 Poster: A snowHead
|
| achilles wrote: |
| GrahamN wrote: |
| ...... Not covering the use of skins is clearly ridiculous, as touring without skins is just off-piste skiing. ...... |
it isn't for snowcard:
[snip]
So ski-touring is specifically listed by snowcard as requiring insurance at a level higher than off-piste skiing. |
Erm....having a few senior moments this week? You're actually agreeing with me. My reply was to beanie1, when she asked
| beanie1 wrote: |
| how do they differentiate between touring (which they apparently cover in Europe) and ski mountaineering? Would they not cover you if you're using crampons and skins? |
Crampons (and ropes, and ice-axes) are part of DT's definition of ski mountaineering (see elsewhere for my thoughts on their inconsistencies on this point, but that's a side-issue here), but the inclusion of skins in the restricted items is ridiculous (and was in no way suggested by DT) as "touring without skins" is just off-piste skiing. (Here crampons mean just that, not harscheisen/couteaux, which are an essential part of ski-touring equipment). So that would be covered by Snowcard at level 3, and "touring with skins" (i.e. what the world knows as "ski touring") would require level 4.
| VolklAttivaS5 wrote: |
| It still doesn't tell us, is L4 and above classed as dangerous, or is L3 and below ok, etc etc. |
...and I hope your reply doesn't. I had some fantastic skiing with guides on many occasions this past season quite safely at level 4, and maybe once unguided. I also on one week skied (with a guide) in areas we were all very leery about (essentially short exits after skiing safer areas) despite the level being 3. On one occasion, we just exited a valley when a massive avalanche came down which had we been in its path would have almost certainly killed more than one of us (there were some pretty big blocks coming down). Our path down that valley crossed several other old avalanches, but skirted the main danger areas that day. Had the insurance had some ridiculous blanket restriction, we would have been prevented from that excellent safe skiing, but would have been allowed to get in the path of that potentially fatal avalanche. In the final instance - it's where you ski that's what's important, not what some bit of paper says. Someone else here had a beautifully precisely defined policy that would have been music to all the lounge-lawyers' ears here, but would have prevented >90% of my skiing this year as it covered nothing over level 2. It's perfectly possible to find fatal places to ski at level 2 (or even 1), so an excessive concentration on avvy warning level is plain stupid. DT's principle of
| Quote: |
| you would need to be guided by the local advice (any of the emergency services, mountain rescue, ski resort employees such as ski guides instructors), i.e. is the area deemed too dangerous for skiing?" If there are any doubts as to the safety of the area you wish to ski in, and there is nobody in authority to ask, do not ski there. |
if fairly applied, seems just the right one to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
GrahamN,
| Quote: |
...and I hope your reply doesn't. I had some fantastic skiing with guides on many occasions this past season quite safely at level 4, and maybe once unguided.
|
Me too, I was only giving that as an example as I've been out plenty of times with a guide when it's been L4 and had great days. My concern is, in my policy document with them (I appreciate that others have written to them and asked the same question previously, but I wasn't aware that the specifics question had already been asked until someone linked me to their thread earlier on in this one) it was a bit woolly as I said, hence my email to them to ask what constitutes 'skiing against local advice'. They will probably come back and say the same as in your last quote above then, therefore.
I see what you mean about not a lot of the skiing you did would be covered if they had the avy specifics in there. If they did come back and say nothing over L2 was covered then I wouldn't take the policy with them anyway as I'd need to have more than that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Arno, what does AAC membership cost?
VolklAttivaS5, will be interesting to hear what you get back from DirectTravel (and from the intriguing sounding snowcrazy
I followed the thread last year with interest, and eventually decided that I'd rather have a policy with some discretion in it than one that picks an arbitrary avalanche warning limit and says you're suddenly not allowed off piste. Fundamentally, skiing off piste is a continuum - 2 feet off the side of a blue run is a very different prospect to hucking cliffs in the farthest BC, regardless of the avvy level...I don't think it's unreasonable for wording to sound a bit woolly when there are no hard and fast rules.
