Buying a MTB helmet from the US

[John Tserkezis]

Zebee Johnstone wrote:

> THey added extra internal material to the skull to pass the
> penetration test. made the lid heavier. System 2 I think, but it may
> have been the original System 1.

That's a major change. There would have been _some_ change to the model
number that would be clearly identifiable.

If you've never been involved in the development of a product that has to
undergo standards testing (even in one country!), it's a huge job. If you're
aiming at an international market, there are even more considerations (such as
this one). Granted, safety specs are a big deal, on some products it's not
such a big deal.

It's time consuming and quite expensive to do.
--
Linux Registered User # 302622
<http://counter.li.org>

 

[Donga]

On Oct 18, 2:44 pm, Dorfus Dippintush
<[email protected]> wrote:
> TimC wrote:
> > On 2007-10-18, John Tserkezis (aka Bruce)
> > was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> >> Dre wrote:
>
> >>> The problem is, if I get one from the US, it wont be Australian approved.
> >>> My question is, since the helmets are identical apart from the Australian
> >>> approval, whats generally frowned apon when doing this??
> > ...
> >> As far as I'm aware, something like the blue mountain fire trails, since
> >> they're not "public roads" you're on your own again, so again, since you're
> >> the only one responsible, it would be in your best interest to wear an
> >> effective hat.
>
> > And if you are able to get a higher specced helmet, cheaper, from the
> > US, then trust your head to the cheaper more effective US model
> > helmet. Stupid laws; stupid protectionalist trade policies. QED.
>
> What rules would you propose Tim?

"Fit for Purpose". Very standard part of the Trade Practices Act.

The standard is shite. I can buy a $15 helmet in KMart that fits like
a dirty-bird bucket and has a shiny sticker. That would be legal. Yet
I can't legally use a top-line lid off the same production line, minus
the shiny sticker because it's bought overseas.

I think it's time the standard was dumped and we went for "fit for
purpose".

Donga

 

[Donga]

On Oct 18, 1:10 pm, Zebee Johnstone <[email protected]> wrote:
> In aus.bicycle on Thu, 18 Oct 2007 13:31:24 +1100
>
> Dre <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Yes the helmets are exactly the same in the US as they are here, same name,
> > model number, everything, apart from the Australian approval.
>
> dunno about pushbike helmets but that is not always the case with
> motorcycle helmets.
>
> There is at least one model of motorcycle helmet that is the same name
> and model number but the Oz one is different as the US version
> *failed* the Oz test.
>
> Zebee

It's not very likely they would retool a production line making tens
of thousands of widgets, just for the Australian market. I'm not
disputing your anecdote, but it's fair to assume that a Bell is a Bell
is a Bell, etc.

Donga

 

[Dorfus Dippintush]

Donga wrote:
> On Oct 18, 2:44 pm, Dorfus Dippintush
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> TimC wrote:
>>> On 2007-10-18, John Tserkezis (aka Bruce)
>>> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>>>> Dre wrote:
>>>>> The problem is, if I get one from the US, it wont be Australian approved.
>>>>> My question is, since the helmets are identical apart from the Australian
>>>>> approval, whats generally frowned apon when doing this??
>>> ...
>>>> As far as I'm aware, something like the blue mountain fire trails, since
>>>> they're not "public roads" you're on your own again, so again, since you're
>>>> the only one responsible, it would be in your best interest to wear an
>>>> effective hat.
>>> And if you are able to get a higher specced helmet, cheaper, from the
>>> US, then trust your head to the cheaper more effective US model
>>> helmet. Stupid laws; stupid protectionalist trade policies. QED.
>> What rules would you propose Tim?
>
> "Fit for Purpose". Very standard part of the Trade Practices Act.
>
> The standard is shite. I can buy a $15 helmet in KMart that fits like
> a dirty-bird bucket and has a shiny sticker. That would be legal. Yet
> I can't legally use a top-line lid off the same production line, minus
> the shiny sticker because it's bought overseas.
>
> I think it's time the standard was dumped and we went for "fit for
> purpose".
>
> Donga
>

So would it still need to be tested to see if it's "fit for purpose"?

