Statement from Rich Taylor (LACR Lawsuit)

6/12/2025 12:39pm

Things like this raise the cost for all of us. How many insurance companies are out there that cover our sport? They all talk and I know for a fact the insurance costs in my neck of the woods for an event has gone up significantly this year.

5
LungButter
Posts
8684
Joined
1/9/2016
Location
Yellow Pine, ID, USA
6/12/2025 12:43pm
Log Hopper wrote:
Things like this raise the cost for all of us. How many insurance companies are out there that cover our sport? They all talk and I...

Things like this raise the cost for all of us. How many insurance companies are out there that cover our sport? They all talk and I know for a fact the insurance costs in my neck of the woods for an event has gone up significantly this year.

There are less than 5 (maybe only 2) and insurance costs for a lot of tracks and promoters have more than doubled this year.

 

4
MotoDad32
Posts
244
Joined
7/23/2017
Location
Beverly Hills, CA, USA
6/12/2025 12:49pm
Matthes wrote:
There's more to the story w LACR and why they closed, people have been able to get insurance for it, the track has been a bit...

There's more to the story w LACR and why they closed, people have been able to get insurance for it, the track has been a bit weird with this whole thing from other people I've talked to that want to race/ride there. 

As far as this goes, I'm not into cancel culture- if you don't want to support EKS because of this, then cool. I can respect that & understand that opinion. It's not an unreasonable one. 

Me, myself, I've known Rich for a long time, seen him do many great things for the industry/local riders. I also believe that if there was no merit to this lawsuit, it would've been thrown out so the American judicial system decided that there was track negligence. I'm not an expert in laws/tracks etc so I'll leave it to them.  Others testified that it was unsafe, a judge agreed and Rich was able to pay some, not all, of his kids medical bills & this injury still affects him today.

Sad to see the abuse & harassment that RT has gotten over this. Again, you do you & not buy EKS-I can respect that but cancel culture, trying to ruin someones livelihood is complete BS IMO. Monday night I do a show where anyone can call in, haven't gotten one call about this ever for all the tough guys on here. 

To me, it's pretty straightforward.  When I go to a track and ride it, I understand that's a risk I'm taking.  If I crash, get hurt, whatever - that's 100% on me.  I sign the waiver and accept the risk.  That's really the end of it.

Just because we have lawyers in this country that find ways to circumvent that intent - well that just sucks.  The owner is allowing people to ride there in exchange for a relatively small fee, and an understanding that the guest accepts all risk and won't sue him if they get hurt.  It's complete BS that our laws and legal system allows stuff like this to happen, and people that exploit the laws and walk away from the commitment they made when signing the waiver deserve to be frowned upon.

    

23
MotoDad32
Posts
244
Joined
7/23/2017
Location
Beverly Hills, CA, USA
6/12/2025 12:54pm
bsward423 wrote:
Lung, I kind of arbitrarily chose your comment to quote, but no hate-coms here. Yours is a good base for discussion. I think there are some...

Lung, I kind of arbitrarily chose your comment to quote, but no hate-coms here. Yours is a good base for discussion. I think there are some really great points on both sides of this argument. I think accidents happen, but I also think we should do our best to avoid them as much as possible. You mentioned experts. You're right that Rich Taylor, if he could do it over again, should have packed up and went home if it was that bad. HOWEVER, the track that is providing the place to race should absolutely be an expert in track safety. Motocross is dangerous. We all understand that, but that doesn't preclude the tracks from taking precautions to limit major injuries that could have been prevented with logical thinking ahead of time. I wasn't there, but it appears that this is the case in this situation. I think that two things can be true. The track can be negligent, AND RT and the rest of the people that day COULD have noticed the problem sooner and left. It's also important to realize that not everyone at the track on any given day has experience with safety. Therefore, it is absolutely the track's responsibility to limit dangers as much as possible. With all of that said, I do think that you and everyone else on this thread are entitled to their opinion on the matter, but I do tend to lean towards the Matthes way of thinking. I wish we wouldn't try to ruin someone's life the moment they do something we disagree with (RT, Bud Light, etc.). It's also my opinion that 75% of the people commenting in this thread would do the exact same thing RT did if they were faced with the same medical bills stemming from the same situation. Again though, just an opinion, not facts. No need to crucify me too.

