Pistes are getting more dangerous, more people out of control

A snowHead

@holidayloverxx, no, but you replied directly to @ecureuil who did specifically mention that he thought Carre Neige wouldn't cover you. By extension, your comments around ducking a rope, avy risk or needing a guide also apply to Carre Neige. They don't.

A snowHead

@Je suis un Skieur, you obviously know a lot more than the head of pistes in Val d’Isere who regularly tells listeners to Radio Val that they are not covered if they ski on closed pistes. They will be rescued if injured, but they will be charged for the service.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

@Je suis un Skieur, You misinterpreted, I was responding to the point "most overseas visitors will have broader travel insurance" and I said that insurance companies etc. I have no idea what carre neige does or does not cover in any great detail as I haven't used it for donkey's years

You need to Login to know who's really who.

@Dr John, interesting point but is that a Carre Neige policy or a VdI policy? Or just an attempt create a little fear factor to disencourage the activity because they're fed up with it? Do you know anyone that has ever been charged for a rescue on a closed piste?

With no specific exclusion in the policy documents for a closed piste, I think you'd be in to some pretty debatable legal semantics to argue that a closed piste is not part of the overall ski area, which is the area of coverage declared on the policy. And as @ecureuil stated, "what IS the difference between skiing on a closed piste and an off-piste line immediately adjacent to it?"

What if you have a fall off piste and drag yourself to the nearest piste which (unknown to you) is closed but you're just trying to be helpful because it makes more sense from a rescue accessibility perspective?

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

The closed piste thing is a real bugbear of mine anyway. The signage and reasoning is very inconsistent.

You'll need to Register first of course.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

If you ski off piste then you assume the risks and you have a good idea what they are. As long as you take reasonable precautions you are not being negligent. If you ski a closed piste you have no idea why it's closed; there might be a piste basher operating below a sightline, there could be a downhill race or training session underway, there could be cables and pipes being installed and spread across the piste. Piste control do know those risks and (generally) don't close pistes if not necessary so you are knowingly putting yourself at risk and anyone working on that piste too. That is negligent behaviour and akin to jumping into a closed swimming pool and then trying to claim when you break your neck because there's no water in it. If the insurance company can prove that it was your negligence that contributed significantly to your misfortune, and in this case it's a slam dunk, then they will either not pay out or pay out a massively reduced sum.

So, @Je suis un Skieur, I think that the legal semantics wouldn't centre on whether the piste was part of the resort ... they would be argued as to whether the behaviour was sufficiently crass to reach the definition of negligence so they could avoid paying out.

After all it is free

@Blackblade, all of that is fine if it is noted in the policy terms and conditions but it isn't (unless someone can prove otherwise). And I have known plenty of seasonaires who have skied off piste in a resort they barely know with no equipment other than male bravado - they're still covered by carre neige for rescue.

Let's be clear, I'm not advocating skiing closed pistes per se or skiing off piste unequipped. I once had a right go on this forum at someone who advocated ducking the rope on to the Boulevard des Lanches to Meribel. As a local, I know full well that that boulevard is extremely susceptible to avalanches above it and it's closed in spring because sooner or later the entire side slips. If you duck the rope in spring, you're asking not to be found until summer.

But just as with local off piste routes, if you're a local who's skied for instance, early season year after year, you soon get to know which pistes are closed for marketing reasons and which are closed for safety reasons. It's well known where I am that certain pistes are "saved" for Xmas week even though they're fully prepared and have neither the exposure nor the gradient to be at avy risk or anything else. You can frequently scope them out from a lift the same as you'd scope out an off piste line.

My home piste is sometimes shut early season because they haven't got around to flattening out the mounds of snow from the cannons. Does that make it unsafe for the full quota of possible skiers? Yes. Does it make it unsafe for a single skier on his way home who knows the piste inside out and can easily circumvent the mounds in the same way he'd circumvent a big rock off piste? Not in my opinion. Is it ridiculous to suggest that skiing down through the dense trees off piste instead which ends up in the same place is somehow less of a risk? I think an actuary would say yes, it is ridiculous. But the trees are insured and the closed piste isn't? It's not logical.