Each to their own, though... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
ChrisWo,
| Quote: |
| I followed the thread last year with interest, and eventually decided that I'd rather have a policy with some discretion in it than one that picks an arbitrary avalanche warning limit and says you're suddenly not allowed off piste. |
Yes, when you look at it like that. Just a bit wary of what's said to be going against local advice though.....I wouldn't want to have an accident off piste and them turn around and say, ah, because there was an avalanche warning in place of 1 at the time, you're not covered.
Think I'd rather go for Snowcard or BMC where the people running the show are at least skiers themselves, despite the additional cost, I think I'd feel more confident then.
Anyway, we'll see. Nothing as yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
I think asking questions of what levels of avalanche risk you are allowed to ski in, and what levels you are not, is a bad question to ask. It allows the insurance companies to give an answer and, maybe, forbid you from skiing off piste above some stated level. VolklAttivaS5 said he has "been out plenty of times with a guide when it's been L4 and had great days". I have done the same. The avalanche risk as published in a resort is not the risk on each and every slope in that resort. The published avalanche risk is some sort of merge of the risks across each of the many slopes of the resort. That means on a higher risk day one can choose low risk slopes, leaving the steep or exposed slopes to low risk days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
ChrisWo, £41 - Achilles has a reasonable point about how you will be dealing with a German/Austrian insurer should the worst happen but I am not sure that it that big a concern for me. YMMV
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arno, I am not trying to be prescriptive for anyone else on that. I have a similar view on other services that can go wrong (private dentistry overseas, for example) but happily accept that others have a different viewpoint.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Adrian wrote: |
| I think asking questions of what levels of avalanche risk you are allowed to ski in, and what levels you are not, is a bad question to ask. It allows the insurance companies to give an answer and, maybe, forbid you from skiing off piste above some stated level. VolklAttivaS5 said he has "been out plenty of times with a guide when it's been L4 and had great days". I have done the same. The avalanche risk as published in a resort is not the risk on each and every slope in that resort. The published avalanche risk is some sort of merge of the risks across each of the many slopes of the resort. That means on a higher risk day one can choose low risk slopes, leaving the steep or exposed slopes to low risk days. |
 she actually, not he. Yes I see what you mean, it doesn't matter even if they did come back with specific avy warnings being covered or not covered (which I very much doubt they will, since a couple of others have asked them exactly the same question in the past clearly from what they've said on this thread and they've not made any changes so far) because if they said anything over a L2 for the day was not covered, well for some people that might suit their requirements if they hardly ever go off piste for example, and when they do it's on low risk days, whereas for me I'd go with another insurer instead as that wouldn't be any good for me. In my email to them I have simply asked the question of what consititutes skiing against local advice as others did. I haven't suggested they change the wording so that only some avalanche risk categories are covered.
Will be interesting to see what they say to see if it's any different from the past responses given to others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
VolklAttivaS5, dear lady, my apologies.
Yes, if an insurance company did say "only below level X" on their policy it would make many of us choose someone else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
For anyone else interested, this is Dogtags view of their underwriters position (The same firm as some other ski policys) on what constitutes off piste throughout the world (Not just France or the US)
| Quote: |
Q. Do you cover Off Piste Skiing and what is the definition of Off Piste?
A. The generally accepted understanding of off-piste (or backcountry) skiing or boarding means 'going out of bounds', i.e. outside the resort boundary (if there is a boundary) or simply off the marked pistes if within the resort area. If you are going out of bounds or outside marked areas of the resort, we recommend you do so with a fully qualified local guide because, in our view, you will be taken to the best areas and you'll have a higher degree of comfort concerning your safety. However, we do not insist that you take a guide, you are insured for off-piste without a guide provided that you are not going alone or going against advice. And remember, even some areas within a resort may be considered out of bounds because they are hazardous. In most parts of North America, going out of bounds contravenes local law and you may, at best have your lift pass confiscated or worse, face arrest and have an overnight stay courtesy of the Sherriff's office. Normally there is a physical fence with warning signs so you shouldn't be in any doubt.
It is your responsibility to ensure that on any particular day you are aware of and obey local advice, information and instructions given by the resort authorities and that you obey any signs and information you encounter on the mountain - the source of this information will vary resort to resort and country to country and it is your responsibility to find out. If a section is marked 'closed' there will be a very good reason for it (e.g. high avalanche danger) and ignoring such signs or advice may invalidate your cover. You should be aware that under the terms of cover, needless self-exposure to peril except in an endeavour to save human life may invalidate your cover.