OMG this is so indicative of what's wrong with today's society.  Everyone looking to place blame on others, as opposed to taking responsibilty for their own actions.  

16

The Shop

hubbardmx50
Posts
2801
Joined
11/17/2016
Location
Rancho Cucamonga, CA, USA
6/12/2025 1:37pm
Rickyisms wrote:

I’m on hold!

Can we get a time stamp? 

6/12/2025 1:41pm Edited Date/Time 6/12/2025 2:08pm
TAUTOG wrote:
I just don't get people in the industry saying we don't know both side or the whole story. Steve said the same thing on twitter when...

I just don't get people in the industry saying we don't know both side or the whole story. Steve said the same thing on twitter when I talked shit on his goggles of choice. Yes, it is a choice. Rich made a statement. The facility made a statement. You can look at the berm. What's this secret we are missing?

Matthes wrote:
There's more to the story w LACR and why they closed, people have been able to get insurance for it, the track has been a bit...

There's more to the story w LACR and why they closed, people have been able to get insurance for it, the track has been a bit weird with this whole thing from other people I've talked to that want to race/ride there. 

As far as this goes, I'm not into cancel culture- if you don't want to support EKS because of this, then cool. I can respect that & understand that opinion. It's not an unreasonable one. 

Me, myself, I've known Rich for a long time, seen him do many great things for the industry/local riders. I also believe that if there was no merit to this lawsuit, it would've been thrown out so the American judicial system decided that there was track negligence. I'm not an expert in laws/tracks etc so I'll leave it to them.  Others testified that it was unsafe, a judge agreed and Rich was able to pay some, not all, of his kids medical bills & this injury still affects him today.

Sad to see the abuse & harassment that RT has gotten over this. Again, you do you & not buy EKS-I can respect that but cancel culture, trying to ruin someones livelihood is complete BS IMO. Monday night I do a show where anyone can call in, haven't gotten one call about this ever for all the tough guys on here. 

Matthes, since you were kind enough to join this thread, let us know how "the American judicial system decided that there was track negligence" and "a judge agreed and Rich was able to pay some of his kids medical bills" tracks with anything factual or known so far. All of that seems provably false.

Rich says clearly in the VERY FIRST POST: "My Son's case eventually led to it being settled without a trial."
So, If a judge or the American judicial system decided, and if others testified to these facts in court, we would have recorded records of all of that. We do not. And Rich confirms that.

Certainly, there has been no definitive statement EVER of track negligence by the court. In fact, stating that negligence was determined from Rich's side likely breaches Rich's agreement in the settlement. I mean, I hope you probably wouldn't want to be doing that. He might wanna check what he agreed to.

11
GrapeApe
Posts
8865
Joined
6/7/2010
Location
Mc Kinney, TX, USA
6/12/2025 1:53pm Edited Date/Time 6/12/2025 1:57pm
TAUTOG wrote:
I just don't get people in the industry saying we don't know both side or the whole story. Steve said the same thing on twitter when...

I just don't get people in the industry saying we don't know both side or the whole story. Steve said the same thing on twitter when I talked shit on his goggles of choice. Yes, it is a choice. Rich made a statement. The facility made a statement. You can look at the berm. What's this secret we are missing?

Matthes wrote:
There's more to the story w LACR and why they closed, people have been able to get insurance for it, the track has been a bit...

There's more to the story w LACR and why they closed, people have been able to get insurance for it, the track has been a bit weird with this whole thing from other people I've talked to that want to race/ride there. 

As far as this goes, I'm not into cancel culture- if you don't want to support EKS because of this, then cool. I can respect that & understand that opinion. It's not an unreasonable one. 

Me, myself, I've known Rich for a long time, seen him do many great things for the industry/local riders. I also believe that if there was no merit to this lawsuit, it would've been thrown out so the American judicial system decided that there was track negligence. I'm not an expert in laws/tracks etc so I'll leave it to them.  Others testified that it was unsafe, a judge agreed and Rich was able to pay some, not all, of his kids medical bills & this injury still affects him today.

