Public Liability Insurance

[Sharkbyte]

It is regarded by many that the worst case scenario for the future of sea angling would be the introduction of a licence without the benefits of 'more and bigger fish'. It would also be fair to say that a reasonable number of anglers oppose a sea angling license full stop.

 

Considering the level of current opposition to a license, it may then come as somewhat of a surprise to many anglers that the possible future regulation of our sport and the cost of staying legal, may not end there!

 

Upon scrutiny it was noticed that contained within the Draft RSA Strategy, under section 6.2, liability insurance was included within 'elements that could be considered'.

 

6.2 Elements that could be considered include:

• Marine finfish handling and return from both boat and shore

• Sustainable angling practices (‘catch and release’ through to ‘catching sufficient for the table’)

• Bait collection

• Appropriate hook selection for size and species of targeted fish

• Appropriate terminal tackle selection to minimise tackle losses

• Disposal of waste and marine litter

• Safety for the public and fishers from the shore and boats

• Liability insurance

• Knowledge of finfish regulations

 

There are some implications I feel need discussed and hopefully resolved. I have tried to get clear answers to some of my questions elsewhere but to no avail.

 

Firstly do sea anglers feel they need public liability insurance? I know I don't. The risks associated with with my activities as an angler are negligible. I truly believe that I would pose far more threat to public safety and third party property, walking a dog. As we are well aware PLI is not a legal requirement of dog owners, cyclists, seaside kite flyer's and even shooters. So why is it that PLI is under some form of consideration for anglers?

 

Well lets begin by analysing the origins of the current RSA Strategy. In an email reported to have come from Richard Ferre of the NFSA, he says,

 

"The draft strategy document you refer to I have had a a lot of involvement with. The idea for one came from me and I prepared a draft based on input from as many RSA people as I could get together. that formed the basis of early discussions with both DEFRA and representatives of SFC's and Commercial Fishermen. "

Was PLI included for consideration in this draft? I have asked the question to individuals that I believe know the answer but as yet have received no satisfactory response. All I can say is that many of the other inclusions in section 6.2 have an air of familiarity to them, having been linked to other RSA campaigns.

 

If I was at some point required to buy PLI, where would I get it? Initially I knew of only one place, by joining the NFSA. I must make it clear that having since researched PLI providers, it is apparent that at least one other company offers tailor made policies. How much they charge, I do not know. The point is that many anglers are likely to head for the most familiar and immediately obvious supplier, whatever. A member of the NFSA's conservation group, is even quoted as saying,

 

"Insurance can be added to your house insurance , or for the small cost ( about £17) its worth joining the NFSA as you get full cover , even if you disagree with every thing else they do."

 

 

Now, if only 10% of the claimed 1.2M sea anglers signed up, this would generate revenues of over £2M! Serious money, I think you will agree!

 

In the interests of fairness, lets presume RSA had no involvement in the inclusion of PLI into the draft Strategy. If so where did it come from, was it opposed, by whom and why does it still feature in Draft V3?

 

The cost of any proposed sea angling license could well be around the £15-£20 mark. What would the average angler say if the cost of keeping on the right side of any new laws / regulations, rose to nigh on double, taking into account the likely cost of PLI! I'm sure he would not be happy. Even more so, if it was discovered that there was no attempt to 'negotiate' PLI out of the Strategy, by his representatives.

 

I have already been accused of NFSA bashing over this issue. Not so, however one thing I am not afraid to do is ask questions.

 

Unfortunately, as with many other RSA topics of late, those in the know have been frustratingly reluctant to answer them.

Edited February 22, 2007 by Sharkbyte

[wurzel]

Hello Wyne

 

You have made a very good point, it won't be long you'll end up just as cynical as I am.

 

Quote

6.2 Elements that could be considered include:

• Marine finfish handling and return from both boat and shore

• Sustainable angling practices (‘catch and release’ through to ‘catching sufficient for the table’)

• Bait collection

• Appropriate hook selection for size and species of targeted fish

• Appropriate terminal tackle selection to minimise tackle losses

• Disposal of waste and marine litter

• Safety for the public and fishers from the shore and boats

• Liability insurance

• Knowledge of finfish regulations

 

Also with these elements to be considered I can foresee several compulsory courses to attend before you can obtain your licence.

