*All* Bob's email below is accurate. I do find CEO Minster's email [arrl-odv:35321] to be disturbing because of its inaccuracies. * ARES Volunteer Insurance Coverage* As the Member of EC-FSC that initiated, at the request of multiple ARES groups, an investigation into whether it was possible to find a carrier that would offer individual policies to protect ARES volunteers, I have been involved in this matter since its initiation. At no time, contrary to the implication in Mr. Minster's email, was there ever any consideration that the League would provide coverage to individual ARES Members. That consideration had been laid to rest years before Mr. Minster was hired and that limiting factor was discussed between Mr. Minster, Chairman Williams and me before the subcommittee initiated its investigation. So the comment "I would not support this idea" is misleading as the "idea" was */_never_/* on the table. The scope of the investigation by the EC-FSC subcommittee from the beginning was to determine if the League could, as it had done with the club liability and equipment insurance policies, locate a carrier that would offer individually purchased policies. Unfortunately, due to the reasons Bob has accurately discussed, the subcommittee was unable to identify a carrier willing to offer individual liability coverage to ARES volunteers. As an aside, the investigation was never focused on "umbrella" coverage; it was focused on individual special liability policies. * Club Liability Policies* I refer everyone to my email of 11.5.23 [arrl-odv:35318]. The deficiencies in the language of the current club liability policies are, if Tom KT8Y, is correct renders the club liability policies to if not worthless, to sufficiently defective to leave our Clubs seriously exposed. Note the example discussed by Bob as to the carrier refusing to tender either a defense or coverage. I repeat my warning: /The League needs to involve KT8Y and insurance professionals to address the shortcomings in the Club policies. .... Insurance is a specialty and this matter needs to reviewed by both industry experts and attorneys whose practice specializes in insurance matters. And it needs to be be done sooner rather than later; too much time has already passed since the issue was brought to our attention./ ______________________________________ John Robert Stratton N5AUS Director West Gulf Division Office:512-445-6262 Cell:512-426-2028 P.O. Box 2232 Austin, Texas 78768-2232 *______________________________________* On 11/7/23 2:27 PM, Famiglio, Bob, K3RF (Dir, AD) wrote:
I spoke to several of you on the phone after you commented to me about this subject. There are some misconceptions about the insurance inquiry I believe. Insurance is boring stuff I know. So here is a more detailed review of the scope of the committee’s work and my further observations for those that want to know. If you don’t, I will not be offended.
It is important to note that at no time did the ECFSC insurance subcommittee suggest or pursue ARES insurance for ARRL members or non-members at League expense. This is the first I heard of this suggestion. I agree that is not doable. And the club liability policy protection and the equipment policy protection is different than the designed liability protection inquiry for ARES individuals. The club policy was not effective for the ARES risks to individual members for which a solution was sought. ARRL Members (and the non-members serving ARES) express a growing concern about individual liability and ask me (or other Volunteer counsel assuming they can get any to return a call for questions) about what happens in a simple (non-vehicle based) accident or other injury claim of some non-performance by an ARES operator included in some blanket claim for whatever scenario one can think of. Emergency communications support to hospital groups are a good example of the nightmare claim.
No ideas of providing a free benefit to members or non-members was ever raised. Rather, individuals would pay their own premium to be covered with some protection assuming their own personal insurance does not cover them. Many states do NOT cover their communications volunteers as “government” workers. Some states do provide SOME coverage assuming you qualify as a state registered volunteer under some other program (not ARES). Vice Director Tharp and I had a long phone call last night on this very subject. His state volunteers if signed up with a government agency and issued a “mission number” for a given response, may be covered. Whether they are working under ARES or not is an entirely different question. That rarely happens in some other jurisdictions. In my local ARES group in a suburban Philadelphia county, ARES is not covered for personal liability claims against ARES operators even when help is requested by the county. If they are working for another NGO like American Red Cross (ARC), it may be different, but then they report to ARC and not ARES. I find there is confusion as to the responsible agency. Some ARES members (league members or not) mistakenly believe our League (or at least someone else) covers them. This was never a concern for our volunteers 30 or 40 years ago. It is now.
I personally spent almost an hour on the phone the first time with our present club policy administrator at Risk Strategies, earlier this year, on an ARES policy design. And I answered their questions in other calls. They were enthusiastic and helpful about a possible new product – why not. Our suspicion was that we might see some limited but useful coverage at $30 to maybe $75/yr per individual for low coverage limits. It might not sell over those fees. But the risk pool size (policy holders) was not able to be defined (I guessed at 20,000 to maybe 50,000 policy buyers at most nationally) as a starting point. We had to start somewhere.
