.jpg)
Well! after all the 'hoop-la' & threats of class action & raving radio rants & everything else, it would appear that many of the would-be litigants had no idea they were part of the would-be litigious plan.
Notwithstanding that many of those on the class-action list had "not been contacted", the lawyer involved remained confident that he had "good reason to believe" they were willing participants in his cause.
Oh dear! a cause without rebels - not very convincing!
Meanwhile back in 'Insurance-land', it would appear that the NRMA's home contents policy provides 'public liability cover of up to $20 million' but not if the damage or injury is the result of 'a professional sporting activity that's paid or competitive'.
WOW! Actuarial Proof that my type of cycling activity (you know with skirts & baskets & shopping & picinics) is nowhere near as risky as that of the industry- led activity (you know with lycra & water bottles & cut off gloves & vented helmets!!!)...
...how incredibly convincing!
That is not actuarial proof that your type of cycling is safer than commuting on a road bike in lycra - it might show that it is safer than actual racing.
ReplyDeleteTrue - you're right, anonymous!! I stand corrected
ReplyDelete