[Jim Roper]

Also with these elements to be considered I can foresee several compulsory courses to attend before you can obtain your licence.

 

 

Don't forget all the risk assessment to be done before every trip!

[RobStubbs]

Public liability insurance is not mandated for most activities but it is a sensible precaution. Most shooters have it via their club insurance, governing body membership or via something like the BASC. Most fishing clubs and syndicates also have it, either via the NFA or as a separate policy.

 

PLI costs very little but has the potential to save you literally millions. You say your fishing is safe but so are all the other activities you mention. Competition shooting for example is probably one of the least accident likely activities you can pursue, certainly far safer than fishing.

 

You could be sued over a total non event. A bit of line accidentally dropped on a beach, a hook accidentally dropped or even a dog snaffling one of your your pre-tied rigs. None of that could be reasonably deemed your fault but you could still end up in the dock over it and then who'd pay the bill ? The simple answer is that without PLI it would more than likely come out of your own pocket.

 

Rob.

[barry luxton]

Public liability insurance is not mandated for most activities but it is a sensible precaution. Most shooters have it via their club insurance, governing body membership or via something like the BASC. Most fishing clubs and syndicates also have it, either via the NFA or as a separate policy.

 

PLI costs very little but has the potential to save you literally millions. You say your fishing is safe but so are all the other activities you mention. Competition shooting for example is probably one of the least accident likely activities you can pursue, certainly far safer than fishing.

 

You could be sued over a total non event. A bit of line accidentally dropped on a beach, a hook accidentally dropped or even a dog snaffling one of your your pre-tied rigs. None of that could be reasonably deemed your fault but you could still end up in the dock over it and then who'd pay the bill ? The simple answer is that without PLI it would more than likely come out of your own pocket.

 

Rob.

 

 

What about the boat angler Rob, i'm trying to think of a method where we could cause damage to some one, accidently that is?

[darlick]

What about the boat angler Rob, i'm trying to think of a method where we could cause damage to some one, accidently that is?

Most harbours around the coast wont let you launch without PLI.

Before going commercial i got mine added on the house insurance peanuts and worth it. there are plenty of ways you can damage some one i was out one day with a few mates jigging and one lad got stuck on the bottom in a mad atempt to get it off wanged his rod up in the air and the line went round his mates neck just about took his head bit of quick thinking with a knife sorted it but if it had have braid instead of mono could have been a different story.

even on the beach how many times have you heard a lead crack of and seconds later heard a thud only takes one.

And we are living in a claim society.

I would not worry about a few quid get pli.

All the commercial fishermen have to have it and a lot more.

[Steve Coppolo]

Don't get confused between the damage you can do with a boat, and the damage you can do with your fishing tackle. The subject here is PLI for fishing. Yes you can crack off and do some serious damage if you usually cast leads a long way from a beach that is frequented by other people. But what if you just flick a freelined bass bait 10 yeards from a very secluded location? Should you still have to buy insurance? The issue here, I think, is whether it should be compulsory to buy something you don't need just to be able to fish. If that is what is being proposed in the sea angling strategy, then it needs looking at.

Edited February 22, 2007 by Steve Coppolo

[darlick]

Don't get confused between the damage you can do with a boat, and the damage you can do with your fishing tackle. The subject here is PLI for fishing. Yes you can crack off and do some serious damage if you usually cast leads a long way from a beach that is frequented by other people. But what if you just flick a freelined bass bait 10 yeards from a very secluded location? Should you still have to buy insurance? The issue here, I think, is whether it should be compulsory to buy something you don't need just to be able to fish. If that is what is being proposed in the sea angling strategy, then it needs looking at.

Not getting confused steve.

Just saying it only takes one daft accident and they do happen i have taken people to hospital to have hooks removed on a few occasions not allways there hooks, i took my brother to get a rather large lure out of his eye lid it was not his he was lucky not to have been blind.

I dont really think it will come to that.and like you say it does need looking at.

[thedogs]

Isnt that illeagal Sharkbyte?

[Davy Holt]

Isnt that illeagal Sharkbyte?

 

Dont think so Sam.

 

Is PLI not included with the membership of NFSA ???