Piper/Hales court case
23-01-2013, 07:52 AM
#1
Advanced PassionFord User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: widnes
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Piper/Hales court case
Anyone been following the Piper and Hales court case and whats your views on it ??
for those who dont know basically Mark Hales (racing driver and freelance journalist) borrowed a Porsche 917 from carcollector and multi millionaire Piper for various world wide magazine publications think main one was for Octane and during the test day at cadwell park the engine went bang in a big way and Piper sued Hales for the damage of the engine etc which could now ean Hales looses his house.
for those who dont know basically Mark Hales (racing driver and freelance journalist) borrowed a Porsche 917 from carcollector and multi millionaire Piper for various world wide magazine publications think main one was for Octane and during the test day at cadwell park the engine went bang in a big way and Piper sued Hales for the damage of the engine etc which could now ean Hales looses his house.
23-01-2013, 09:31 AM
#4
It is a tough one but you have to ask your self the question that if it was your pride and joy car some one broke when they borrowed it would you expect them to fix it?
can't understand why insurance is not paying as you have insurance to cover driver error I thought?
can't understand why insurance is not paying as you have insurance to cover driver error I thought?
23-01-2013, 09:40 AM
#5
Not heard of this, can I just ask one question, why would he put that in writing about the gear selection, was it in an article he wrote afterwards? if it was in a written statement then he's a fool, however I still don' agree with bringing the case.
If you worry about your car getting damaged in someone else's care, then don't lend it out, simple really.
If you worry about your car getting damaged in someone else's care, then don't lend it out, simple really.
Trending Topics
23-01-2013, 12:17 PM
#10
Always going to be a difference of opinion, although not the same in monetary value, if I leant someone my car and they blew the engine, I wouldn't hold them accountable for it, I'd take the stance where it was my own bad judgement call or accept that it may have happened anyway.
If anything I'd say the owner was a fool to lend the car without having making sure it was covered in the event of an incidents if he valued it so much, it obviously wasn't or somone was economical with the truth and hence the resulting court case.
I am not saying the driver is blameless but I do not believe he is solely responsible.
If anything I'd say the owner was a fool to lend the car without having making sure it was covered in the event of an incidents if he valued it so much, it obviously wasn't or somone was economical with the truth and hence the resulting court case.
I am not saying the driver is blameless but I do not believe he is solely responsible.
23-01-2013, 12:42 PM
#11
PassionFord Post Troll
I've not seen this case but generally speeking IMHO if the driver caused the damage the driver should fix it and on a car like that he should have made insurance arangements, silly not to.
If the engine blew up through no fault of the driver (i.e. would have let go whoever was driving it) then I would expect the owner to pay out. Again I'd have thought the owner would have some sort of insurance to cover this.
If the engine blew up through no fault of the driver (i.e. would have let go whoever was driving it) then I would expect the owner to pay out. Again I'd have thought the owner would have some sort of insurance to cover this.
23-01-2013, 12:45 PM
#12
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Mike
23-01-2013, 01:09 PM
#13
hales in court blamed the gearbox for jumping out of gear, the engine went to 10k apparantly when hales was told to keep it to 7k
this could end road tests of cars for magazines/tv as the insurance costs will be high and dan @ FF/ tiff l/ plato/ VBH probably won't want to get caught out themselves, the top gear lot will be protected by the BBC and tax payers cash no doubt
they should have had something in writing before hand about what to do should the worst happen, I believe hales paid a 2 grand retainer to use the car
wonder if he got it back lol
steve
this could end road tests of cars for magazines/tv as the insurance costs will be high and dan @ FF/ tiff l/ plato/ VBH probably won't want to get caught out themselves, the top gear lot will be protected by the BBC and tax payers cash no doubt
they should have had something in writing before hand about what to do should the worst happen, I believe hales paid a 2 grand retainer to use the car
wonder if he got it back lol
steve
Last edited by The Youth.; 23-01-2013 at 01:10 PM.
23-01-2013, 01:46 PM
#14
Have you seen the stuff they put cars through on top gear and fifth gear? The manufacturers love the publicity which they can't buy for the cost of a car
You think James may taking a £100k+ Bentley onto a rally stage in Wales is covered by insurance in case he scratches it? Or will it be better to insure against him rolling it?