Sad to see the abuse & harassment that RT has gotten over this. Again, you do you & not buy EKS-I can respect that but cancel culture, trying to ruin someones livelihood is complete BS IMO. Monday night I do a show where anyone can call in, haven't gotten one call about this ever for all the tough guys on here. 

Matthes, since you were kind enough to join this thread, let us know how "the American judicial system decided that there was track negligence" and "...

Matthes, since you were kind enough to join this thread, let us know how "the American judicial system decided that there was track negligence" and "a judge agreed and Rich was able to pay some of his kids medical bills" tracks with anything factual or known so far. All of that seems provably false.

Rich says clearly in the VERY FIRST POST: "My Son's case eventually led to it being settled without a trial."
So, If a judge or the American judicial system decided, and if others testified to these facts in court, we would have recorded records of all of that. We do not. And Rich confirms that.

Certainly, there has been no definitive statement EVER of track negligence by the court. In fact, stating that negligence was determined from Rich's side likely breaches Rich's agreement in the settlement. I mean, I hope you probably wouldn't want to be doing that. He might wanna check what he agreed to.

There was deposition and affidavit testimony that the track condition was unnecessarily and unreasonably unsafe, but you're right there was no finding of negligence by a trier of fact. Steve is a little confused there.

6
6/12/2025 1:55pm
bsward423 wrote:
Lung, I kind of arbitrarily chose your comment to quote, but no hate-coms here. Yours is a good base for discussion. I think there are some...

Lung, I kind of arbitrarily chose your comment to quote, but no hate-coms here. Yours is a good base for discussion. I think there are some really great points on both sides of this argument. I think accidents happen, but I also think we should do our best to avoid them as much as possible. You mentioned experts. You're right that Rich Taylor, if he could do it over again, should have packed up and went home if it was that bad. HOWEVER, the track that is providing the place to race should absolutely be an expert in track safety. Motocross is dangerous. We all understand that, but that doesn't preclude the tracks from taking precautions to limit major injuries that could have been prevented with logical thinking ahead of time. I wasn't there, but it appears that this is the case in this situation. I think that two things can be true. The track can be negligent, AND RT and the rest of the people that day COULD have noticed the problem sooner and left. It's also important to realize that not everyone at the track on any given day has experience with safety. Therefore, it is absolutely the track's responsibility to limit dangers as much as possible. With all of that said, I do think that you and everyone else on this thread are entitled to their opinion on the matter, but I do tend to lean towards the Matthes way of thinking. I wish we wouldn't try to ruin someone's life the moment they do something we disagree with (RT, Bud Light, etc.). It's also my opinion that 75% of the people commenting in this thread would do the exact same thing RT did if they were faced with the same medical bills stemming from the same situation. Again though, just an opinion, not facts. No need to crucify me too.

yak651 wrote:
No hate coms and agree if a track does something egregious they should be sued. Leaving equipment on a track or track edge. Metal fence poles...

No hate coms and agree if a track does something egregious they should be sued. Leaving equipment on a track or track edge. Metal fence poles in or near the race surface. Something anyone that has been at a motocross would say “yeah that’s not right” go ahead and sue. But an elevated berm?? They might as well shut down Glen Helen, RT kid would not be here if he whisky throttled at the top of Mt St Helen’s. I’m sorry if I don’t see the other side of this situation but I just can’t see how this is a legitimate situation to have a lawsuit. 

NV825 wrote:
I agree 100%. And unless I'm mistaken, it took place in the last moto of the day after he had already ridden it throughout the day...

I agree 100%. And unless I'm mistaken, it took place in the last moto of the day after he had already ridden it throughout the day with no issues. I tried to see the merit from RT's angle, but this one is all on the rider for losing control off a standard obstacle.

That being said, if Vital, Pulp, etc. want to keep taking sponsor dollars from EKS, then that's their choice. My choice is to keep enjoying these entertainment outlets, and if the time comes that I need goggles, then I'll most likely support a different brand because of this whole situation. But none of us are any holier than those who choose to support EKS.

I see absolutely ZERO merit to RT's lawsuit.