Dorf

 

[Aeek]

UriarraOn Thu, 18 Oct 2007 02:43:58 -0700, Donga
<[email protected]> wrote:

>> Zebee
>
>It's not very likely they would retool a production line making tens
>of thousands of widgets, just for the Australian market. I'm not
>disputing your anecdote, but it's fair to assume that a Bell is a Bell
>is a Bell, etc.
>
>Donga

BMW is different though, they want to provide EVERYTHING and they're
not really about selling helmets.

 

[Tomasso]

"Donga" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> On Oct 18, 1:10 pm, Zebee Johnstone <[email protected]> wrote:
>> In aus.bicycle on Thu, 18 Oct 2007 13:31:24 +1100
>>
>> Dre <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Yes the helmets are exactly the same in the US as they are here, same name,
>> > model number, everything, apart from the Australian approval.
>>
>> dunno about pushbike helmets but that is not always the case with
>> motorcycle helmets.
>>
>> There is at least one model of motorcycle helmet that is the same name
>> and model number but the Oz one is different as the US version
>> *failed* the Oz test.
>>
>> Zebee
>
> It's not very likely they would retool a production line making tens
> of thousands of widgets, just for the Australian market. I'm not
> disputing your anecdote, but it's fair to assume that a Bell is a Bell
> is a Bell, etc.

Hmmm.

I once bought a Bell helmet at KMart. Of course I knew what it was and checked that it fitted (rip, rip).

Way back I bought a Bell Tour-lite for $73, which was a HUGE amount of money in those days.

T.

 

[SteveA]

Zebee Johnstone wrote:

> There is at least one model of motorcycle helmet that is the same name
> and model number but the Oz one is different as the US version
> *failed* the Oz test.

They're the same thing. The Australian Standards AS1698 for motorcycle
helmets means it needs to pass a series of tests according to the standard
before being passed.

Basically, the australian importer brings a couple in for evaluation and
testing. One is sent to a testing lab that does that kind of thing, and if it
passes, they go through the formality of ordering stickers for them. (there
may be a couple of helmets, as some of the tests are destructive).

You probably know all this.

Just because one helmet is ok in the US and not here, is not because the
helmet is different, (they're all ordered from the same place regardless) but
the test procedures.

There have been many cases cited for equipment that was established in the
US, but won't pass here.

It only means the _tests_ are different.

--
Linux Registered User # 302622
<http://counter.li.org>

Last time I looked into this, the cost of certification was around $20,000 per model of helmet in Australia (I can't be buggered to check but I think that was the number I was quoted).

So there are top end helmets which the importer considers have too small a market in Aus to bother getting certification even though they would pass with flying colours. Or if the importer considers they have already covered the market with the speread of models they are bringing in. Sometimes the importer may get certification of these high end helmets so they can sell 'the best' (whatever that is).

I have been told that one of the main differences between the Aus standards testing and other testing is that the Aus tests require continuous testing during the time that the product is in production, ie a sample must be provided for testing at regular intervals, while overseas standards testing are 'once only' at the time of initial certification.

I am not aware of insurers refusing liability on the basis of an 'illegal' helmet, but it is certainly legally available to them.

3 of my 4 current helmets are imports (top of the range Bells) which do not have the silver sticker. I don't consider that there is an increased risk to my health in a crash because I do not have the silver sticker, but there is an increased risk to my insurance cover.


SteveA

 

[TimC]

On 2007-10-19, SteveA (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> I am not aware of insurers refusing liability on the basis of an
> 'illegal' helmet, but it is certainly legally available to them.

Oh, I'm positive there are insurers who have refused to insure a
broken arm resulting from a collision with a car turning in front of
them when the victim had a torn standards sticker on their helmet.

--
TimC
I bet the human brain is a kludge.
-- Marvin Minsky

 

[Resound]

