new waiver form............

[pete reeves]

Jeff.
As a member of this club and a member of this forum I have the right to post my thoughts and opinions regarding this disclaimer.
Thank you for the explanation of the meaning of the phrase “Is not to be used” Is this what you are referring to when you say you called ME on this and all you got was SMOKE AND MIRRORS?

In my first post on this topic I said I could not see anything in the wording that constitutes a threat. I have not seen anything in subsequent posts that have made me change my mind.

Pete Reeves 860

[jmanjeff]

Pete Reeves
I must say that i am sorry for being pushy on my post, i did not know you are just a AMCA Member and not on ether Foundation board or the AMCA board.

[Britluv]

This may have been caused by non-AMCA clubs using a copy of our judging form, but neglecting to remove the AMCA name from it. I have been told that the AMCA National Judge once received a complaint from a BMW owner,
"I never received my trophy." Investigantion showed he never competed at an AMCA event, but a BMW event used the AMCA form (still with the AMCA name) as its judging form. Flattery for the AMCA, but a problem nonetheless.

[gmarakas]

I am most intrigued with items #2 and #3 in the disclaimer. What they essentially say is that the AMCA has no mechanism in place to create even a modicum of consistency in the judging and that the points you get are nothing more than the opinion of the person available to judge that day. This actually means you are getting the award (or lack of) from that person on that day rather than from the AMCA. An AMCA judge is an independent contractor that simply brings his or her opinion to the meet. They simply have to say it is so but we have to provide proof that it isn't.

We have some great judges in the AMCA who take a very developmental approach to our hobby and try to genuinely help the entrant with making the bike better. Unfortunately, they are very rare and now they are being cast aside in favor of a new regime who fancies the sounds of their own voices.

To say I am disgusted just doesn't really capture the feeling.

[Lonnie]

The judging disclaimer seems to merely verify that which most of us know to be true - the points deduction is often based on what the judge(s) on hand believe to be the true representation of the machine. I have experienced occasions where the judges' inexperience was overruled on the field by Kevin and/or a more experienced judge who was not part of that particular judging team. I have seen numerous instances where restorers where told at one meet that an item was incorrect. After researching further, the restorers made decisions to change the part or finish to correspond with what they were told it should be, only to find at the next judging session that the part or finish that they changed was the correct way to begin with. In very few cases did it bounce a bike from JR to SR or vice-versa but it is frustrating.

The disclaimer seems to authenticate that possibility of that scenario so that on down the line a potential buyer cannot have recourse against the seller.

I had significant distrust about the disclaimer when I first read it, but I have re-read it repeatedly and it seems just to be typically over-wordy lawyer-speak. I see no threat of legal threat from the AMCA to sue for use of the form as a selling tool.

See you guys at Denton. I will be the guy with grey hair.