5
6/12/2025 1:56pm
Matthes wrote:
There's more to the story w LACR and why they closed, people have been able to get insurance for it, the track has been a bit...

There's more to the story w LACR and why they closed, people have been able to get insurance for it, the track has been a bit weird with this whole thing from other people I've talked to that want to race/ride there. 

As far as this goes, I'm not into cancel culture- if you don't want to support EKS because of this, then cool. I can respect that & understand that opinion. It's not an unreasonable one. 

Me, myself, I've known Rich for a long time, seen him do many great things for the industry/local riders. I also believe that if there was no merit to this lawsuit, it would've been thrown out so the American judicial system decided that there was track negligence. I'm not an expert in laws/tracks etc so I'll leave it to them.  Others testified that it was unsafe, a judge agreed and Rich was able to pay some, not all, of his kids medical bills & this injury still affects him today.

Sad to see the abuse & harassment that RT has gotten over this. Again, you do you & not buy EKS-I can respect that but cancel culture, trying to ruin someones livelihood is complete BS IMO. Monday night I do a show where anyone can call in, haven't gotten one call about this ever for all the tough guys on here. 

Matthes, since you were kind enough to join this thread, let us know how "the American judicial system decided that there was track negligence" and "...

Matthes, since you were kind enough to join this thread, let us know how "the American judicial system decided that there was track negligence" and "a judge agreed and Rich was able to pay some of his kids medical bills" tracks with anything factual or known so far. All of that seems provably false.

Rich says clearly in the VERY FIRST POST: "My Son's case eventually led to it being settled without a trial."
So, If a judge or the American judicial system decided, and if others testified to these facts in court, we would have recorded records of all of that. We do not. And Rich confirms that.

Certainly, there has been no definitive statement EVER of track negligence by the court. In fact, stating that negligence was determined from Rich's side likely breaches Rich's agreement in the settlement. I mean, I hope you probably wouldn't want to be doing that. He might wanna check what he agreed to.

GrapeApe wrote:
There was deposition and affidavit testimony that the track condition was unnecessarily and unreasonably unsafe, but you're right there was no finding of negligence by a...

There was deposition and affidavit testimony that the track condition was unnecessarily and unreasonably unsafe, but you're right there was no finding of negligence by a trier of fact. Steve is a little confused there.

Fair 'nuff. Pulled that section to alleviate confusion, although I'm sure we all understood the meaning

ACBraap
Posts
1169
Joined
2/10/2012
Location
Seattlish, WA, USA
Fantasy
6/12/2025 1:59pm Edited Date/Time 6/12/2025 2:03pm
MotoDad32 wrote:
To me, it's pretty straightforward.  When I go to a track and ride it, I understand that's a risk I'm taking.  If I crash, get hurt...

To me, it's pretty straightforward.  When I go to a track and ride it, I understand that's a risk I'm taking.  If I crash, get hurt, whatever - that's 100% on me.  I sign the waiver and accept the risk.  That's really the end of it.

Just because we have lawyers in this country that find ways to circumvent that intent - well that just sucks.  The owner is allowing people to ride there in exchange for a relatively small fee, and an understanding that the guest accepts all risk and won't sue him if they get hurt.  It's complete BS that our laws and legal system allows stuff like this to happen, and people that exploit the laws and walk away from the commitment they made when signing the waiver deserve to be frowned upon.

    

Unless you are paying 100% of your medical bills yourself this is not the case.  If you get hurt, your insurance company will look for other people they can recoup money from.

The real villain in all of this is outrageous medical costs that drive all of this litigation and the effect it has on insurance availability and pricing.

Also props to @Matthes for continuing to participate.

3
8
6/12/2025 1:59pm
Log Hopper wrote:
Things like this raise the cost for all of us. How many insurance companies are out there that cover our sport? They all talk and I...

Things like this raise the cost for all of us. How many insurance companies are out there that cover our sport? They all talk and I know for a fact the insurance costs in my neck of the woods for an event has gone up significantly this year.

Our home insurance, health insurance, and car insurance went up significantly this year. 

Can't imagine the increase for all the specialized insurance that tracks use. Must be astronomical. 

whyZ
Posts
1158
Joined
4/15/2009
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
6/12/2025 2:11pm Edited Date/Time 6/12/2025 2:23pm

It seems to me the waiver is the lynch-pin to all of this.  Who crafts these waivers that are seemingly so easy to pick apart.  One would think that the AMA in conjunction with the insurance industry could compose a pretty effective waiver that could be specific to each state and their laws.         

4
Matthes
Posts
2755
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
USA
6/12/2025 2:33pm

Fair 'nuff. Pulled that section to alleviate confusion, although I'm sure we all understood the meaning

From my understanding, the case was filed to be dismissed on some sort of grounds that someone (I assume a judge somewhere? Can a lawyer do it?) said "this is a legit complaint" and from there it was settled. 

So to me, this is how the "system" works right? Obviously we see lawsuits get thrown out as in the USA, anyone can sue anyone at anytime for any reason. I could be wrong but this is how I understood it from a long time ago. 

1
18
6/12/2025 2:37pm Edited Date/Time 6/12/2025 2:38pm

Fair 'nuff. Pulled that section to alleviate confusion, although I'm sure we all understood the meaning

Matthes wrote:
From my understanding, the case was filed to be dismissed on some sort of grounds that someone (I assume a judge somewhere? Can a lawyer do...

From my understanding, the case was filed to be dismissed on some sort of grounds that someone (I assume a judge somewhere? Can a lawyer do it?) said "this is a legit complaint" and from there it was settled. 

So to me, this is how the "system" works right? Obviously we see lawsuits get thrown out as in the USA, anyone can sue anyone at anytime for any reason. I could be wrong but this is how I understood it from a long time ago. 

Cliff notes: you are so horrendously wrong that you are near voiding the settlement. 

STOP NOW before Rich's lawyers do on your behalf. It's not cute. A track is gone.

2
3
Matthes
Posts
2755
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
USA
6/12/2025 2:38pm
Cliff notes: you are so horrendously wrong that you are near voiding the settlement. STOP NOW before Rich's lawyers do on your behalf. It's not cute. A...

Cliff notes: you are so horrendously wrong that you are near voiding the settlement. 

STOP NOW before Rich's lawyers do on your behalf. It's not cute. A track is gone.

How so? 

5
6/12/2025 2:38pm Edited Date/Time 6/12/2025 2:39pm
Cliff notes: you are so horrendously wrong that you are near voiding the settlement. STOP NOW before Rich's lawyers do on your behalf. It's not cute. A...

Cliff notes: you are so horrendously wrong that you are near voiding the settlement. 

STOP NOW before Rich's lawyers do on your behalf. It's not cute. A track is gone.

Matthes wrote:

How so? 

Are you still claiming fault has been determined in court by court officials on the track operator?

1
Matthes
Posts
2755
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
USA
6/12/2025 2:42pm

Are you still claiming fault has been determined in court by court officials on the track operator?

Did my explanation not make sense? Serious question.

Obviously if the track did nothing wrong they would not try to settle right? Based on other peoples statements & whatever else was used, they decided to settle before it went to court. 

1
19
6/12/2025 2:46pm

Are you still claiming fault has been determined in court by court officials on the track operator?

Matthes wrote:
Did my explanation not make sense? Serious question.Obviously if the track did nothing wrong they would not try to settle right? Based on other peoples statements...

Did my explanation not make sense? Serious question.

Obviously if the track did nothing wrong they would not try to settle right? Based on other peoples statements & whatever else was used, they decided to settle before it went to court. 

Dude, first question first: are you still claiming fault has been determined in court by court officials on the track operator?

1
2
yak651
Posts
8712
Joined
8/26/2006
Location
Appleton, WI, USA
Fantasy
6/12/2025 2:46pm
MotoDad32 wrote:
To me, it's pretty straightforward.  When I go to a track and ride it, I understand that's a risk I'm taking.  If I crash, get hurt...

To me, it's pretty straightforward.  When I go to a track and ride it, I understand that's a risk I'm taking.  If I crash, get hurt, whatever - that's 100% on me.  I sign the waiver and accept the risk.  That's really the end of it.