Those of you familiar with insurance actuarial studies and policy designs can appreciate the problems. I asked two separate ham radio-familiar insurance policy brokers and received the same results. Director Stratton also investigated with his industry contacts. High deductible and low policy limits did not help. I later learned after they searched for a carrier that the risk pool hazards are undefined and there is little published loss history to guide the carrier about possible losses. Understandable. I reminded them that the 1997 Federal Volunteer Protection Act, (assuming claims of ordinary negligence) reduces virtually all possible losses to cost of defense. The Act provides an affirmative defense and basis for possible early dismissal, but hiring a lawyer to address that in court still costs money-thousands just to start.
As to the deficiencies in the present club insurance, that is not the issue we investigated but that came up separately. The problem is not coverage limits, it is definitions of covered losses. And I forgot to mention in an earlier email that our Southeastern division Vice Director Jeff Beals WA4AW was also very helpful in informal discussions on this whole subject. Jeff is not a lawyer but is an insurance professional with considerable experience and generally, but informally, suggested he agrees with our lawyer member in Dale’s division who expressed concern about the defined coverage of our existing club policy. I only know of one lawsuit referred to the ARRL insurance program carrier by our affiliated club Keystone VHF Club in central PA, when they were sued in State court for big bucks in December of 2021. They were not factually involved in the actual claimed loss injury. The club owns Real Estate free and clear of debt with a mountaintop club house and towers so were not judgement proof. Our Club insurance Carrier refused to cover or even tender a defense with reservation, but it was fortunately resolved (as to the claim against the club) after some pro bono legal work. We were lucky. The club was sure the policy we promote would cover the claim (they have separate real estate insurance for real estate-based injury, not involved here) .
Maybe some members of the board are aware of good results from the club liability carrier. Though the subcommittee was terminated since we completed our specific mission, I would still appreciate information on your experience with the club policy. And our equipment loss (property) insurance carrier (different policy) appears to have a good reputation for claim payouts from what some of you and our members have told me. If you have read this far and you still have questions or comments and I did not answer them, I prefer you call me at your convenience and I will be happy to discuss them.
*Bob Famiglio, K3RF*
ARRL Atlantic Division Director
610-359-7300
www.QRZ.com/db/K3RF
*From:* arrl-odv <arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org> *On Behalf Of *Minster, David NA2AA (CEO) *Sent:* Monday, November 6, 2023 4:01 PM *To:* arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org *Subject:* [arrl-odv:35321] Re: Club Liability Policies
I think it is important to understand that this is not a universal plan intended to provide high levels coverage on a blanket basis for clubs. This was, and is, basic inexpensive coverage for clubs.
There is nothing that precludes clubs from pursuing other insurance options based on specific needs where their potential liability of losses exceeds our basic coverage.
I do not recollect any additional information regarding insurance for ARES members. My position, as discussed with Director Williams, is that this is not an insurance coverage we can offer to ARES members on an individual basis at no charge. As I recall, the number we were looking at was basic umbrella liability coverage that would cost $150 per member per year - 3 times the annual membership rate per member. Plus, there is no requirement (much to my chagrin) that ARES members have any obligation to be an ARRL member. Based on these facts, I indicated to Director Williams that I would not support this idea.
David
*From:* arrl-odv <arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org> *On Behalf Of *John Robert Stratton *Sent:* Sunday, November 5, 2023 7:28 PM *To:* arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org *Cc:* Famiglio, Bob, K3RF (VD, AD) <RBFamiglio@Verizon.net> *Subject:* [arrl-odv:35319] Re: Club Liability Policies
All
The issue of liability insurance coverage for ARES volunteers is a pressing concern in many jurisdictions as more and more served agencies/organizations are requesting that volunteers sign waivers that include blanket indemnity clauses.
As Bob observed, some coverage — either private or government — exists, but it is not universal.
There is no indication that Minster and/or A&F have pursued a resolution of the concern.
Tom, KT8Y's, concerns regarding the defects in the Club policy that is offered are troubling and if valid, those concerns indicate that the promised coverage in some instances is illusory. These defects — discovered by an insurance professional — must be addressed. Were a Club to suffer a substantial financial loss due to a defective insurance policy the League represents provides ironclad protection, the fallout would be damaging to the League.
The League needs to involve KT8Y and insurance professionals to address the shortcomings in the Club policies. By professionals I do not mean the clown show of Murtha Cullina. Insurance is a specialty and this matter needs to reviewed by both industry experts and attorneys whose practice specializes in insurance matters. And it needs to be be done sooner rather than later; too much time has already passed since the issue was brought to our attention.
Were a substantial financial loss to be visited on one of our insureds due to the defects in the policies, our knowledge of the defects and our failure to take action to remedy those defects while continuing to promote the safety of the policies could expose the League to an adverse judgment — on a number of legal theories.
