Two rope system and Insurance

[Luketreewalker]

Hi guys. I’m looking at life insurance and salary insurance. Looking at the two rope system, in particular item 3. Who decides if it was the safest option if I’m dead or unable to work.
 

Would insurance companies still pay out. 

Has anybody had any dealings with this matter? 
 

Thank you in advance. 
 

 

 

[richyrich]

I would think any legislation,etc. they can use to not pay out will be used... Just an educated(?) guess...

[Brushcutter]

Ask the insurer would be the best bet. I would imagine it would be based on what happened and how involved the HSE are in terms of RIDDOR. I would imagine the insurance would look at the best practice tg1 and the work at height regs. I bet the sticking point will always be if you only had rope would a mewp have been safer. Or as you said on point 3 is the use of one rope justified Vs a mewp or was the risk assessment written to say one rope because you wanted to use one rope.

 

 

[Gordon S]

1 hour ago, Luketreewalker said:

Hi guys. I’m looking at life insurance and salary insurance. Looking at the two rope system, in particular item 3. Who decides if it was the safest option if I’m dead or unable to work.
 

Would insurance companies still pay out. 

Has anybody had any dealings with this matter? 
 

Thank you in advance. 
 

My guess is if you are dead then you didn't chose the safest option.

 

 

 

[Mick Dempsey]

Gordon S makes a very good point.

 

Every accident/fatality has at its base an error of judgement. 
Short of actually intentionally killing yourself they will pay out, that’s what your insuring yourself against.

 

This is based on practically zero knowledge of the subject of course.

[monkeybusiness]

1 hour ago, Mick Dempsey said:

Gordon S makes a very good point.

 

Every accident/fatality has at its base an error of judgement. 
Short of actually intentionally killing yourself they will pay out, that’s what your insuring yourself against.

 

This is based on practically zero knowledge of the subject of course.

I know of a company who had a fatality whereby the most senior experienced person on site was struck by a tree knocked over by the tree he was winching over. HSE were all over it and ultimately found nobody other than the deceased at fault as he put himself within 2 tree lengths of the tree being felled. 
Employers liability insurance didn’t pay anything to the family as the deceased was sadly deemed responsible for his own demise.

I’m not sure how life insurance would work in the same circumstances but I am sure that insurance companies are incredibly slippery buggers…… I’d definitely research the point with them (whether 2 ropes etc or any other incident caused by a variation away from best practice). 

[Mick Dempsey]

Yes, I’m talking about personal life insurance.

 

Point taken though.

[richyrich]

If you were killed by a fall from cutting through your only rope - they may state that industry best practice was to use 2, and you would possibly have survived if 2 were implemented. This is all very subjective, and hopefully it won't happen... 

[Stubby]

2 hours ago, Mick Dempsey said:

 

 

This is based on practically zero knowledge of the subject of course.

So Mick , you have never killed yourself ?

[Luketreewalker]

Thank you to all. Some very valid points there. I’ve been climbing for 10 years, nothing major, I know my limits, or I’ve set them….I do climb most days, frequently on one rope, using a lanyard. The second rope comes in to play when needed. I’m aware this leaves me very exposed. I have maybe 5 years left, and a small child. I want life insurance for obvious reasons, and need to show more respect to H&S and not getting a job done ASAP. Even with that said though, there are occasions when one rope is safer. 
 

Thank you all again.