J2Ski Forum Posts and Replies by EmmaEvs

Maybe it would help to come up with a few standard scenarios to put to the insurance companies, that would test the most common concerns. It might only take three or four carefully worded questions to clear up many of the ambiguities, and would allow direct comparisons.

Good thinking. That's what I had in mind initially. Problem - I don't ski off piste so can't fill in the blanks properly! :oops: Came up with this a while back, not sure if there's anything of use...

"To evaluate off piste conditions I check the avi warning level each day, for the purpose of this example it is 2. This is defined as "Snow stability - On some steep slopes the snow is only moderately stable [1]. Elsewhere it is very stable.

[1] Stability - Generally described in more detail in the avalanche bulletin (regarding the altitude, aspect, type of terrain etc.).

Flag colour – yellow as with lowest level which is 1.

Avalanche risk - Avalanches may be triggered when heavy [2] loads are applied, especially on a few generally identified steep slopes. Large spontaneous avalanches are not expected.

[2] heavy: two or more skiers or boarders without spacing between them, a single hiker or climber, a grooming machine, avalanche blasting."

The avi bulletin (for the purpose of this example) stated danger areas to be XX altitude, North facing aspect, XX terrain. We also check with a local ski instructor who advised XX based on his/her knowledge of weather and snow conditions over the whole season, along with personal experience of conditions on that day.

Our route is planned to avoid areas raised as concerns above. As a party of two, we ski/board one at a time with greater than 10m spacing in between, as recommended. Equipment is carried by both parties i.e. probe, shovel, transceiver.

As you can see, the above indicates that I take all reasonable steps to ensure that this activity bears no unnecessary risk. Should an incident happen in the above circumstances, please confirm whether I would be covered under your policy, or not. If not, please indicate which specific element/s led you to this decision in order for me to be able to modify my approach as necessary, to fall within the boundaries of this policy."

Yes, we are reading this lot from our perspective. How would the Underwriter interpret the wording in their favour to reduce their costs? Most of the recent unease that has arisen in skier Policyholders is because of what is not written in these Policies, maybe we have to read between the lines too?

I understand why you're wary. From what I recall the words 'reasonable cost' feature quite a few times, and different people will no doubt have different views of reasonable. The standard cover I looked at goes up to £2,000,000 though so any figure well within that (even £20,000 for a chopper) would be difficult to class as unreasonable, otherwise why have this inflated limit?

In terms of reading between the lines of what is not written... oooeeee where do you start and end? They had a noteable absence of the vague wording which is included in others and is causing (understandable) concern. Statements made are pretty clear, and this (to me) gives very little room for the underwriters to manoeuvre on interpretation, as opposed to some of the other examples. I'm no legal expert in insurance, but to add in brand new caveats after an event, when they haven't even been alluded to in the policy beforehand, sounds like a really weak basis on which to debate a claim. SCGB do have a page on which they provide guidance on off piste skiing/boarding (http://www.skiclub.co.uk/skiclub/respectthemountain/safety/whatcanyoudo.aspx). This is SCGB advice though, not (as far as I can see) part of any policy offered.

Emma, you do understand that 45 days isn'y mandetory!

Aye. It should be though 8)

Righto. That does sound expensive for a couple. I have to admit I didn't price it, just looked at the policy wording. At least it's one in the bag though - if all else fails you know there is one which provides the cover you need. I wish I had a problem with having to ensure I had enough days on my policy :cry:

Onwards and upwards :-)

Just checked Ski Club GB policy. I'm sure this has been covered on FB but thought I'd check it out for myself. It looks ok actually.

1 Off Piste skiing/boarding specifically covered under Hazardous Sport level 1 (which is included under standard cover).
2 Ski mountaineering is specifically covered under Hazardous Sports level 2 (which carries a 50% premium loading). However, trekking/hiking which requires specialist equipment is not covered so if anybody really is proposing to go the whole hog I guess this will need further clarification.
3 Search and rescue is covered up to a reasonable level (with £250 excess). Under FAQ's it says - Q. Will the policy pay if I need to be air lifted off a mountain? A9. Yes if you are injured or have an accident the policy will cover the reasonable cost of mountain search and rescue services.
4 Emergency medical treatment - We will contact hospitals or doctors abroad and guarantee to pay their fees, providing you have a valid claim.

Within the policy wording there don't appear to be any caveats or exclusions which seem to be popping up elsewhere and are causing confusion e.g. the avalanche risk issue. It's written pretty clearly (I think). Any thoughts?

Just by way of update. No response as yet to the co. I wrote to last Friday who are underwritten by Fortis, not even an acknowledgement! My insurer is P.O. too so no point me duplicating AllyG's stuff. I'll find another company or two today and try to get a response from them.

(Bandits) 02:14ish Hell of a face plant :lol:

(GummyBears) Ploop!

As a resort, it might struggle with snow at that time of the year

:shock: No no no no no please please please please please!!!! I'm going there over New Year. DaveMac! DaveMac! Will we have snow? :cry: