BTAWA versus BWA membership insurance

BTAWA versus BWA membership insurance

Postby eldavo » Wed Feb 20, 2013 8:25 pm

Asking here instead of direct via BTAWA site as others might search here first as I did, and I've seen the BTAWA folks active here.

Are the membership insurances identical, if not can I have info to write up a comparison column to that which BWA have presented?
BWA
http://www.bwa.org.au/join-us/614/

BTAWA policy doc
http://btawa.org.au/join/insurance/

Anyone else been through this and can say which they went with and why?
I'm only looking at the personal injury and 3rd party person/property aspect like these.
eldavo
 
Posts: 799
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 12:21 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia

by BNA » Thu Feb 21, 2013 4:11 pm

BNA
 

Re: BTAWA versus BWA membership insurance

Postby Thoglette » Thu Feb 21, 2013 4:11 pm

eldavo wrote:Anyone else been through this and can say which they went with and why?

Yup, at the time BWA was not a not for profit organisation focused on cycling as transpotration. BTA was (and is)

I did read the BTA insurance way back when and was happy. About time to re-read, I guess
User avatar
Thoglette
 
Posts: 1145
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:01 pm

Re: BTAWA versus BWA membership insurance

Postby RobertFrith » Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:35 pm

Thoglette wrote:About time to re-read, I guess

I just spent a few minutes looking at the basics. The policy documents are from the same insurer, Sports Underwriting Australia but they are definitely not the same policy.

BWA's policy is Personal Accident and from my reading covers you only when you are competing and only as an an amateur. I don't think it covers you for your commute or training. BWA's web page claims that it covers third party but I can't see any specific mention of it in the policy document.

BTAWA's is a liability (third party) policy only. Covers you for personal, property and advertising injury, I think regardless of whether you are pro/am or just riding to the shops (It's a much longer policy document and I haven't read it carefully!)

Not sure if either of these policies covers everything that the OP is chasing.

Audax membership includes 24/7 coverage for all cycling activities with the exception of non-sanctioned events.
Image
User avatar
RobertFrith
 
Posts: 1345
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 9:27 pm
Location: Perth

Re: BTAWA versus BWA membership insurance

Postby eldavo » Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:53 pm

Thanks for the Audax tip.

While the BWA site says cycling anytime anywhere in Australia, that opening "Cover" statement on page 02 of the policy contradicts it significantly as you've pointed out.

Website:
What does it cover me for?
Injury to yourself as well as injury you cause someone else and damage you cause to someone else's property, every time you ride a bike anywhere in Australia. Bicycling Western Australia memberships do not cover your bike or accessories.

Our membership is designed to complement other insurance policies, as no insurance policy covers everything, especially when you take into account excesses and waiting periods.


Policy (summarised, non text PDF, will have to OCR convert it):
Cover
i. competition
ii. social or training
iii. competition, game, performance, social, training, or "administrative activity" presumably related to the prior.
iv. staying away overnight for competition, game, performance, social function, training session, administrative...
eldavo
 
Posts: 799
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 12:21 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: BTAWA versus BWA membership insurance

Postby exadios » Tue Feb 26, 2013 1:05 am

Thoglette wrote:
eldavo wrote:Anyone else been through this and can say which they went with and why?

Yup, at the time BWA was not a not for profit organisation focused on cycling as transpotration. BTA was (and is)

I did read the BTA insurance way back when and was happy. About time to re-read, I guess


Are you saying that BTAWA is a for profit organization? If so, why do you say that?
User avatar
exadios
 
Posts: 479
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:07 am
Location: Melville, WA

Re: BTAWA versus BWA membership insurance

Postby mikedufty » Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:08 am

There are two "not"s in the statement, he was saying BTAWA IS "not for profit" BWA was NOT "not for profit".
Probably could have been phrased better, I had to read it twice too.
User avatar
mikedufty
 
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:52 pm
Location: Western Australia, Bull Creek

Re: BTAWA versus BWA membership insurance

Postby CycleSnail » Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:16 pm

I think this post is going to cost me ....

To be a member of BTA solely because of insurance is not an effective use of funds. I like to think that people are members of BTA because we are the only "pure" advocacy organisation in WA - we do not organise rides or events. Most of the membership fees go towards supporting advocacy.

I recommend that people check their household liability insurance - it is often quite comprehensive, and often carries a lesser excess than the insurance that forms part of the BTA membership.
Visit the Bicycle Transportation Alliance at
http://www.btawa.org.au
User avatar
CycleSnail
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:23 pm
Location: Bassendean, WA

Re: BTAWA versus BWA membership insurance

Postby senator52 » Tue Mar 05, 2013 10:26 pm

Regarding the BWA insurance, do you think you would have any claim, given their website is so clear about what IS covered, when clearly when you read the PDS, commuting is not covered?

False representation?
User avatar
senator52
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 9:12 pm
Location: Perth, WA

Re: BTAWA versus BWA membership insurance

Postby eldavo » Tue Mar 05, 2013 10:35 pm

I've been meaning to enquire for them to clarify, and check out home contents like CS suggested (Aushiker covered that a couple years ago).
Not done that yet, but wouldn't expect any of the convenience of being insured to apply when debating a PDS versus web copy.
eldavo
 
Posts: 799
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 12:21 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: BTAWA versus BWA membership insurance

Postby Thoglette » Thu Mar 07, 2013 10:56 pm

exadios wrote:
Thoglette wrote:
eldavo wrote:Anyone else been through this and can say which they went with and why?