"Dorfus Dippintush" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Donga wrote:
>> On Oct 18, 2:44 pm, Dorfus Dippintush
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> TimC wrote:
>>>> On 2007-10-18, John Tserkezis (aka Bruce)
>>>> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>>>>> Dre wrote:
>>>>>> The problem is, if I get one from the US, it wont be Australian
>>>>>> approved.
>>>>>> My question is, since the helmets are identical apart from the
>>>>>> Australian
>>>>>> approval, whats generally frowned apon when doing this??
>>>> ...
>>>>> As far as I'm aware, something like the blue mountain fire trails,
>>>>> since
>>>>> they're not "public roads" you're on your own again, so again, since
>>>>> you're
>>>>> the only one responsible, it would be in your best interest to wear an
>>>>> effective hat.
>>>> And if you are able to get a higher specced helmet, cheaper, from the
>>>> US, then trust your head to the cheaper more effective US model
>>>> helmet. Stupid laws; stupid protectionalist trade policies. QED.
>>> What rules would you propose Tim?
>>
>> "Fit for Purpose". Very standard part of the Trade Practices Act.
>>
>> The standard is shite. I can buy a $15 helmet in KMart that fits like
>> a dirty-bird bucket and has a shiny sticker. That would be legal. Yet
>> I can't legally use a top-line lid off the same production line, minus
>> the shiny sticker because it's bought overseas.
>>
>> I think it's time the standard was dumped and we went for "fit for
>> purpose".
>>
>> Donga
>>
>
> So would it still need to be tested to see if it's "fit for purpose"?
>
> Dorf

Possibly compiling a list of standards from other countries that could be
accepted as equivalent (or close enough to equivalent) would be a clever
thing. Something along the lines of "must wear a helmet complying with one
or more of the following standards:".

 

[Donga]

On Oct 19, 2:23 pm, SteveA <SteveA.2yo...@no-
mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
> John Tserkezis Wrote:
>
> > Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>
> > > There is at least one model of motorcycle helmet that is the same
> > name
> > > and model number but the Oz one is different as the US version
> > > *failed* the Oz test.
>
> > They're the same thing. The Australian Standards AS1698 for motorcycle
> > helmets means it needs to pass a series of tests according to the
> > standard
> > before being passed.
>
> > Basically, the australian importer brings a couple in for evaluation
> > and
> > testing. One is sent to a testing lab that does that kind of thing, and
> > if it
> > passes, they go through the formality of ordering stickers for them.
> > (there
> > may be a couple of helmets, as some of the tests are destructive).
>
> > You probably know all this.
>
> > Just because one helmet is ok in the US and not here, is not because
> > the
> > helmet is different, (they're all ordered from the same place
> > regardless) but
> > the test procedures.
>
> > There have been many cases cited for equipment that was established in
> > the
> > US, but won't pass here.
>
> > It only means the _tests_ are different.
>
> > --
> > Linux Registered User # 302622
> > <http://counter.li.org>
>
> Last time I looked into this, the cost of certification was around
> $20,000 per model of helmet in Australia (I can't be buggered to check
> but I think that was the number I was quoted).
>
> So there are top end helmets which the importer considers have too
> small a market in Aus to bother getting certification even though they
> would pass with flying colours. Or if the importer considers they have
> already covered the market with the speread of models they are bringing
> in. Sometimes the importer may get certification of these high end
> helmets so they can sell 'the best' (whatever that is).
>
> I have been told that one of the main differences between the Aus
> standards testing and other testing is that the Aus tests require
> continuous testing during the time that the product is in production, ie
> a sample must be provided for testing at regular intervals, while
> overseas standards testing are 'once only' at the time of initial
> certification.
>
> I am not aware of insurers refusing liability on the basis of an
> 'illegal' helmet, but it is certainly legally available to them.
>
> 3 of my 4 current helmets are imports (top of the range Bells) which do
> not have the silver sticker. I don't consider that there is an increased
> risk to my health in a crash because I do not have the silver sticker,
> but there is an increased risk to my insurance cover.
>
> SteveA
>
> --
> SteveA

Can I take that as legal advice? (I know, worth what I paid for it).

But thanks for the reinforcement. There's a bloke (I crossed out
****** out of respect) on another newsgroup who every time anyone says
"helmet" he's making up stories about the dire consequences of wearing
a helmet without a shiny sticker. Sheesh!

