 Poster: A snowHead
|
I've just read this - I was largely aware, but it is scarey tbh, and makes me think about the insurance I have. Anyone know more / have a perspective? Also makes me reflect on how comfortable I am being in a group which has 'fluid' (non) arrangements for leading off piste.
If you are a SCGB rep - or volunteer leader of social groups - or just ski with groups off piste - then being aware of this is a good idea: https://pistehors.com/DhQItpoBhUhZWzGsuHo1/in-case-of-accident-call-a-lawyer
You absolutely need legal cover and liability cover - and need to tell people to stay in group etc. Shirking behind the scenes pretending not to be the leader isn't going to cut it. This is very relevant for SCGB reps who ski with groups off piste - and those of us who love skiing off piste in groups, happy to take the lead when appropriate.
Note that in January a court found: On 16 January, the Bonneville criminal court handed down its ruling. The volunteer leader, a 70-year-old member of the club, was sentenced to a one year suspended imprisonment and ordered to pay nearly €300,000 in damages to civil parties. Insurance companies say that compensation can run into millions, for example where the victim was a Managing Director of a British firm killed off piste skiing. When a ski guide asks group members what they do for a living he's not just making small talk, he's assessing his liability in case of accident.
In the Courts case the reasoning was clear: the leader should never have allowed the group to fragment in such committing terrain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
@pisteoff, you are right to be scared.
I don't ski off piste at all any more, but I'm grateful to you for your post, because it means that davidof is in the land of the living. He hasn't posted here in ages.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Thanks for posting.
Here is the summary:
What Backcountry Skiers Should Take Away
These cases reveal several important principles for anyone travelling in winter mountains:
1. Stay together. Courts penalise group dispersion.
2. Match the outing to the weakest member. This is one of the most common findings in court rulings.
3. Understand that the most experienced skier often carries implicit responsibility.
4. Check the avalanche bulletin, weather, and equipment.
5. Never allow someone to travel alone in risky terrain.
6. Be very careful about changing a planned route on the terrain - courts want to see clear decision making as to why this was done and why the route choice was safer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Off-Piste Skiing & Liability Summary
Bleeding hell - ChatGPT made this easy, and this is a good summary I thought about insurance cover and what you can - and cannot do. It is specific to the insurance I have (Insureandgo) but similar will apply to others:
InsureandGo Gold (Annual) + Winter Sports
1. Core Coverage (Relevant to Off-Piste)
• Medical & rescue fully apply off‑piste, provided the area is not officially prohibited.
• Avalanche burial rescue treated as a medical emergency.
• Personal Liability (up to £2 million) covers accidental injury to others and damage to property. The cost of defending this claim, legal representation, is covered by the insurer
• Legal Expenses (up to £50,000) only covers claims YOU pursue, not claims against you.
2. What’s Explicitly Allowed
• Off‑piste skiing is fully covered with Winter Sports added.
• No guide is required.
• Being the informal group ‘leader’ does not void cover.
• Early‑season “closed pistes” for lack of snow do not invalidate cover.
• Generic danger signs (cliffs, avalanche risk, unpatrolled area) are warnings, not prohibitions.
3. The Only Real Limitation
You are not covered only if the resort has EXPLICITLY prohibited access.
Examples:
• “PISTE FERMÉE – DANGER”
• “SECTOR CLOSED – AVALANCHE RISK”
• Avalanche control zones
• Official safety closures by piste security
Warnings = allowed. Note for example you can ski on a piste closed for lack of snow to access off piste.
Prohibitions = excluded.
4. Practical Implications
• You can ski normal off‑piste routes without a guide.
• You are covered if someone alleges your route choice caused injury.
• You can use closed (non‑danger) pistes for access/exit in early season.
• Avalanche risk levels (1–4) do not affect cover.
• Only explicit hazard-based closures invalidate cover.
5. Legal Representation in France
InsureandGo does NOT cover criminal defence.
In France, accidents often trigger BOTH:
• a criminal investigation (involuntary injury), and
• a civil damages claim.
Personal Liability covers:
• Civil defence costs (insurer provides lawyers)
• Damages up to £2 million
BUT:
• Criminal defence costs are NOT covered.
• You must appoint and pay your own criminal lawyer.
• Carré Neige or local French insurance is strongly recommended for criminal/legal assistance on the mountain.
6. Simple Decision Rule
If the sign warns — you’re covered.
If the sign prohibits because of safety — you’re not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Quote: |
Carré Neige or local French insurance is strongly recommended for criminal/legal assistance on the mountain.
|
FYI, I've just checked and the AAC (which I take instead of Carre Neige) includes European criminal law legal protection up to EUR 35,000.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| pisteoff wrote: |
InsureandGo Gold (Annual) + Winter Sports |
Does that annual policy limit you to 17 days cover for skiing?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yes it does. So need to think about this later this season ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don’t think you need to be scared—just aware of your responsibilities, and that you can be held accountable for your actions. This is the case with most things in life.