Just because we have lawyers in this country that find ways to circumvent that intent - well that just sucks.  The owner is allowing people to ride there in exchange for a relatively small fee, and an understanding that the guest accepts all risk and won't sue him if they get hurt.  It's complete BS that our laws and legal system allows stuff like this to happen, and people that exploit the laws and walk away from the commitment they made when signing the waiver deserve to be frowned upon.

    

ACBraap wrote:
Unless you are paying 100% of your medical bills yourself this is not the case.  If you get hurt, your insurance company will look for other...

Unless you are paying 100% of your medical bills yourself this is not the case.  If you get hurt, your insurance company will look for other people they can recoup money from.

The real villain in all of this is outrageous medical costs that drive all of this litigation and the effect it has on insurance availability and pricing.

Also props to @Matthes for continuing to participate.

Except in this case it wasn’t the insurance company that sued it was RT

12
SoCalMX70
Posts
3555
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Thousand Oaks, CA, USA
6/12/2025 2:51pm
Log Hopper wrote:
Things like this raise the cost for all of us. How many insurance companies are out there that cover our sport? They all talk and I...

Things like this raise the cost for all of us. How many insurance companies are out there that cover our sport? They all talk and I know for a fact the insurance costs in my neck of the woods for an event has gone up significantly this year.

LungButter wrote:

There are less than 5 (maybe only 2) and insurance costs for a lot of tracks and promoters have more than doubled this year.

 

2, 3 tops. Just dealt with this for our club.

1
GrapeApe
Posts
8865
Joined
6/7/2010
Location
Mc Kinney, TX, USA
6/12/2025 2:53pm Edited Date/Time 6/12/2025 3:27pm

Are you still claiming fault has been determined in court by court officials on the track operator?

Matthes wrote:
Did my explanation not make sense? Serious question.Obviously if the track did nothing wrong they would not try to settle right? Based on other peoples statements...

Did my explanation not make sense? Serious question.

Obviously if the track did nothing wrong they would not try to settle right? Based on other peoples statements & whatever else was used, they decided to settle before it went to court. 

If you were wrongly accused of murder and the prosecution offered you one year in jail or risk trial and the death penalty from 12 random jurors, you kinda have to think about the one year right? Settlement is a balancing of risk and parties that feel they have done nothing wrong settle often to have certainty and to take control of the risk. Settlement is not an admission of liability.

20
6/12/2025 3:03pm Edited Date/Time 6/12/2025 3:04pm
TAUTOG wrote:
I just don't get people in the industry saying we don't know both side or the whole story. Steve said the same thing on twitter when...

I just don't get people in the industry saying we don't know both side or the whole story. Steve said the same thing on twitter when I talked shit on his goggles of choice. Yes, it is a choice. Rich made a statement. The facility made a statement. You can look at the berm. What's this secret we are missing?

Matthes wrote:
There's more to the story w LACR and why they closed, people have been able to get insurance for it, the track has been a bit...

There's more to the story w LACR and why they closed, people have been able to get insurance for it, the track has been a bit weird with this whole thing from other people I've talked to that want to race/ride there. 

As far as this goes, I'm not into cancel culture- if you don't want to support EKS because of this, then cool. I can respect that & understand that opinion. It's not an unreasonable one. 

Me, myself, I've known Rich for a long time, seen him do many great things for the industry/local riders. I also believe that if there was no merit to this lawsuit, it would've been thrown out so the American judicial system decided that there was track negligence. I'm not an expert in laws/tracks etc so I'll leave it to them.  Others testified that it was unsafe, a judge agreed and Rich was able to pay some, not all, of his kids medical bills & this injury still affects him today.

Sad to see the abuse & harassment that RT has gotten over this. Again, you do you & not buy EKS-I can respect that but cancel culture, trying to ruin someones livelihood is complete BS IMO. Monday night I do a show where anyone can call in, haven't gotten one call about this ever for all the tough guys on here. 

"so the American judicial system decided that there was track negligence. I'm not an expert in laws/tracks etc so I'll leave it to them"

Steve, are you SERIOUSLY are sitting here trying to argue that some random California attorneys and possibly a judge KNOW MORE about the safety of a motocross track than you, who has been riding for 40 years and has made an entire career of being a professional journalist for the sport of Motocross?