Donga

 

[Donga]

On Oct 19, 6:36 pm, "Resound" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Dorfus Dippintush" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
> > Donga wrote:
> >> On Oct 18, 2:44 pm, Dorfus Dippintush
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> TimC wrote:
> >>>> On 2007-10-18, John Tserkezis (aka Bruce)
> >>>> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> >>>>> Dre wrote:
> >>>>>> The problem is, if I get one from the US, it wont be Australian
> >>>>>> approved.
> >>>>>> My question is, since the helmets are identical apart from the
> >>>>>> Australian
> >>>>>> approval, whats generally frowned apon when doing this??
> >>>> ...
> >>>>> As far as I'm aware, something like the blue mountain fire trails,
> >>>>> since
> >>>>> they're not "public roads" you're on your own again, so again, since
> >>>>> you're
> >>>>> the only one responsible, it would be in your best interest to wear an
> >>>>> effective hat.
> >>>> And if you are able to get a higher specced helmet, cheaper, from the
> >>>> US, then trust your head to the cheaper more effective US model
> >>>> helmet. Stupid laws; stupid protectionalist trade policies. QED.
> >>> What rules would you propose Tim?
>
> >> "Fit for Purpose". Very standard part of the Trade Practices Act.
>
> >> The standard is shite. I can buy a $15 helmet in KMart that fits like
> >> a dirty-bird bucket and has a shiny sticker. That would be legal. Yet
> >> I can't legally use a top-line lid off the same production line, minus
> >> the shiny sticker because it's bought overseas.
>
> >> I think it's time the standard was dumped and we went for "fit for
> >> purpose".
>
> >> Donga
>
> > So would it still need to be tested to see if it's "fit for purpose"?
>
> > Dorf
>
> Possibly compiling a list of standards from other countries that could be
> accepted as equivalent (or close enough to equivalent) would be a clever
> thing. Something along the lines of "must wear a helmet complying with one
> or more of the following standards:".

The Qld law (presumably the same in other states) gives the Chief
Executive (i.e. the Director General) discretion to accept another
standard - except they haven't and probably won't, without a concerted
campaign.

 

[John Tserkezis]

TimC wrote:

> Oh, I'm positive there are insurers who have refused to insure a
> broken arm resulting from a collision with a car turning in front of
> them when the victim had a torn standards sticker on their helmet.

I'd like to see how that holds up in the media if the tear was a result of
said collision.

Though, sadly, it appears the insurance companies have earned a really bad
reputation on this, and what's worse, they REALLY don't appear to want to
change it.

Result: (with regard to car insurance) my brother in law moved to another
insurance company, and grilled them on the point he was ripped of on on the
last one. New insurance company said they were getting new people signing up
from various other insurance companies with the same issues.

While I know that "voting with your wallet" doesn't fix the broken arm, if
there was not voting with wallets, then you'd be better off self-insuring.
It's just a question of risk management.

--
Linux Registered User # 302622
<http://counter.li.org>

 

[TimC]

On 2007-10-19, Donga (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> But thanks for the reinforcement. There's a bloke (I crossed out
> ****** out of respect)

Yeah, what have wankers ever done to you?

Wankers get a really bad name, even when saving Burma:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2297/1551474807_49af2e7919.jpg

--
TimC
You're trying to trick me into being intelligent. It won't work.
-- David P. Murphy in ASR

 

[Zebee Johnstone]

In aus.bicycle on Sat, 20 Oct 2007 00:11:59 +1000
John Tserkezis <[email protected]> wrote:
> TimC wrote:
>
>> Oh, I'm positive there are insurers who have refused to insure a
>> broken arm resulting from a collision with a car turning in front of
>> them when the victim had a torn standards sticker on their helmet.
>
> I'd like to see how that holds up in the media if the tear was a result of
> said collision.
>
> Though, sadly, it appears the insurance companies have earned a really bad
> reputation on this, and what's worse, they REALLY don't appear to want to
> change it.
>

Why do they need to change it?

What are they in business for? To make money for shareholders.

How do they do that? By making sure that money in[1] exceeds money
out by a large margin.

THey know that people will buy insurance because it seems like a sensible
bet: pay a little so that if something you have some but not complete
control over - a crash - happens, then you don't lose too badly.

The insurance company is like any bookie: it doesn't want to pay out
and so will set the odds to be just attractive enough to keep you
betting but bad enough so that the bookie makes a living.

THey know people will buy insurance. They also know that most people
don't read policies and of those who do a fair few will misunderstand
them. So will buy without really knowing what they buy.

They also know that an insurance company that offers substantially
better cover than others will get more business, but pay out more, the
ones who balance that well will do OK but most aren't going to risk
such a difficult job.