Let’s look at the cases mentioned:
1 – Leaving someone behind in dangerous terrain.
This is probably the hardest one. You could argue that they were all beginners and didn’t know better, or that the person going slowly told them to go on. But at the end of the day, it’s poor judgment. The details of this case would be interesting to look at.
2 – Triggering an avalanche on a group below you.
If you trigger an avalanche that injures someone or results in a fatality, then of course your actions need to be investigated, and there’s a good chance you could end up in court.
3 – Skiing when local authorities have banned it.
In this case, you’re essentially breaking the law. So yes, you can be charged.
4 – The CAF case.
CAF has its own qualifications and structure. On a CAF outing, there is a designated leader, and it is established that this person is qualified/experienced. So yes, they are officially the leader and have the responsibility to act like one.
5 – Someone showing off and claiming to be something they aren’t.
Offering to take a beginner out while not being experianced enough is not good. I wonder what was said and if he was honest about his ability to look after her.
I don’t see any of the above as inappropriate or surprising. Even if you are a de facto leader, you still have to be negligent to get into legal trouble. I’d be interested, for example, in whether the CAF case would have had the same outcome if it had been a group of peers—I’m guessing not.
If you’re going out with friends or peers, yes, you are still responsible for each other and your actions, but unless someone is really negligent, I don’t think you have much to worry about (though you still need insurance).
If you are accepting the role of leader—whether paid, volunteering, in a club, with friends, or simply offering to take a beginner out—and there is proof or an expectation within the group that you are in charge, then you are accepting that level of responsibility. If something goes wrong, you will be judged as a leader and everything that involves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| pisteoff wrote: |
| yes it does. So need to think about this later this season ... |
In terms of liability and piste/off-piste rescue & repatriation costs, is there anything that Insure and Go offer that isn't covered by Carre/Carte Neige or the AAC membership? The usual travel insurance cover for things like travel disruption, personal belongings, etc aren't especially important for me, but I am looking for ski-specific cover (off-piste without a guide, liability, rescue & repatriation) for multiple trips (no longer than 21 days) for up to 80 days of skiing in total. I have Carre Neige for the season which I think covers me for everything I'm likely to do this winter, and AAC membership would probably be equally good. I'm trying to work out if there is an alternative or additional policy which covers my skiing requirements, with the added benefit of general travel insurance coverage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ecrinscollective wrote: |
| I don’t think you need to be scared—just aware of your responsibilities, and that you can be held accountable for your actions. This is the case with most things in life. |
I think that's correct. None of this is dated or referenced, but none of it sounds surprising as you note.
---
I tried to follow some of it down. The French Alpine Club has a legal summary around "volunteering". Worth a look if you're volunteering there, although perhaps UK organizations will have their own legal opinions anyway.
https://www.cafgrenoble.com/files/others/Statut_Responsabilite_Benevole-signed.pdf
There's a lot of interesting analysis in there, including the potential for joint and several liability of club and volunteer.
---
I disagree with the concept of "legal safeguards" though. For example the "courts penalize group dispersion" thing. No they don't, they penalize negligence. There are plenty of different circumstances where splitting a group could be a life saver, it depends.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Worth reiterating that the scgb reps course covers this stuff… and there is plenty of opportunity to discuss.
The CAF case was > 10 years ago.
The reps are definitely not ‘leading’.
@Old Fartbag summarises nicely… you’s almost consider it ‘common sense’, but we all know how lacking _that _ is these days.
Anyways, hope to see some of you in Tignes shortly… apparently there’s a ‘bash’ or something…
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| rob@rar wrote: |
| pisteoff wrote: |
| yes it does. So need to think about this later this season ... |
In terms of liability and piste/off-piste rescue & repatriation costs, is there anything that Insure and Go offer that isn't covered by Carre/Carte Neige or the AAC membership? The usual travel insurance cover for things like travel disruption, personal belongings, etc aren't especially important for me, but I am looking for ski-specific cover (off-piste without a guide, liability, rescue & repatriation) for multiple trips (no longer than 21 days) for up to 80 days of skiing in total. I have Carre Neige for the season which I think covers me for everything I'm likely to do this winter, and AAC membership would probably be equally good. I'm trying to work out if there is an alternative or additional policy which covers my skiing requirements, with the added benefit of general travel insurance coverage. |
I'm sure you are well able to take your own insurance decisions. Just a warning the medical cover on Carre Neige / AAC is much more limited than a full travel insurance policy, country limited and wouldn't cover repatriation to UK. You may be happy to take a risk on local state cover with the UK global health insurance card. I would be nervous about doing a lot of off piste / mountaineering on a mass market policy such as Insure&Go. Too many weasel words around off piste cover, and ski days are limited. Recommend you look at SCGB Platinum membership (60 ski days, extendable), or the Gold cover if you don't want membership, or the BMC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[quote="Shakira"]
| Quote: |
Carré Neige or local French insurance is strongly recommended for criminal/legal assistance on the mountain.
