CTC No more

[mjr]

So becoming an Affiliate Group isn't a route for us; it would mean we'd only have 7 ride leaders

Couldn't an affiliate could just register all potential ride leaders as officers with the title of "Ride Leader"?

(That said, I suspect some I know don't actually bother in practice, which does raise the question of why they affiliate, but anyway...)

Tried your example, signed up on the site but there was no Organisers Liability Insurace on offer. You got the £130 idea from the home page without looking at the detail. So not an option. Thanks anyway.

I got the £130 idea from a different insurance policy used by another voluntary organisation I've done events with, but its policy details aren't online, so I linked that one instead.

I think you've not looked at the detail, which I did indeed look at. The "community activities" it insures "means activity (including home working) undertaken by your trustees, directors, employees or volunteers, with your knowledge or under your control, involving: [...] organising, arranging, hosting or supplying [...] Events with up to 500 (five hundred) attendees at any one time." It specifically mentions cycling as an example of what's covered.

As far as I can tell, it's wider than CTC's insurance coverage and without the need to register Events with CTC HQ.

You're suggestion that members of an SC affiliated club have to take out individual membership of the organisation is wrong though.

I made no such suggestion, except that they'd need to if they wanted third-party cover and didn't have it already.

 

[iandg]

↑
You're suggestion that members of an SC affiliated club have to take out individual membership of the organisation is wrong though.

I made no such suggestion, except that they'd need to if they wanted third-party cover and didn't have it already.

The obvious alternative is to affiliate to CTC/CUK at £75/year [edited after checking] and as far as I can tell from local affiliates, members don't have to join CTC/CUK (unlike BC/SC) and there isn't all the bureaucracy and kicking people out after five rides if they don't subscribe and so on.

 

[steveindenmark]

It appears that CTC has secretly changed its name to try and escape the bad name it has earned itself. It has become one of those seedy companies that change its name and set up somewhere else under another name only to carry on with the same practices.

I hope those trying to set up the new touring club will succeed.

 

[Pro Tour Punditry]

The CTC attracts the kind of nobber I have no intention of going anywhere near, either on a bike or off it.

 

[srw]

The press release went out on 18th Feb to couple of cycling media folks but it is not on CTC press release folder (checked it on 18th Feb when I saw the media release on a cycling site). You can use these cheeky search words to find the media release "Tuohy" and "Durex". There are at least 2 cycling sites that carry the media release.

On 18th Feb, members got in their email an article on Lorry safety and I think something about Essex, nothing on rebranding till today. Sadly it is not even in the press release archive so obviously the members are not important enough to know. I saw the first hint on the other forum also on the 18th. The petition to poll the members went out on the 18th shortly after one of the cycling blogs carried the press release.

Says a lot about an organisation when they don't bother to keep a copy of their press release in their own website despite having a folder specifically for it.

Let me know if you need any further help.

It doesn't read to me as if there is a press release. Rather, there's a statement from Tuohy that one US website (Bikebiz) has carried. The other website (Singletrackworld) seems to have got its information straight from Bikebiz.

Since the Tuohy statement talks about a launch in the April mag, which will be at press now, that sounds like a possible route for a leak.

 

[ianrauk]

The CTC attracts the kind of nobber I have no intention of going anywhere near, either on a bike or off it.

You not renewing your membership then?

 

[mjr]

You're suggestion that members of an SC affiliated club have to take out individual membership of the organisation is wrong though.

OK, I see what the problem is. I've edited it to try to clarify that I meant ride-leading members (who must be BC members and qualified).

There's also the big problem that BC/SC club insurance only insures the types of cycling they regulate, so recumbent and e-bike riders are excluded among many others. (edited to add "club insurance")

 

[Crackle]

The CTC attracts the kind of nobber I have no intention of going anywhere near, either on a bike or off it.

The Crusty Tourists Club, currently Crusty the clown.

It seems the CTC belongs to a bygone age, along with the Rough Stuff Fellowship and the YHA. They need to modernise and move on, that's not to say there isn't a clientèle for them, it's just not what it was and is probably better served by someone/something else. That's speaking purely as an outsider in all of this. 30 years ago I aspired to join the CTC, now I just wouldn't. My brief Friday's affiliation exposed me to the newsletter, which I thought was awful, no longer aspirational stuff, just mundane. Of course something is lost in the process, like the YHA. I love the ones that have been modernised, some of those which have become independent are superb as well but I lament the big holes in the network which allowed you to happily tour between them once. Goodbye CTC, hello BC: Amen.

 

[twentysix by twentyfive]

The CTC attracts the kind of nobber I have no intention of going anywhere near, either on a bike or off it.

What kind of "nobber" is that? Just asking

 

[Tim Hall]

What kind of "nobber" is that? Just asking

Groucho Marx had something to say about belonging to clubs. It may be relevant here.

 

[mjr]

You sure about that? They offer 'Events Insurance' which covers those sorts of risks.

Aw heck, OK, I'll edit both posts to make it clear that this is about their activities organiser insurance. Of course you can get other insurance by registering the events with BC/SC.

Edit: I can't find the Events policy wording or a FAQ answer that they cover e-bikes, recumbents and so on. It looks like anything covered by the Events policy has to be run under BC/SC competitive rules or non-competitive guidelines which both exclude such cycling. Can someone double-check this for me, please?

 

[iandg]

OK, I see what the problem is. I've edited it to try to clarify that I meant ride-leading members (who must be BC members and qualified).

There's also the big problem that BC/SC only insure the types of cycling they regulate, so recumbent and e-bike riders are excluded among many others.

My apologies

Aw heck, OK, I'll edit both posts to make it clear that this is about their activities organiser insurance. Of course you can get other insurance by registering the events with BC/SC.

Edit: I can't find the Events policy wording or a FAQ answer that they cover e-bikes, recumbents and so on. It looks like anything covered by the Events policy has to be run under BC/SC competitive rules or non-competitive guidelines which both exclude such cycling. Can someone double-check this for me, please?

(ps - my apologies if I came over too argumentative earlier)

 

[Philip Benstead]

Completely disgusted with the news that the CTC HQ have unilaterally decided to change the name of our organisation. No consultation with the members, not even a communication to the members, just a press release.
http://road.cc/content/news/179543-ctc-national-cycling-charity-become-cycling-uk

News Flash

Latest new on the CTC Rebranding debate go to

https://www.facebook.com/groups/911322558887222/

http://forum.ctc.org.uk/viewforum.php?f=48