ORIGINAL: pattratt
Gordon
I can take a half a dozen passages from the quoted Carl e-mail that exactly supports my conclusions just as the highlighted ones support your conclusions. The e-mail is ambigious at best and means nothing as far as a definition of AMA insurance coverage is concerned. There are two truths here regardless what Carl wrote:
1. Before there can be a denial of coverage there must be a "CLAIM!"
2. A contested "Claim" is going to be judicated by lawyers and a civil court judge!
There is nothing in Carl’s email that indicates that a claim has to exist before member could be suspended or expelled, so anyone who wilfully ignores the safety code
could still be penalised by the ama even if there is no claim.
BTW, Carl has apparently moved on and his responsibilities now lie with a different AMA official. I have an email out to Joyce to see who is now the correct person to check with to see whether there is any change in the official AMA position to go with the change in official.
Gordon