I agree you'd have to be an idiot to duck a rope on to a race piste but with the amount of fencing around the ones in Courchevel and Meribel, you could never claim ignorance. It's exceptionally uncommon in my part of France for a piste basher to run during skiing hours. I have only ever seen it a handful of times - usually in truly horrendous conditions to create a corridor of flat snow for people to get home.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

@Pejoli, fair enough but that's another example from VdI/Tignes. What I'm trying to establish is if that is because it's a defined carre neige exclusion (in which case it is not at all clear in their marketing sales pitch or their T&Cs) or is it VdI/Tignes local policy to charge for rescue on a closed piste?

In your example, did the injured party only have to pay for the rescue costs or the full medical bills also? If it was the full rescue and medical then that would suggest it's a carre neige policy. If he was charged for the rescue but carre neige paid the medical costs then that suggests it is a local VdI/Tignes policy.

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

snow reports

@Je suis un Skieur, I don think it's just vdi / tignes - when Mrs NBT had a tumble in Sainte Foy, we'd just come down the "closed" Arpette piste. We knew it had been closed for race training, and that said training had finished, so there was a large area of untracked powder which was extremely fun to ski - Mrs NBT just had an unfortunate tumble at the end of the piste when she crossed one of the ruts left by the slalom finish gate on the run out area, and was thrown off balance. As we were on the run-out from the Arpette piste to the lift, the pisteur completing the rescue form said he'd put us down as having exited the closed piste, or the rescue costs (I had to pay and claim back from my insurance) would have been much higher had we needed rescue from a closed piste

The generic full policy wording (as opposed to the summary posted on the previous page) is here: https://carreneige.com/en/nos-offres/carre-neige/documents-contractuels/ I saved the link a while back when trying to satisfy myself that a Carre Neige policy bought in one resort would be valid in all the others.

With respect to on-piste/off-piste/closed piste, the full wording (p19) seems pretty clear to me:

"1. RESCUE AND EVACUATION
Rescue and research expenses
The Insurer will cover the payment, within the guarantees limits indicated in
the table enclosed in this document, of the expenses incurred due to calling in
professionals in order to rescue or research for a Policyholder who is injured, has
died, or is lost, including via helicopter.
The benefit is provided in the ski area including the off-piste ski area that is
accessible via ski-lifts."

Given that an off-piste skier could easily enter a closed piste without knowing it - ie by joining anywhere other than from the top - it's hard to see how one could read an exclusion for closed pistes into that wording.

However, note that there is a qualification on page 1 that exact details may vary by ski area and that the wording as issued upon policy purchase is what matters.

You know it makes sense.

@Je suis un Skieur, you're arguing for a commonsense approach whereas loss adjusters for insurers are very much looking for reasons they can legally avoid paying out.

You can of course continue to bear risk of skiing closed runs or maintain faith that carre neige will operate differently to othe wintersports insurance.

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

Generally ski pistes are much better prepared than a decade or two ago, the real issues relate to the skiers/boarders using them. Toofy Grin

A snowHead

I've just checked the dogtag insurance conditions and it clearly states you will have no cover if you are acting "contrary to local advice or warnings". Skiing down a closed piste is perhaps the most cut and dried situation imaginable. I imagine other companies have similar exclusions, or more general warnings about "negligence". Whether they would choose to rely on such get-outs is another matter - but it would be foolish to assume they won't.

A snowHead

Interesting research just published

Severe accidents due to collisions between skiers1

Press release from the French Academy of Medicine

April 10, 2025

The large number of ski slope users in winter sports resorts exposes skiers to serious collision accidents.

https://www.ledauphine.com/societe/2025/04/10/collisions-sur-les-pistes-l-alarme-de-l-academie-de-medecine

https://www.academie-medecine.fr/severe-accidents-due-to-collisions-between-skiers/?lang=en

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

Zut alors! Les debutantes FFFFF "beginner skiers who, preoccupied with the downstream of the slope, do not see those who hit them coming."

Or alternatively being unawares of the dangers of traversing across a busy slope unable to actually turn on skis predictably and competently. Usually without any understanding of FIS guidelines.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

@Layne, please.don't go spoiling a good argument with cold, hard facts!

Or quoting the, potentially bleedin', obvious:

Help!!

Pistes are getting more dangerous, more people out of control

snowHeads Forum Index >>> The Piste