Remember... they are in it to make money. That's all.

Zebee

[1] premiums and profits from investments, you didn't think the sudden
tightening of the insurance market for 3rd party liability at the time
of the most recent sharemarket crash was because suddenly more people
were being hurt did you?

 

[Donga]

On Oct 20, 12:11 am, John Tserkezis
<[email protected]> wrote:
> TimC wrote:
> > Oh, I'm positive there are insurers who have refused to insure a
> > broken arm resulting from a collision with a car turning in front of
> > them when the victim had a torn standards sticker on their helmet.
>
> I'd like to see how that holds up in the media if the tear was a result of
> said collision.
>
> Though, sadly, it appears the insurance companies have earned a really bad
> reputation on this, and what's worse, they REALLY don't appear to want to
> change it.
>
> Result: (with regard to car insurance) my brother in law moved to another
> insurance company, and grilled them on the point he was ripped of on on the
> last one. New insurance company said they were getting new people signing up
> from various other insurance companies with the same issues.
>
> While I know that "voting with your wallet" doesn't fix the broken arm, if
> there was not voting with wallets, then you'd be better off self-insuring.
> It's just a question of risk management.
>
> --
> Linux Registered User # 302622
> <http://counter.li.org>

I am pretty sure there is an insurance ombudsman. I'd be making a call
to a lawyer if they pulled **** like that. Even trying to duck out of
paying a head injury might be questionable.

 

[Donga]

On Oct 20, 12:44 am, TimC <[email protected]
astro.swin.edu.au> wrote:
> On 2007-10-19, Donga (aka Bruce)
> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>
> > But thanks for the reinforcement. There's a bloke (I crossed out
> > ****** out of respect)
>
> Yeah, what have wankers ever done to you?
>
> Wankers get a really bad name, even when saving Burma:
>
> http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2297/1551474807_49af2e7919.jpg
>
> --
> TimC
> You're trying to trick me into being intelligent. It won't work.
> -- David P. Murphy in ASR

Just what surfing have you been doing, to find that? Get back to work!

 

[SteveA]

On Oct 20, 12:11 am, John Tserkezis
<[email protected]> wrote:
> TimC wrote:
> > Oh, I'm positive there are insurers who have refused to insure a
> > broken arm resulting from a collision with a car turning in front of
> > them when the victim had a torn standards sticker on their helmet.
>
> I'd like to see how that holds up in the media if the tear was a result of
> said collision.
>
> Though, sadly, it appears the insurance companies have earned a really bad
> reputation on this, and what's worse, they REALLY don't appear to want to
> change it.
>
> Result: (with regard to car insurance) my brother in law moved to another
> insurance company, and grilled them on the point he was ripped of on on the
> last one. New insurance company said they were getting new people signing up
> from various other insurance companies with the same issues.
>
> While I know that "voting with your wallet" doesn't fix the broken arm, if
> there was not voting with wallets, then you'd be better off self-insuring.
> It's just a question of risk management.
>
> --
> Linux Registered User # 302622
> <http://counter.li.org>

I am pretty sure there is an insurance ombudsman. I'd be making a call
to a lawyer if they pulled **** like that. Even trying to duck out of
paying a head injury might be questionable.

If the sticker was still attached to the helmet, without significant bits missing etc I would consider challenging the insurer (via insurance ombudsman etc). If the sticker was missing or never there or was gone except for just one tiny corner remaining, it is possible for insurance policies to exclude liability if they are suitably worded.

SteveA

(and Donga, this is not legal advice or medical advice or even actuarial advice)

 

[Donga]

