Hi All, Any advice for the following please. A local coarse (freshwater) fishing club has asked about their responsibilities for H & S. (In fact, I am assuming their insurance company have asked the question). They have a membership of circa 120 members (18 plus, though juniors can fish as long as they are accompanied). They lease all of their lakes/sections of river from land-owners and farmers on an annual basis. Bearing in mind they have no 'employees' as such but are run by a totally voluntary committee, including 3 trustees, how far, reasonably, should they be expected to go down the H & S route. They have already ensured, via membership cards, that Postcodes of the Lakes are available, as in an emergency, any emergency vehicles would find them easier, bearing in mind, some lakes are well off the beaten track. Any advice, or general comments, gladly accepted. Thanks in advance.

Many thanks Steve, A useful start.

Private clubs with no employees are not employers or ‘at work’ and therefore hold only a civil 'duty of care'. That is the extent of the Club’s legal duties, and the bit that the Insurers need to know gets ‘managed’. There is no direct H&SAWA liability on Trustees, although any person can be held negligent. The club insurance should cover the collective, and would be the fall-back in the event of any claim. Unfortunately, as we all know, insurance companies are not very good on interpretation of H&S law or standards. So they frequently ‘demand’ from their private club clients assorted bits of documentation which is intended only for the world of work – such as “risk assessments” and pseudo safety policies. The other complication is that the Federation of Angling Clubs – as an organisation – may even have it’s own employees, and therefore try to impose it’s own (required) systems and approaches with it’s affiliated, but private, clubs. (I haven't checked). Whilst material designed for H&S at Work may be useful as a reference, statements within them such as “you must” are supported only by H&S at work standards, and therefore the ‘clunkiness’ of this material can get in the way of really sensible practical approaches to cover ‘duty of care’. In order to satisfy the duty of care, sensible planning and ‘controls’ (rules) should of course be applied. For angling it would be water safety, watching out for overhead or nearby power lines, keeping routes tidy where fishing from pathways, etc. It may also be helpful for the club to focus separately and specifically on child protection and safeguarding, see link http://www.nspcc.org.uk/...tionPolicy_wda60690.html

I love this thread. Having been a committee member of an AC for 15 years it is obvious to me that most of the posts are speaking from a position of zero knowledge of the way that clubs (not just fishing clubs) operate. Firstly very few if any ACs have employees - so much legislation eg HASWA does not apply. Most ACs are run by committees who are volunteers. They do not have time to do risk assessments and all that palaver, nor do they have the expertise. It is correct that should they be forward enough thinking to go for insurance for their members, insurance companies often have some basic requirements - for instance they won't cover things such as using chainsaws............. Fear of being held responsible sadly holds some people back from being on committees.......... let's not scare any one.

Sorry for the delay but feel I must respond to Pikeman's comments. No, I am not a member of a fishing club but have belonged to sailing clubs and assisted my wife as chairman of the school’s PTA. And as may be obvious I do work for an insurance company. I did not state that the HaSaW Act applied to fishing clubs, but they do have civil liabilities which they need to accept and discharge. Consider a Frisbee club. They decide to hold a championship and family fun day. They arrange with a local landowner/farmer to have use of some fields. They organise a championship and invite fellow frisbee enthusiasts to attend. They organise a family “It’s a Knockout” competition to run alongside the frisbee throwing. They hire a bouncy castle for the children. A marquee is hired and a local pub sets up a beer tent. Other stall holders are invited to attend, selling food, gifts etc. An adjacent field is set up as a car park and club members act as marshals, organising the parking and also controlling access to and exit from the parking area onto the public highway. There are numerous parties involved in this event, there are many potential liabilities. Perhaps some readers will recognise activities and aspects that have featured in recent high profile court cases. I doubt the frisbee club would entertain the running of such an event if they thought they would have to fund any compensation that might be awarded following an accident and subsequent successful claim. They wisely take out insurance against such an eventuality. But what do insurers seek? Obviously a premium since insurance is a commercial transaction, but also insurers expect that the policyholder will recognise potential hazards and risks and take suitable and sufficient action to eliminate, reduce and minimise them. So, let’s get insurers’ demands in contest. They are a response to the presence of risk. Frisbee throwing may present little or no significant risk but some of the other activities do, and have resulted in accidents in the past. Management of risk is part of the contract between the policyholder and their insurer. Phil

I am really struggling to understand the relevance of the "Frisbee club" scenario here. Most fishing clubs are small organisations, and do not do anything other than rent fishing rights and divide up the costs between members. Some may organise matches but that's about it. Most don't. I know of no fishing club that has an open day or family day. Pie and peas and beer...............maybe. Most H&S stuff does not apply. They owe no more or less duty of care than ayone else.