And how much money have they saved and how much free advertising have they done? They've probably doubled up their money by requesting a years free advertising
But I agree, for the little man in a basic car mag it's going to be something else to worry about
You think James may taking a £100k+ Bentley onto a rally stage in Wales is covered by insurance in case he scratches it? Or will it be better to insure against him rolling it?
And how much money have they saved and how much free advertising have they done? They've probably doubled up their money by requesting a years free advertising
But I agree, for the little man in a basic car mag it's going to be something else to worry about
23-01-2013, 06:29 PM
#15
Advanced PassionFord User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: widnes
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
there is a bit more of a insight on Chris Harris's post on PH and Dan will probably know more as looks like to get a car like this in a magazine feature will cost thousands in insurance fee's alone so it may just kill off a few magazines in the process like has already been mentioned, shame really
Had a quick chat with Paul Oneill (touring car driver and itv4 commentator) today too looks like a few people in motorsport and journo circles having a whip round to help out
Had a quick chat with Paul Oneill (touring car driver and itv4 commentator) today too looks like a few people in motorsport and journo circles having a whip round to help out
Last edited by kev 3dr; 23-01-2013 at 06:31 PM.
23-01-2013, 06:34 PM
#16
there is a bit more of a insight on Chris Harris's post on PH and Dan will probably know more as looks like to get a car like this in a magazine feature will cost thousands in insurance fee's alone so it may just kill off a few magazines in the process like has already been mentioned, shame really
Would change much in the way of car mags IMO
23-01-2013, 06:34 PM
#17
PassionFord Post Whore!!
I agree it is a shame but he admits to over revving the car after being told not to, then realises the insurance won't cover it and says he did not mean to say he over revved it............. really
Mike
Mike
24-01-2013, 06:43 AM
#18
Testing the future
24-01-2013, 07:36 AM
#19
My car blew up last year, I blame HMRC!!!
24-01-2013, 09:05 AM
#20
Go on to PH and read the comments on the article.
Chaps; thanks for the kind words but if I may, I'd like to proffer a completely factual account. I have hardly ever posted on a forum but in this case, sadly, I am in a position to know.
The test was a joint effort between two publishers (Octane/Dennis, and 911 and Porsche World/Auto Italia/CHP).
The 917 part of the test was a commercial arrangement and the fee was split between Octane Magazine and the rest. The other car in the test (Nick Mason's Ferrari 512S) was provided on the understanding that out of pocket costs were covered.
There was an agreement between Piper and Hales as to the terms of the hire. Piper knew that crash damage was covered by insurance which was provided by Octane Magazine but there was a very specific discussion about damage to the engine in the case of an overrev. The Porsche 917 has a very tricky gearshift which caught out top level drivers like Vic Elford and Jo Siffert. This is well documented in the history books
Hales regularly gets to drive cars like this because his reputation is well established and his experience with different cars is extensive. He is not however, and never has been in a position to indemnify any damage. This is well established custom and practice in the historic race car world.
Piper agreed that the mechanicals would not be covered.
This was an agreement between gentlemen and was not written down. Piper chose not to remember the conversation in court.
On the day, the 917's gearshift was particularly difficult, especially shifting into third. Hales came straight into the pits to report this to Piper's mechanic. Hales was told that this was a matter of adjustment (the implication being that they didn't have the time or the inclination to make that adjustment) and please to be careful.
Hales found that if he held his hand on the gearlever and released the clutch, the overrun would tell him if and when the gear was engaged. Sometimes it wouldn't and he had to go back to second and try the shift again at lower revs. Not an ideal way to get the feel of a 917.
Later in the day, Hales short-shifted from second to third to make sure the gear was changed before the next corner but didn't hold his hand on the lever long enough. The car drove on the synchromesh for a fraction of a second then spat the gear out and the engine overrevved.
In court, the mechanic chose not to remember the visit to the pits or the conversation that took place there.
This is all a matter of public record, as is an invoice which was produced in evidence, bearing the date February 30th. The issuer of the invoice also misspelt his own name.
Piper spent £63,000 in lawyer's fees and was predictably successful in the High Court.
Hales made some very silly mistakes since the event, and was badly served by less expensive lawyers.
Octane Magazine made a financial offer of settlement. This was declined and there was no further discussion.
Piper has since sold the car for £1.3million which is entirely his prerogative.
Hales is now facing bankruptcy and likely to lose his house.
