LOT of discussion, as it should. I'll try to find the rule for the states in which we sponsor events as to whether the waiver works for gross negligence or only simple negligence.
For new production cars the point on stability control (PSM) may not be so significant--I think the US has rules soon to become effective that will require it.
From what I remember reading of Corey Rudl's financial position (he could afford a CGT, among other things), the settlement struck me as relatively low. I wonder if the waivers are more effective than the headline makes it appear.
In any event, there are lessons here for our club:
Some of this result can be written off as fear of a CA jury, but there are things for us to consider.
For new production cars the point on stability control (PSM) may not be so significant--I think the US has rules soon to become effective that will require it.
From what I remember reading of Corey Rudl's financial position (he could afford a CGT, among other things), the settlement struck me as relatively low. I wonder if the waivers are more effective than the headline makes it appear.
In any event, there are lessons here for our club:
- continue to take tech inspection seriously (thanks, Paul!) and consider whether we should expand or change the items covered[/*]
- stress the blend line, whether it's painted on the racing surface or not[/*]
- no "fun rides," this is instruction[/*]
- if a track or a car does not seem safe, speak up!
Some of this result can be written off as fear of a CA jury, but there are things for us to consider.
Chris
981 GT4
996 GT3 Cup
911 Carrera Sport Coupe
PCA Nationally Trained DE Instructor #200810247
Genesee Valley BMW CCA Instructor
981 GT4
996 GT3 Cup
911 Carrera Sport Coupe
PCA Nationally Trained DE Instructor #200810247
Genesee Valley BMW CCA Instructor