Yup, at the time BWA was not a not for profit organisation focused on cycling as transpotration. BTA was (and is)

I did read the BTA insurance way back when and was happy. About time to re-read, I guess


Are you saying that BTAWA is a for profit organization? If so, why do you say that?


BWA was "Cyclosportif" and at the time was not focused on transportation )(see the BWA 2011 annual report).

The BTA was and is focused on transportation.
User avatar
Thoglette
 
Posts: 1145
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:01 pm

Re: BTAWA versus BWA membership insurance

Postby elStado » Sat Mar 09, 2013 1:54 am

senator52 wrote:Regarding the BWA insurance, do you think you would have any claim, given their website is so clear about what IS covered, when clearly when you read the PDS, commuting is not covered?

False representation?


Huh! :shock:

I contacted them and explicitly told them I wanted insurance to cover me while commuting, both for personal injury and for 3rd party damages (I am paranoid about accidental injuring a pedestrian or another cyclists and having to pay their medical bills and lost income).

Might have to re-contact them, as insurance is THE main reason I am a BWA member.

I've been meaning to become a BTA member for a while now. I think it's about time I switched over, considering all the good work that the BTA members (many of them regular posters on the forums) are doing around Perth.
Check out my practical cycling and cycle touring website: VELOPHILE AUSTRALIA
User avatar
elStado
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 11:27 pm
Location: Riding somewhere around Perth on my Vivente World Randonneur!

Re: BTAWA versus BWA membership insurance

Postby fixed » Sun Mar 10, 2013 1:21 pm

Just asked Bicycling WA a question regarding insurance for commuters on their Facebook page.

My question- Does BWA insurance cover for accidents incurred while commuting?
I find it difficult to believe but here's what is being said on forums ...

viewtopic.php?f=18&t=61663&p=936107#p934471

Cover
i. taking part in competition, game or performance
ii. attending a social function or training session
iii. competition, game, performance, social function, training session, or "administrative activity" presumably related to the prior.
iv. staying away overnight for competition, game, performance, social function, training session, administrative...

Where does riding a bike to work or shops get covered in that quote from the page 2 of the PDS?

Disclosure I am no longer associated with BTA either as a member or a Board member.


Also tweeted @bicyclingwa
The bicycle is a curious vehicle. Its passenger is its engine.

2010 Planet X Stealth Sram Red; 2007 Giant City Pro; 2005 Orbea Vento; 2002 Giant Upland; 1980-ish Vandeveire fixt
fixed
 
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:16 pm

Re: BTAWA versus BWA membership insurance

Postby fixed » Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:40 pm

Clarification from BWA
Hi Fixed here is some clarification around the insurance component of the membership to Bicycling Western Australia.
Coverage is as outlined on page two of the Policy Wording (pdf document) listed website http://www.bwa.org.au/join-us/614/
To ensure all riding is covered (including recreational and commuting) we have endorsements made to the Policy (refer pages 17-20) - specifically para 3 on page 17.
These endorsements effectively 'trump' the policy wordings of when you are covered on page two.
It would be appreciated if you could feed this information back to the members of our online forum.


The specific endorsement is on page 17 "while riding a bicycle"
The bicycle is a curious vehicle. Its passenger is its engine.

2010 Planet X Stealth Sram Red; 2007 Giant City Pro; 2005 Orbea Vento; 2002 Giant Upland; 1980-ish Vandeveire fixt
fixed
 
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:16 pm

Re: BTAWA versus BWA membership insurance

Postby eldavo » Tue Mar 12, 2013 2:03 pm

Thanks fixed, on another issue I remember seeing page 16 and wondering why the policy coverage is for Vic, Tas and WA as the only 3 insured, but capital benefit coverage caps have only Vic and Tas equal higher coverage 50k/100k, and "All other Australian residents" (with BWA only other incorporated listed) has half the coverage at 25k/50k.

Looking at the BicycleNetwork.org.au (Victoria) website it's got contrasting statements, but the PDS and statement at bottom is very clear:
https://www.bicyclenetwork.com.au/gener ... -in/93919/
"Bicycle Network Victoria has members across the nation, and they all get equal treatment."
"The state in which a member resides does not disqualify a rider from the premium level of insurance cover available through Bicycle Network Victoria."
Web page of coverage summary:
https://www.bicyclenetwork.com.au/gener ... -in/91741/
Includes confirmation of the PDS in the side pane.
Major conditions: Reduced Death and Capital Benefits apply to members residing outside of Victoria and Tasmania.
eldavo
 
Posts: 799
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 12:21 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia


Return to Western Australia

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users



Popular Bike Shops
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Ebay Ebay AU
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK

“Bicycles BNA Twitter
“Bicycles BNA Facebook
“Google+ BNA Google+
“Bicycles BNA Newsletter

> FREE BNA Stickers