The test was a joint effort between two publishers (Octane/Dennis, and 911 and Porsche World/Auto Italia/CHP).
The 917 part of the test was a commercial arrangement and the fee was split between Octane Magazine and the rest. The other car in the test (Nick Mason's Ferrari 512S) was provided on the understanding that out of pocket costs were covered.
There was an agreement between Piper and Hales as to the terms of the hire. Piper knew that crash damage was covered by insurance which was provided by Octane Magazine but there was a very specific discussion about damage to the engine in the case of an overrev. The Porsche 917 has a very tricky gearshift which caught out top level drivers like Vic Elford and Jo Siffert. This is well documented in the history books
Hales regularly gets to drive cars like this because his reputation is well established and his experience with different cars is extensive. He is not however, and never has been in a position to indemnify any damage. This is well established custom and practice in the historic race car world.
Piper agreed that the mechanicals would not be covered.
This was an agreement between gentlemen and was not written down. Piper chose not to remember the conversation in court.
On the day, the 917's gearshift was particularly difficult, especially shifting into third. Hales came straight into the pits to report this to Piper's mechanic. Hales was told that this was a matter of adjustment (the implication being that they didn't have the time or the inclination to make that adjustment) and please to be careful.
Hales found that if he held his hand on the gearlever and released the clutch, the overrun would tell him if and when the gear was engaged. Sometimes it wouldn't and he had to go back to second and try the shift again at lower revs. Not an ideal way to get the feel of a 917.
Later in the day, Hales short-shifted from second to third to make sure the gear was changed before the next corner but didn't hold his hand on the lever long enough. The car drove on the synchromesh for a fraction of a second then spat the gear out and the engine overrevved.
In court, the mechanic chose not to remember the visit to the pits or the conversation that took place there.
This is all a matter of public record, as is an invoice which was produced in evidence, bearing the date February 30th. The issuer of the invoice also misspelt his own name.
Piper spent £63,000 in lawyer's fees and was predictably successful in the High Court.
Hales made some very silly mistakes since the event, and was badly served by less expensive lawyers.
Octane Magazine made a financial offer of settlement. This was declined and there was no further discussion.
Piper has since sold the car for £1.3million which is entirely his prerogative.
Hales is now facing bankruptcy and likely to lose his house.
Last edited by rog; 24-01-2013 at 09:07 AM.
24-01-2013, 11:35 AM
#23
And it is ridiculous that you would make that comment because either you have not read the full judgement or can not read of which the latter l do not beleive to be the case, so if you read it l will be surprised if you still think the judge had no choice but to come to the decision he did.
Mike
Mike
I'm obviously going to have a bias - but stand by what I wrote.
Piper knew it would ruin Hales - He did it not because he was out of pocket, but to be spiteful, and vindictive. An evil man who will hopefully be ostracised from the racing community from now on.
24-01-2013, 11:53 AM
#25
Virgin
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a world of difference between test driving a car or borrowing a mates motor for the day and taking a performance car out on to a track. In the former case it might well be acceptable to assume "if you bend it, you buy it" but in the latter, there will clearly be an inherent risk of loss or damage.
The owner of a prestige or valued vehicle might well be entitled to expect the driver to exercise "reasonable care and skill" but must accept some element of risk or chose not to proceed; its his option.
I don't know anything like enough about the case to comment meaningfully on this particular matter, but the principles that appear to be implied from it leave a rather nasty taste in the mouth and to my mind go against the conventions and spirit of equity which has been established over many years.
The fact is that the only people who have "won" in this case are the lawyers.
The owner of a prestige or valued vehicle might well be entitled to expect the driver to exercise "reasonable care and skill" but must accept some element of risk or chose not to proceed; its his option.
I don't know anything like enough about the case to comment meaningfully on this particular matter, but the principles that appear to be implied from it leave a rather nasty taste in the mouth and to my mind go against the conventions and spirit of equity which has been established over many years.
The fact is that the only people who have "won" in this case are the lawyers.
24-01-2013, 01:08 PM
#27
Hardly a "ridiculous comment" The entire case did not rest on that one statement. Agree it was a stupid thing to put in writing, but it was more a question of appalling legal advice, rather than a genuine admission of guilt.
I'm obviously going to have a bias - but stand by what I wrote.
Piper knew it would ruin Hales - He did it not because he was out of pocket, but to be spiteful, and vindictive. An evil man who will hopefully be ostracised from the racing community from now on.