_______________________________________
John Robert Stratton
N5AUS
Director
West Gulf Division
Office: 512-445-6262
Cell: 512-426-2028
P.O. Box 2232
Austin, Texas 78768-2232
*_______________________________________*
On 11/5/23 4:12 PM, Famiglio, Bob, K3RF (Dir, AD) wrote:
This might be a good time to raise an ongoing concern. ARES members have often been asking how they can personally insure against losses and possible hazards if injuring someone while serving. Not all homeowners or renters policies cover such nonprofit activities. I have recently found some do not (and some carriers have told our members they do not) and some do with a rider, an umbrella policy or just extend coverage to certain non-business social activities. The liability insurance subcommittee of the ECFSC reviewed the ARES liability issues from an insurance standpoint and found that carriers we approached (including the present one) were uninterested in a separate, individual policy product offering (non-club as ARES is not a club).
In the process of undertaking this task, Director Stratton and I presented a well-attended liability insurance seminar at the last Dayton convention on this topic. Although we did not undertake to review the existing club liability policy offered by the League, we had the good fortune of meeting and conversing with a retired lawyer at the seminar who practiced and litigated strictly insurance coverage issues and evaluated policy language. Tom, KT8Y, a long-time ARRL member, reviewed the existing club policy we promote and raised some serious concerns about the effectiveness of the liability protection it offered, or did not. I spoke with him about it after he provided an evaluation.
The ECFSC insurance subcommittee was folded by our chairman Dale Williams so nothing further was pursued in that regard. But Dale did tell us the remaining matter raised by Tom was forwarded to the CEO and to A&F for some further action, whatever that turns out to be. Would this be a good time to finish an analysis of Tom’s concerns and speak to our program administrator before this goes to much further? Would anyone on the board like a copy of Tom’s evaluation and concerns about the problems with the existing liability (not the equipment protection) policy we promote? Let John or I know if you are curious. The issue had to do with the poor compilation used in the policy language which appeared likely to have been an poorly considered cut and pasted from a commercial business policy according to Tom.
*Bob Famiglio, K3RF*
ARRL Atlantic Division Director
610-359-7300
www.QRZ.com/db/K3RF <http://www.QRZ.com/db/K3RF>
*From:* arrl-odv <arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org> <mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org> *On Behalf Of *Middleton, Diane, W2DLM (CFO) *Sent:* Sunday, November 5, 2023 11:22 AM *To:* w7vo@comcast.net *Cc:* arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org *Subject:* [arrl-odv:35317] Re: Club Liability Policies
Mike,
Let me get a well written statement done tomorrow that you can send out. I rushed to get this to odv asap in case anyone heard something over the weekend.
Diane
-------- Original message --------
From: Mike Ritz <w7vo@comcast.net>
Date: 11/5/23 10:51 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: "Middleton, Diane, W2DLM (CFO)" <dmiddleton@arrl.org>
Cc: arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
Subject: Re: [arrl-odv:35315] Club Liability Policies
Diane;
Can the above be quoted and text out into a Division newsletter?
Thanks!
Mike
W7VO
Sent from my iPhone, utilizing a very tiny keyboard fed from very fat fingers
On Nov 5, 2023, at 5:49 AM, Middleton, Diane, W2DLM (CFO) <dmiddleton@arrl.org> wrote:
Dear ODV-
You may hear from some members in a panic that they received a letter stating that their Club Liability Insurance policies are not being renewed. We have learned that Marsh/AIG are not renewing any of these policies that remained with them after the transfer to our program. I am told that these letters are not very friendly.
Short version – these policies are not part of our program but the Clubs can move to our program with Risk Strategies by going to *arrlinsurance.com* or calling *1-866-819-0209*.
For those of you who have not been on the board for many years- a little history – The ARRL Club Liability and Equipment Insurance Program has changed administrators and, therefore underwriters multiple times over the years. Despite very public announcements many of the policy holders who have never had a problem just kept renewing with the old program administrators/underwriters. When these folks have issues with their policies, we cannot help resolved their concerns. In recent weeks there has been an uptick in members contacting us complaining that no one will respond to them or answer the phone. These complaints are not related to our program. While they will call ARRL or Risk Strategies, we learn that their policies are actually with an old program administrator/underwriter and we have to explain to them that they are not in our program and there is nothing we can do for them.
The silver lining is this can be an opportunity to grow our program by regaining all these clubs into our current program. Should you hear from any of your members who have received one of these letters, please encourage them to contact Risk Strategies and assure them that insurance is still available.
At this time, we do not know if this impacts the equipment insurance policies.
I will be working this week to get the word out to the clubs that coverage is still available.
Please let me know if you have any questions or can be of any assistance.
73,
Diane Middleton, W2DLM
Chief Financial Officer
ARRL, The National Association for Amateur Radio®
225 Main Street
Newington, CT 06111
(860)594-0225
image001.png
_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list
arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