|
FYI, I've just checked and the AAC (which I take instead of Carre Neige) includes European criminal law legal protection up to EUR
Last edited by So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much  on Thu 27-11-25 23:00; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Quote: |
I.e. not a lot! SCGB Platinum gives you £2m personal liability cover, other proper travel insurance polices similar.
|
SCGB Platinum legal expenses cover is £50k.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
For the avoidance of doubt I'm not competent to lead a wee wee up in a brewery so anyone stupid enough to ski with me is definitely at their own risk regarding the Ministry of Bad Ideas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Old Fartbag wrote: |
Thanks for posting.
Here is the summary:
What Backcountry Skiers Should Take Away
These cases reveal several important principles for anyone travelling in winter mountains:
1. Stay together. Courts penalise group dispersion.
2. Match the outing to the weakest member. This is one of the most common findings in court rulings.
3. Understand that the most experienced skier often carries implicit responsibility.
4. Check the avalanche bulletin, weather, and equipment.
5. Never allow someone to travel alone in risky terrain.
6. Be very careful about changing a planned route on the terrain - courts want to see clear decision making as to why this was done and why the route choice was safer. |
I do a lot more sea kayaking than off piste skiing these days. The above is very analogous to sea kaykaing leadership; managing taking a group through challenging and potentially hazardous terrain and needing a deep understanding of changing environmental conditions (tides, swell, wind). As a qualified Sea Kayak Leader I assume responsibility for an organised group, eg a club. However most of my paddling is with peers of a known ability and experience; we are all capable of rescuing each other and making joint decisions.
The greatest worry in being a “leader” of a group who may not be known to you is lack of “followship” by a group member, ie not knowing what they don’t know and hence putting themselves and possibly other members in danger. I imagine the same worry/risk applies to SCGB leaders. A court case may make the Leader responsible for not keeping control of the group.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
@On the rocks, Indeed it has been featured regularly in the German media but easier to link to an article from UK media. It is a sad and tragic case, it is easy to pass judgements but in reality what would any of us done in similar circumstances.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| munich_irish wrote: |
| @On the rocks. It is a sad and tragic case, it is easy to pass judgements but in reality what would any of us done in similar circumstances. |
Not got into that situation in the first place:
Prosecutors have charged the mountaineer with manslaughter and gross negligence, accusing him of nine critical errors:
– starting the climb late
– ignoring winter storms and 46mph winds
– failing to turn back despite his girlfriend’s inexperience
– allowing her to climb in unsuitable soft snowboard boots
– carrying no bivouac gear
– not sheltering her from the wind
– failing to deploy emergency blankets
– missing rescue calls after putting his phone on silent
– and not signalling a helicopter that flew overhead at 10:50 PM.
Investigators concluded that because he was the experienced climber and the planner of the ascent, he effectively acted as the guide and failed in that responsibility.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| hamilton wrote: |
| The reps are definitely not ‘leading’. |
It may be the case that on a particular occasion a given rep is not ‘leading’.
It is certainly not the case that the reps are definitely not ‘leading’.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would venture that after the initial mistakes he was suffering from hypothermia himself and loosing cognitive function. Not a defence , but a possible reason for the strange actions later.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@prometheus, 'strange' is putting it mildly. Some of those actions look quite murderous. Shocking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| JayRo wrote: |
| hamilton wrote: |
| The reps are definitely not ‘leading’. |
It may be the case that on a particular occasion a given rep is not ‘leading’.
It is certainly not the case that the reps are definitely not ‘leading’. |
Well, they aren't, but in the case of an incident the authorities could decide they were the de facto leader, or they could decide that BASI qualified group member was. Even if that ends up being the case, then it has to be decided just how much more experienced than the others were they, and therefore at what level was their duty of care.
I've seen a lot of such cases over the years, and it seems to me that it's the ones where you have a very experienced person leading very inexperienced people that end up in a prosecution.
Let's not forget the Snowcrazy case: an off duty SCGB Rep, who led a less experienced skier into the danger zone, where tragedy struck, and she was killed. He wasn't prosecuted.