Obviously, you must never ski off-piste alone. |
http://www.dogtag.co.uk/faqs.aspx#1332
Perhaps other snowHeads would care to post the definition of off piste from their insurance policy here.
I have claimed on ski insurance twice. First time settlement took 6 weeeks. Second time with Dogtag the money was in my account in 14 days. (Neither claim was for off piste.
_________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Boredsurfing wrote: |
| .....Obviously, you must never ski off-piste alone. |
Obviously? Right now I'm recalling a very pleasant spell below the Diable restaurant at LDA doing just that. That's Dogtag off the list, then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
achilles, Indeed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
david@mediacopy, achilles, me too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Sorry for the delay in getting another post about this. Will try to bring news as soon as I can. This news will apply right across the board for single trips to seasons away so keep your eyes on this one. In the mean time does anyone else have any news about there experiences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Hmm. It was that "skiing against advice" which I came up against. The girl I spoke to said that would "obviously" apply if there was an avalanche warning in force. From my chairlift observations loads of people ski off-piste alone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
pam w,
| Quote: |
From my chairlift observations
|
Which according to SCGB advice is the 'safest' off piste for their reps to take you on. ie off piste is OK if you can see a lift and you are no more than 5/10 mins from a piste. Laughable I know, but thats the guidance they were given, as relayed to me by a former scgb rep.
Pam (and any others), perhaps you would like to post on here your insurance policys definition of off piste so that we may compare.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| pam w wrote: |
| Hmm. It was that "skiing against advice" which I came up against. The girl I spoke to said that would "obviously" apply if there was an avalanche warning in force. From my chairlift observations loads of people ski off-piste alone. |
Skiing off piste alone in Europe is a minefield from an insurance perspective. Clearly lots of people do it in terrain they don't even consider "off piste" just ungroomed and with less objective risk than skiing on a crowded piste. Yet the same would also apply to solo descents of the Mallory couloir.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| pam w wrote: |
| The girl I spoke to said that would "obviously" apply if there was an avalanche warning in force. From my chairlift observations loads of people ski off-piste alone. |
That’s ok then - don't resorts call them avalanche bulletin's not warnings. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Boredsurfing wrote: |
pam w,
| Quote: |
From my chairlift observations
|
Which according to SCGB advice is the 'safest' off piste for their reps to take you on. ie off piste is OK if you can see a lift and you are no more than 5/10 mins from a piste. Laughable I know, but thats the guidance they were given, as relayed to me by a former scgb rep. |
Sorry but you have only quoted part of the criteria for the ski club leading off piste.
Reps also have to consider all the other obvious factors such as snow level, slope aspect, visibility, experience of the group etc.
I am an ex ski club rep so I am not fully up to date, but as I understand the ten minute factor, it is relevant to being able to obtain help or back track reasonably quickly if there is a problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Would people feel it was reasonable if an insurer said you could ski off-piste with a guide OR without a guide but at or below level 3 avalanche risk?
Not that I've ever seen that - but just out of interest.
| VolklAttivaS5 wrote: |
snowball . Who do you do your policy with out of interest? Is it the SCGB one? |
Yes.
Gazzza And there is always an avalanche danger level - there is no zero on the scale.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowball, quite, my point exactly. Thats why they are bulletin's or advisorys and they refer to a generalised risk level, and they not a specific warning.
My point was facetious (to the insurance companys) - arguably (though I wouldn't like to test it!) unless the resort sticks a sign out saying "warning no off piste" (which I have seen done in Les Arcs after heavy snow) then you are not skiing against warning.
This is of course daft as if you ski off piste with a risk of 5 then you are either a genius at mind-reading snowpack or are a pillock. One of the two.
But you get my point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...before anyone lambasts I know the bulletin refer to risks related to specific pitches, at speific altitude ranges, etc etc so on the same day one slope can be exceptionally high risk while another can be relatively safe...