....its giving -> "Yeah man the lawyers know what they are doing and have no ill itentions, they got it all figured out! Nothing to see here!"

6
1
vet323
Posts
3604
Joined
7/31/2010
Location
Lead, SD, USA
6/12/2025 3:04pm
Log Hopper wrote:
Things like this raise the cost for all of us. How many insurance companies are out there that cover our sport? They all talk and I...

Things like this raise the cost for all of us. How many insurance companies are out there that cover our sport? They all talk and I know for a fact the insurance costs in my neck of the woods for an event has gone up significantly this year.

LungButter wrote:

There are less than 5 (maybe only 2) and insurance costs for a lot of tracks and promoters have more than doubled this year.

 

SoCalMX70 wrote:

2, 3 tops. Just dealt with this for our club.

Mine, too. Our last insurance was going to go up from $4,800/ yr (base policy + $1,800 per event) to $11,200/yr + $2,600 per event). That's after 10 years with the same insurer with zero claims. 

2
vet323
Posts
3604
Joined
7/31/2010
Location
Lead, SD, USA
6/12/2025 3:05pm

Are you still claiming fault has been determined in court by court officials on the track operator?

Matthes wrote:
Did my explanation not make sense? Serious question.Obviously if the track did nothing wrong they would not try to settle right? Based on other peoples statements...

Did my explanation not make sense? Serious question.

Obviously if the track did nothing wrong they would not try to settle right? Based on other peoples statements & whatever else was used, they decided to settle before it went to court. 

This is laughably dumb.

3
1
6/12/2025 3:11pm

Are you still claiming fault has been determined in court by court officials on the track operator?

Matthes wrote:
Did my explanation not make sense? Serious question.Obviously if the track did nothing wrong they would not try to settle right? Based on other peoples statements...

Did my explanation not make sense? Serious question.

Obviously if the track did nothing wrong they would not try to settle right? Based on other peoples statements & whatever else was used, they decided to settle before it went to court. 

GrapeApe wrote:
If you were wrongly accused of murder and the prosecution offered you one year in jail or risk trial and the death penalty from 12 random...

If you were wrongly accused of murder and the prosecution offered you one year in jail or risk trial and the death penalty from 12 random jurors, you kinda have to think about the one year right? Settlement is a balancing of risk and parties that feel they have done nothing wrong settle often to have certainty and to take control of the risk. Settlement is not an admission of liability.

That's the bummer with NDA's right? We will never know unless someone breaks the NDA.

Very well could have been as Matthes said he heard in that this was going to go further and been really bad for LACR and their insurance company with a bigger payout. So all parties decided to end it with the settlement before it got worse.

OR

Could have been that all parties agreed to put an end to things with an agreed upon number(I assume it was medical bills plus some) so that it would be over and they could all move on.

Not that knowing would really make much of a difference for anyone or their opinions.

1
MotoDad32
Posts
244
Joined
7/23/2017
Location
Beverly Hills, CA, USA
6/12/2025 3:30pm
ACBraap wrote:
Unless you are paying 100% of your medical bills yourself this is not the case.  If you get hurt, your insurance company will look for other...

Unless you are paying 100% of your medical bills yourself this is not the case.  If you get hurt, your insurance company will look for other people they can recoup money from.

The real villain in all of this is outrageous medical costs that drive all of this litigation and the effect it has on insurance availability and pricing.

Also props to @Matthes for continuing to participate.

Yes, that's true about insurance companies.  However in this instance I understand it was RT who initiated the lawsuit against LACR, not the insurance company.  

6
TalinH112
Posts
1427
Joined
1/30/2022
Location
Belgrade, MT, USA
6/12/2025 3:52pm

I can’t believe @Matthes jumped into the shark tank, covered in chum. 🤣🤣🍿😳🥤

9
mxxcdez
Posts
60
Joined
6/4/2024
Location
socal, CA, USA
6/12/2025 4:00pm
Matthes wrote:
Did my explanation not make sense? Serious question.Obviously if the track did nothing wrong they would not try to settle right? Based on other peoples statements...

Did my explanation not make sense? Serious question.