I'm obviously going to have a bias - but stand by what I wrote.
Piper knew it would ruin Hales - He did it not because he was out of pocket, but to be spiteful, and vindictive. An evil man who will hopefully be ostracised from the racing community from now on.
if he's driven it like jason bourne and it's blown up the mag should accept responsibility for the fuck up rather than hang him out to dry, after all, if he was good enough to be working for them then he's good enough to be driving
24-01-2013, 01:41 PM
#28
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Hardly a "ridiculous comment" The entire case did not rest on that one statement. Agree it was a stupid thing to put in writing, but it was more a question of appalling legal advice, rather than a genuine admission of guilt.
I'm obviously going to have a bias - but stand by what I wrote.
Piper knew it would ruin Hales - He did it not because he was out of pocket, but to be spiteful, and vindictive. An evil man who will hopefully be ostracised from the racing community from now on.
I'm obviously going to have a bias - but stand by what I wrote.
Piper knew it would ruin Hales - He did it not because he was out of pocket, but to be spiteful, and vindictive. An evil man who will hopefully be ostracised from the racing community from now on.
Do you know Piper and that his intention was to ruin Hales or are you speculating?
It may seem like l am trying to be a clever twat he but anything other than what is in the judgement is now unfortunately nothing more than hear say and speculation, which like l say is unfortunate.
I spoke with Richard Meaden last night who told me he took a 906 Porsche on the Nurburgring during a track day on nothing more than a handshake, the owner was a friend of his and even he said now he would consider twice doing it,
Mike
24-01-2013, 01:58 PM
#29
No, not really. I can understand that if you take the 'admission' out of context, and read it in a court, then yes. But he didn't say "Yes it was my fault", in front of the judge, he said what he said to the insurance company as a formality (or so he thought). When he realised that he was likely to get in a whole world of financial shit he tried to retract it - which, viewed cynically, was an admission of guilt. But it could be argued that it was simply an ill advised attempt to lessen the severity of the fine he was looking at - and had he known then what he subsequently knew he would have made a much more complete and detailed statement at the time.
(f) The Defendant himself composed a signed and dated (3 June 2009) detailed note for Octane's insurers relatively shortly after the incident. This included the frank admission that:
There was no fault apparent with the car before this incident, and I admit the damage to the engine was caused by my failure to select the gear correctly".
(g) The Defendant said that the note was "not accurate in some respects" and "not as clear as it should have been and in hindsight should have been worded in a different way on the basis that the gear has disengaged without necessarily fault on the part of me as the driver but distinct from otherwise a mechanical issue". He also said that it was prepared with a view to claiming on the insurance.
I don't know either personally, although have met Hales at a couple of launches. But it's 'known' within the industry that Piper wanted revenge - and it doesn't take a genius to work out that a settlement of that size is going to bankrupt the average person.
It's an emotive subject, and maybe I am far too bias to make a fair comment on the proceedings...
(f) The Defendant himself composed a signed and dated (3 June 2009) detailed note for Octane's insurers relatively shortly after the incident. This included the frank admission that:
There was no fault apparent with the car before this incident, and I admit the damage to the engine was caused by my failure to select the gear correctly".
(g) The Defendant said that the note was "not accurate in some respects" and "not as clear as it should have been and in hindsight should have been worded in a different way on the basis that the gear has disengaged without necessarily fault on the part of me as the driver but distinct from otherwise a mechanical issue". He also said that it was prepared with a view to claiming on the insurance.
It's an emotive subject, and maybe I am far too bias to make a fair comment on the proceedings...
24-01-2013, 06:23 PM
#34
Virgin
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Guildford
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For an insight into the case, and to explain the misconceptions around "the letter", and "why didn't he settle", read this for some balance;
http://www.trackdriver.com/Response%...0v%20Hales.pdf
http://www.trackdriver.com/Response%...0v%20Hales.pdf
24-01-2013, 06:49 PM
#35
Testing the future
24-01-2013, 07:48 PM
#36
unless it will?
25-01-2013, 06:30 AM
#38
Testing the future
25-01-2013, 11:04 AM
#40
For an insight into the case, and to explain the misconceptions around "the letter", and "why didn't he settle", read this for some balance;
http://www.trackdriver.com/Response%...0v%20Hales.pdf
http://www.trackdriver.com/Response%...0v%20Hales.pdf