Also,
colin.smith14@ntlworld.com
We were being told the MVT tour was full some months ago, I hope you have managed to find space.

We have had our confidence a bit shaken here and I am dismayed to have been somewhat rudely dismissed by the MVT Vice-Chairman in an unwarranted manner.

I apologise for the following explanation but it contains a serious point for us in the UK; just to remind you, and it has been published, a change in the UK vehicle law last year saw one simple line quietly removed from the statute books with the effect that your vehicle, even off-road and not road registered, must carry third party minimum insurance where the public "have a reasonable right of access". That sounds like any MV show or other event to me.

Now, we were slightly miffed about the MVT ("Central") supported Kemble Show this year, the entry instructions stressed the absolute necessity to carry vehicle insurance and present this for scrutiny to gain entry to the show, without this you would be placed and not permitted to move at all for the duration. We all thought this a bit high-handed since the law and police here allow you 7 days to produce documents.

It gets worse, the Ballards have previously worked for years on light aircraft restorations and as a throw-away line mentioned that no vehicle insurer here covers you on an operating airfield, its a standard industry exclusion. I checked all the different _policies_ here, yup, sure enough hidden under "other general exclusions" you find the "Airside clause", I'd urge anyone to look very closely at theirs.


I emailed the MVT as below:

Now here's an interesting thing, you might want to quietly check.

As the SD is checking papers at Kemble perhaps bear in mind it is as it says in Para 3: "Please be aware that Kemble is an active airfield and therefore. . . ."

Now my chums who have been in light aviation for years professionally tell me that if you read your insurance small print it is the industry standard that the policy is void whilst within the curtilage of an operating airfield.

This small nuance is the bane of all airfield workers who drive to work apparently, it seems all aircraft, light medium and heavy, are not to be wholly trusted to do what the pilot commands.

Hmmmmmm.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then I sent:

>
> Now my chums who have been in light aviation for years professionally tell me
> that if you read your insurance small print it is the industry standard that the
> policy is void whilst within the curtilage of an operating airfield.
>
Further to that please see the purple printed booklet from the excellent and cheap Footman James that the MVT sensibly promote: Page 18, para 1, fourth indented block.

Nobody will be moving anything then ?
__________________________________________________

So Colin replied for the MVT and my responses below:

Richard,
Everyone is busy as hell right now what with the Show and proper jobs, so back to me, again.
>
I know that feeling well.

>
The paragraph (I am told) refers to the restricted area in or on airports or airfields. We are not in or on any restricted area.
>
I take your point but I wouldn't like to argue it out with the insurers in court. They would likely refer to the area denoted by the land registry, if this is called XYZ airfield/aerodrome/airport and is operational then in the insurers usual way they would duck it.

There is a broader issue worth noting here, when you go to an air show, even Farnborough, the vehicle is uninsured. We have people here who are regularly invited to Goodwood and are asked to pose period vehicles with the parked aircraft; I'm sure they are in an iffy situation.

I have checked the other popular MV insurer - Roadsure; their (KGM) policy states:

"8. The underwriters shall not be liable for any accident,injury, loss, damage, consequential loss or any liability of whatsoever nature whilst the insured vehicle is in or on that part of an aerodrome, airport, airfield or military base provided for the take off and landing of aircraft or the movement of aircraft on the surface, aircraft parking aprons including the associated
service roads and ground equipment areas or those parts of passenger terminals of an international airport which come within the customs examination area."

Worth reading the above twice, slowly.

I did actually dig out my car policy from Royal Sun Alliance, same stuff.

>
The person who is best to refer any queries to is Alan Cogdell (MVT Treasurer) who I am sure will be able to help you on almost all insurance matters .
>

Sure, I wonder how many of us have actually read the fine print though and come to grips with the real inferences.

>
We, the MVT, have been organizing professionally run shows for many years now, and based on that experience, have put together what we consider the right rules and regulations in the interest of the members and the compliance with outside
suppliers of services.
>

I have no doubt, however, the firm statements made in the Kemble info is causing some reasonable grumbling. People do not take kindly to their club acting overtly more severely than the Police do and is required by English law. You can reasonably expect some comment at the show from some quarters I'm sure.

>
Look forward to seeing you at Kemble, if you are still going that is,
considering your e.mail!
>

Oh, Good Heavens, we're far more liberal than that. In fact I must run and finish strapping stuff in the Stalwart, truck arrives at 07:00 for us tomorrow.
__________________________________________________

Then I get this back:

> Good,
>
> Please forward all to Alan, I certainly have not got the time, or
> inclination, for all this nick picking, glad you are going to the Show.
>
Colin,

Sorry to have apparently trodden on some toes, I too generally have little time for the minutia which leads to waves of ennui, however, I would respectfully suggest the insurance companies see it somewhat differently and will rely on the exact detail of the written word.

Please also recognise this demand for production of papers is not of my making and would seem also to be quite generally held as nit-picking too.

Many thanks.

R.
__________________________________________________ _

Well, I regret taking up so much time of the MLU people to plod through this but:
a. I personally consider the legal requirement for insurance to be quite important.

b. I take exception to receive a quite insulting reply to what is actually a serious matter, I would have expected better from the MVT Vice-Chairman.

c. Be quite aware that when you (UK) go to an airshow in your car to say Farnborough, Biggin Hill, Duxford, Fairford or whatever then the moment you leave the public highway you are totally on your own and wholly uninsured both from others or against them.

d. Getting an "opinion" of the policy statement from the broker is worthless, when the poo hits the fan the insurers lawyer will invoke the formally printed policy word. Bet on it.

R.