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
I never ski off piste alone... it's just that I often get seperated from my companion - Gerald the imaginary giraffe
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The other thing to bear in mind in Yurp is what are you actually worried about and whether you can self-insure the perception gap betweem you and the insurer's interpretation of its own policy? For instance heli evac - buy Carte Neige, medical costs - EHIC, etc. If I'm sufficiently hurt offpiste to not be able to make it back under my own steam or aided by companions then to be honest I don't mind bearing some of the cost myself if insurers don't cover it and it was a grey area.
North America is a different matter due to exhorbitant medical costs but there are many policies (arguably all) that define inbounds as fair game and if I go outside/backcountry on a holiday, which I have, I accept its my own risk. BMC insurance is however well worth considering.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
don't carte neige and Austrian Alpine Club policies apply worldwide?
i agree with fatbob - i am not sure what is missing (that i really care about) from a combination of AAC plus travel cover that comes with my credit card
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Arno, so let's say it's your unlucky day and you don't agree with the AAC (assuming you can read their decision) and wish to take the matter up with the Austrian insurance ombudsman (if there is one) or go for an Austrian court case or binding arbitration with an Austrian arbitrator. Would you be up for that? I would not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
achilles, that all sounds like a breeze compared with dealing with a UK-based insurer
seriously though, the terms of the policy and the fact that it is specifically aimed at mountaineers by an insurer from an alpine country makes me think that the likelihood of a dispute is much smaller than it would be with a UK insurer who has a built in get-out clause built into its policy (what on earth does "going against advice" mean?). if you multiply the likelihood of a dispute by the complexity of that dispute, it still, for me, comes down in favour of AAC. that's my risk assessment anyway - YMMV 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Insurance comapnies like making things unclear don't they! Keeping an eye on this thread (amongst others) as I'm off to St Anton for the season working and it appears that off-piste isn't covered on the insurance we get. Going to get the Bergretter to cover rescue costs (which hopefully will not be used).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Arno, you may have a point. Any experience/knowledge of anyone having an off-piste accident well handled by AAC?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
My apologies if someone has already mentioned it, I didn't have time to read all 3 pages ...
I use the British Mountaineering Council Insurance.
It's not cheap, but it is brilliant, and you can do absolutely anything.
It's also virtually the only one recognised by everyone, helicopters, hospitals etc No tedious faxing backwards & forwards whilst you are dying on the table
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Alan McGregor, I didn't have any trouble with our insurers either (Direct Travel) when hubby broke his neck just before NY 2009. I called them, and they dealt with the hospital directly, and kept me informed of what was going on. I rang them if I needed to, to rearrange travel, hotels near the hospital etc. No faxes or claim forms until he was home. Ambulance from Briancon to Grenoble dealt with them directly by telephone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
i use an EHIC card and local piste rescue (carre neige or equivalent) plus a normal general travel insurance policy that doesnt cover off piste. i figure if i get hurt and carted off the rescue covers me, local hospital by EHIC and if i needed repatriation my standard general policy. I have private medical and if needed knee surgery or something that i would be covered. am i missing something? i cant believe if i needed repatriation for instance that there would be a record of where on a mountain i was recovered from..
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
skimottaret, but many European resort hospitals are private clinics (as opposed to state run) & won't recognise your EHIC card - & they'll want paying in cash!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
spyderjon, only time i needed medical care was in mottaret's private clinic and they took the carte neige, no paperwork nothing. i have a decent family travel policy through the mrs. work. The accident i had i needed an ophthalmologist a few days later and she charged so little i didnt make a claim on the travel policy but could have done. I guess my point is once off the hill would anyone know or care if you were on piste or off?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
skimottaret, I guess my point is that claiming would be fraudulent if the accident wasn't covered by the policy. I'm interested that the clinic took the carte neige, though - I had thought that was for recovery to clinic/hospital only.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
It also covers emergency medical expenses that are not covered by the EHIC as well I think, such as prescriptions in resort, and private clinic fees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hells Bells, didn't you have some problem initially persuading them that they had to talk to you, even though Jules was "the insured"? That sounded very, very, frustrating. The only time I've ever dealt with an insurance company after an incident (twice, Snowcard) they were excellent. But they were straightforward - one a damaged ACL on a green piste, the other when a tornado blew half the roof of our house at home.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