If Pisteoff is skiing in a snowHeads group, then he would most likely be the de facto leader, in the absence of a professional, if anything bad happened.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Mac M wrote: |
| rob@rar wrote: |
| pisteoff wrote: |
| yes it does. So need to think about this later this season ... |
In terms of liability and piste/off-piste rescue & repatriation costs, is there anything that Insure and Go offer that isn't covered by Carre/Carte Neige or the AAC membership? The usual travel insurance cover for things like travel disruption, personal belongings, etc aren't especially important for me, but I am looking for ski-specific cover (off-piste without a guide, liability, rescue & repatriation) for multiple trips (no longer than 21 days) for up to 80 days of skiing in total. I have Carre Neige for the season which I think covers me for everything I'm likely to do this winter, and AAC membership would probably be equally good. I'm trying to work out if there is an alternative or additional policy which covers my skiing requirements, with the added benefit of general travel insurance coverage. |
Just a warning the medical cover on Carre Neige / AAC is much more limited than a full travel insurance policy, country limited and wouldn't cover repatriation to UK. |
That’s not correct AAC provides repatriation to the UK.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| On the rocks wrote: |
The greatest worry in being a “leader” of a group who may not be known to you is lack of “followship” by a group member, ie not knowing what they don’t know and hence putting themselves and possibly other members in danger. |
THIS- I cannot imagine that many people are able to effectively control a group of unrelated late middle aged British wealthy men and women who are mostly from Surrey.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
@ed123, Whilst there are problems with group management in any group your stereotype is wide of the mark.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Was immediately thinking of this when seeing the OP's case.
With the insanity that from what I can see, its plausibly possible to end up in mid experience groups where half the members could be prosecuted for endangering each other because leader basically depends on phases of the moon...
Of course the counterpoint is re the Austrian alps case, my reading of the case is the biggest failure was more than one point where it should have been obvious to anyone that they weren't going to summit and should be heading down - Started late, then due to conditions taken a LOT longer than normally expected/scheduled to get to one of the more obvious bail out points so should at that stage have started back (because if they could maintain the same pace in worsening conditions they would be summitting at midnight!), then failed to turn round at a couple of other opportunities (including first heli pass when people reported because they could be seen slowly moving on webcam).
So its regular argument seen for various mountain sports - there is ALWAYS another day so far better to give up on a maybe summit and come back another time than push through. (Also showing the issue with 'quitters never win' attitudes leading to people insisting that they must continue until way, way too late...)
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| ed123 wrote: |
| On the rocks wrote: |
The greatest worry in being a “leader” of a group who may not be known to you is lack of “followship” by a group member, ie not knowing what they don’t know and hence putting themselves and possibly other members in danger. |
THIS- I cannot imagine that many people are able to effectively control a group of unrelated late middle aged British wealthy men and women who are mostly from Surrey. |
You've got a thing for people from Surrey, and, it would seem, especially Guildford.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| ed123 wrote: |
| I cannot imagine that many people are able to effectively control a group of unrelated late middle aged British wealthy men and women who are mostly from Surrey. |
Yes they are people who can easily afford to split the cost of an instructor or guide and then nobody has to worry about who is in charge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| ed123 wrote: |
| On the rocks wrote: |
The greatest worry in being a “leader” of a group who may not be known to you is lack of “followship” by a group member, ie not knowing what they don’t know and hence putting themselves and possibly other members in danger. |
THIS- I cannot imagine that many people are able to effectively control a group of unrelated late middle aged British wealthy men and women who are mostly from Surrey. |
Pretty sure there must have been a number of Surrey residents in the hundreds of people I've lead while wearing the SCGB jacket over the years, and I never had any problems with a "lack of followship". Occasionally someone might stop below me off-piste, or some such inadvertent breaking of the rules, but a quiet word is all that was ever required. Anyone making mutterings about wanting to do something other than the group (i.e. my) decision would be told that they're welcome to go off on their own if they want to. Only ever had to slightly suggest this a couple of times and nobody ever did.
And of course you can do so by not seeming to tell them 'do what I say' but just by asking if they could make the leaders' life a lot easier please by doing X or Y, often making it seem like they were doing a specific favour such that they didn't even think they were being told off in any way. Asking someone to act as a back marker (where it really wasn't necessary) and make sure they could see all the group in front of them, so I could be sure when they arrived I had everyone, was one such tactic.
So no, it's not difficult, and the reps' training course equips you very well in all aspects of group management on the snow.
I recall on my course, back in 1999, as an example, CST one time asked the group (of fellow rep candidates who she was training) what they would do if they had a skier like me in the group. Ooops. I got better, honest guv!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
@Hamilton Academical, I'm sorry your recent post was deleted as I wanted to direct people, by way of contrast, to a thread (the Jjams thread) which would deflect from your grossly generalised insult directed at snowHeads. What a complete toe-rag.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