Obviously if the track did nothing wrong they would not try to settle right? Based on other peoples statements & whatever else was used, they decided to settle before it went to court. 

GrapeApe wrote:
If you were wrongly accused of murder and the prosecution offered you one year in jail or risk trial and the death penalty from 12 random...

If you were wrongly accused of murder and the prosecution offered you one year in jail or risk trial and the death penalty from 12 random jurors, you kinda have to think about the one year right? Settlement is a balancing of risk and parties that feel they have done nothing wrong settle often to have certainty and to take control of the risk. Settlement is not an admission of liability.

mattyhamz2 wrote:
That's the bummer with NDA's right? We will never know unless someone breaks the NDA.Very well could have been as Matthes said he heard in that...

That's the bummer with NDA's right? We will never know unless someone breaks the NDA.

Very well could have been as Matthes said he heard in that this was going to go further and been really bad for LACR and their insurance company with a bigger payout. So all parties decided to end it with the settlement before it got worse.

OR

Could have been that all parties agreed to put an end to things with an agreed upon number(I assume it was medical bills plus some) so that it would be over and they could all move on.

Not that knowing would really make much of a difference for anyone or their opinions.

The latter statement is crucial. All parties agreed to settle the matter. That means both sides including LACR made a conscious decision to move on. If LACR truly believed they were in the right they had every opportunity to take the case to trial and clear their name fully. Legal expenses are real but they could have easily used a GofundMe just like they are using now for their current efforts if proving their innocence was that important.

Instead, they chose to settle which implies a compromise. Since that agreement, there have been actions that appear to breach the spirit, if not the letter, of that settlement. Publicly defaming someone after agreeing to move forward shows poor judgment, especially if they agreed to disagree.

A major question no one seems to be asking is why not reopen the facility under a new entity? If the issue is about getting insurance under their current names, that is not impossible. Plenty of facilities across the country have restructured like this. For example, Texas has seen tracks reopen under new LLCs or corporations with the same group of people. With an AMA required membership, insurance coverage is possible. You can form a rider/member owned track, which not only distributes risk but also builds stronger community investment.

So why is LACR hell-bent on using the Barbacovi name when that appears to be a major roadblock?

Also, what exactly has the GofundMe money been spent on? Transparency would help the community trust the intentions here, especially since they were donations. If they had truly wanted to reopen LACR, that money could have gone toward forming a new business, making basic facility improvements like better runoff zones, adding flags and markers, creating flag stations, and enabling promoters to run race events. These are standard and very doable steps.

Yet the public message has become more about hardship and sympathy rather than actionable steps and solutions. That deserves to be questioned not out of malice but out of a genuine desire to see progress and accountability.

12
SPYGUY
Posts
2169
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
USA
6/12/2025 4:09pm
Matthes wrote:
Did my explanation not make sense? Serious question.Obviously if the track did nothing wrong they would not try to settle right? Based on other peoples statements...

Did my explanation not make sense? Serious question.

Obviously if the track did nothing wrong they would not try to settle right? Based on other peoples statements & whatever else was used, they decided to settle before it went to court. 

There are a lot of factors that go into choosing to settle. Defendants are often persuaded by those on their side (including their own lawyers and insurance company) to settle for a known amount rather than risk losing a substantially larger amount if they proceed on with the trial and lose due to the whims of a jury.

10
j368
Posts
575
Joined
7/13/2014
Location
Tulsa, OK, USA
6/12/2025 4:10pm
Matthes wrote:
Did my explanation not make sense? Serious question.Obviously if the track did nothing wrong they would not try to settle right? Based on other peoples statements...

Did my explanation not make sense? Serious question.

Obviously if the track did nothing wrong they would not try to settle right? Based on other peoples statements & whatever else was used, they decided to settle before it went to court. 

That’s not necessarily true. Many times it’s cheaper to settle the suit than take it to the end, even if there is no merit to the case. Happens all the time. As for suing for anything under the sun. The court really frowns on frivolous lawsuits and it can come back and bite the plaintiff big time. Those days for the most part are long gone. 

6

Post a reply to: Statement from Rich Taylor (LACR Lawsuit)

The Latest