On Oct 23, 6:45 pm, SteveA <SteveA.2yw...@no-
mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
> Donga Wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 20, 12:11 am, John Tserkezis
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > TimC wrote:
> > > > Oh, I'm positive there are insurers who have refused to insure a
> > > > broken arm resulting from a collision with a car turning in front
> > of
> > > > them when the victim had a torn standards sticker on their helmet.
>
> > > I'd like to see how that holds up in the media if the tear was a
> > result of
> > > said collision.
>
> > > Though, sadly, it appears the insurance companies have earned a
> > really bad
> > > reputation on this, and what's worse, they REALLY don't appear to
> > want to
> > > change it.
>
> > > Result: (with regard to car insurance) my brother in law moved to
> > another
> > > insurance company, and grilled them on the point he was ripped of on
> > on the
> > > last one. New insurance company said they were getting new people
> > signing up
> > > from various other insurance companies with the same issues.
>
> > > While I know that "voting with your wallet" doesn't fix the broken
> > arm, if
> > > there was not voting with wallets, then you'd be better off
> > self-insuring.
> > > It's just a question of risk management.
>
> > > --
> > > Linux Registered User # 302622
> > > <http://counter.li.org>
>
> > I am pretty sure there is an insurance ombudsman. I'd be making a call
> > to a lawyer if they pulled **** like that. Even trying to duck out of
> > paying a head injury might be questionable.
>
> If the sticker was still attached to the helmet, without significant
> bits missing etc I would consider challenging the insurer (via insurance
> ombudsman etc). If the sticker was missing or never there or was gone
> except for just one tiny corner remaining, it is possible for insurance
> policies to exclude liability if they are suitably worded.
>
> SteveA
>
> (and Donga, this is not legal advice or medical advice or even
> actuarial advice)
>
> --
> SteveA

.... "informed comment" will do!

Donga

 

[SteveA]

>
> If the sticker was still attached to the helmet, without significant
> bits missing etc I would consider challenging the insurer (via insurance
> ombudsman etc). If the sticker was missing or never there or was gone
> except for just one tiny corner remaining, it is possible for insurance
> policies to exclude liability if they are suitably worded.
>
> SteveA
>
> (and Donga, this is not legal advice or medical advice or even
> actuarial advice)
>
> --
> SteveA

.... "informed comment" will do!

Donga

I'll even deny that it is informed comment

 

[Donga]

On Oct 23, 6:45 pm, SteveA <SteveA.2yw...@no-
mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
> Donga Wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 20, 12:11 am, John Tserkezis
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > TimC wrote:
> > > > Oh, I'm positive there are insurers who have refused to insure a
> > > > broken arm resulting from a collision with a car turning in front
> > of
> > > > them when the victim had a torn standards sticker on their helmet.
>
> > > I'd like to see how that holds up in the media if the tear was a
> > result of
> > > said collision.
>
> > > Though, sadly, it appears the insurance companies have earned a
> > really bad
> > > reputation on this, and what's worse, they REALLY don't appear to
> > want to
> > > change it.
>
> > > Result: (with regard to car insurance) my brother in law moved to
> > another
> > > insurance company, and grilled them on the point he was ripped of on
> > on the
> > > last one. New insurance company said they were getting new people
> > signing up
> > > from various other insurance companies with the same issues.
>
> > > While I know that "voting with your wallet" doesn't fix the broken
> > arm, if
> > > there was not voting with wallets, then you'd be better off
> > self-insuring.
> > > It's just a question of risk management.
>
> > > --
> > > Linux Registered User # 302622
> > > <http://counter.li.org>
>
> > I am pretty sure there is an insurance ombudsman. I'd be making a call
> > to a lawyer if they pulled **** like that. Even trying to duck out of
> > paying a head injury might be questionable.
>
> If the sticker was still attached to the helmet, without significant
> bits missing etc I would consider challenging the insurer (via insurance
> ombudsman etc). If the sticker was missing or never there or was gone
> except for just one tiny corner remaining, it is possible for insurance
> policies to exclude liability if they are suitably worded.
>
> SteveA
>
> (and Donga, this is not legal advice or medical advice or even
> actuarial advice)
>
> --
> SteveA- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

OK, seeing as you are disowning your 'advice' ... surely they could
only exclude liability on matters related to the helmet? (i.e. head
injury). I wouldn't put it past an insurance company to say they
wouldn't pay for your broken arm because you had a non-standard
helmet. Now that can't be right? Even if you wear a helmet that is
demonstrably fit for purpose (e.g. identical to, from the same
production line, as a standard helmet) they would find the exclusions
hard to make stick? There are certain rights you can or can't sign
away. Maybe it comes down to how deep your pockets are for lawyer
bills. Oh well, guess I'd better go buy a $25 helmet from KMart with a
sticker, chuck away my nice Bell/Giro/Met/Catlike from the US/UK.