Disturbing Insurance Article in Telegraph UK

Good rant Andy, I agree with you wholeheartedly. :thumbup:

What is a shame though, is that more and more frequently, the insurance companies themselves are not offering policies which are suitable for general use. I suspect they are simply hoping people will not read the small print, thus saving themselves large payouts.

Perhaps there should be an industry standard for different types of insurance, where if you picked a "ski" policy you would know that it will cover you for all the obvious things when you go skiing. Extras can always be bolted on for people who need something a bit more tailor made.

Andy I agree with you. What annoys me is that the insurance companies tend to DOUBLE the cost of insurance for me (ski insurance or non ski insurance) because of the declaration of my existing medical condition - epilepsy. However, with my car insurance, there is no extra premium. Why is that? :oops:

It is the mindset of, "its insured" like you say that causes a lot of problems. I have not claimed on my house insurance in over 15 years, it still goes up and up and up! Covering those people that "dropped their laptop down the stairs"

Sorry if I have upest anyone that genuinely did drop their laptop down the stairs or think that people with certain medical conditions should be off the road :roll: :twisted:

:D

Tony_H wrote:Will someone please explain to me when it suddenly became much more dangerous to ski?

I have to agree with Andy on this one Tony.
I don't think its a case of Skiing becoming more dangerous its just that people are more willing to claim nowadays and insurance companies are now looking for ways to minimise payout by what ever means they can.

I think it would be fairer to offer discounts should you choose to wear protection or perhaps make non wearers pay a premium in a similar way we do to ski off piste (certain policies).

Tony_H wrote:Will someone please explain to me when it suddenly became much more dangerous to ski?

Look at the footer of the J2ski website

"Warning:- Snow Sports are Dangerous The information on j2ski.com, where not clearly factual, is opinion only. It is not definitive, nor is it exhaustive and you must confirm it for yourself before you act upon it. Wherever and whenever you decide to ski, you do so entirely at your own risk. Skiing is an action sport with many dangers, which you must identify and accept before participating. If you do not accept these risks and your responsibility for understanding them - please do not ski."

Adders obviously thinks it is dangerous :thumbup:

Its always had the same dangers, in fact probably more so in the past with archaic lift systems, pistes in worse condition, and antiquated bindings and equipment.

I'm not going into the helmet debate again, but I dont know why people are suggesting its suddenly become more dangerous. I hear what youre saying about insurance companies, but its not fair to make us all look like muppets just because a few people have claimed on their insurance.

I'm not convinced that it is any more dangerous Tony, but other things have changed.

If by wearing some suitable clothing or equipment, it is possible to reduce the risk of injury to someone, then why should an insurance company not insist on it being worn? Perhaps they could offer a surcharge to those who don't wish to comply. However, I suspect it would be too large to really consider as an option.

Is having a car crash any more dangerous than several years ago? Probably not, with the better designs of cars and the addition of airbags, but we are still required to wear seatbelts.

At least we have (for the time being) the choice of buying travel insurance or not, unlike car insurance.

P.S Good rant Andy.

Tony_H wrote: Will someone please explain to me when it suddenly became much more dangerous to ski?

It's difficult to give a precise date. Carving skis, improved piste preparation, high speed lifts and the widespread use of artificial snow (artificial snow is denser than natural snow) have lead to an increase in the number of people on the slopes travelling at higher speeds than before. In bygone days skiing was a much more relaxed affair.



Even the top athletes didn't seem to go that fast in the straight ski era.



Around 2000 the hospitals here noticed an increase in the number of skiers /snowboarders being admitted with severe head injuries. In order to quantify the risk the Swiss Council for Accident Prevention commissioned research using crash dummies, one of their findings was that if you are knocked over and the back of your head hits the ground, it is possible for the head to be subject to an impact force large enough to cause a severe head injury (one with a head injury criterion of over 1000). In the same tests the head of the dummy wearing a helmet sustained a much lower impact force resulting in a HIC of about 200

http://www.eurailsafe.net/subsites/operas/HTML/Section3/Page3.3.1.4.htm

The article greatly under estimates the cost of a helicopter rescue, in Austria it's between 3000 and 5000 euro and in Switzerland between 3000 and 10,000 francs depending on whether a doctor has to attend. If they have to search for you then costs can rise to 50,000 francs. Manually searching an avalanche using probes and dogs, for someone without a transceiver costs up to 10,000 francs an hour.

Its always had the same dangers, in fact probably more so in the past with archaic lift systems, pistes in worse condition, and antiquated bindings and equipment.

Archaic lifts = more people queuing and riding the lifts and less people on the slopes. Pistes in worse condition = slower speeds especially on straight skis. Antiquated bindings, the basic mechanisms in ski bindings haven't changed in decades. Over 30% of all skiing injuries are knee injuries whereas only 9% of snowboarding injuries are knee injuries. IMO the real safety issue in skiing today is the inadequate protection afforded by current alpine release bindings against knee injuries.