Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length.

[alan colson]

My wife and I have just had our motor insurance cancelled  by the insurers. We both had reverse parking sensors fitted to our cars by the dealers when we purchased them new a couple of years ago. We have been told by our insurance company that the underwriters will not cover our cars because these had been fitted as an optional extra and are not standard. They say that this means thecar has been modified. I thought that modified ment a chipped engine or the addition of alloy wheels, maybe a body kit fitted. PLEASE check that you are covered, I would hate for any of you to have an insurance problem.
Alan

[Circlip]

Had a problem when Daughters car was broken in to and the radio "taken".

  "We don't cover radios cos of all the exotic "ICE" systems, cost too much"

  We were trying to claim for the manufacturers bog standard bottom of the range as supplied box of c**p that just makes a tolerable noise when  switched on.

  Car insurers and clamping firms are exuded from the same primeaval slurry.

  Regards  Ian

[Martin (Admin)]

That scary! 
 Thanks Alan.

[alan colson]

Yes Martin, it is scary. I did ask how far I had to go when it comes to naming accessories but did not get a positive answer. I said I have rubber mats fitted, a towbar etc. It seems that it's ok to tow a caravan or trailer, but you are not allowed an extra safety device.
We have arranged new insurance with a very well known large company, they could not understand why adding the sensors would affect the insurance, they thought they were a good idea. By the way the new insurance seems to be better and  cheaper HOORAY!!!

[Colin Bishop]

That's interesting. How did they find out about the sensors anyway Alan?

I have had them fitted to my new car by the supplying dealer. They can be fitted as a factory option but the main dealer has a standard installation which is essentially identical. Not only that, the car has just had a minor facelift and the sensors are now fitted as standard. I would be pretty p*****d off if that was given as a reason for disallowing a claim. The sensors fitted to my previous car have saved me from bumper damage on a number of occasions - worth their weight in gold and insurers ought to give you a discount on that basis in my view.

I can't believe that a reputable insurer would penalise you for fitting a passive safety device of that nature. Is it something to do with the fact that if you hit something or are shunted then the cost of replacing the bumper would be higher as new sensors might be required? In which case I would have thought that the most they could do is to refuse to pay for the new sensors.

There are a lot of 'scams' by car insurers at the moment to shave their liability. You may think you are covered while abroad for example but it turns out to be third party only once you leave the UK is a common example.

Read the small print, if the quote seems too good to be true then it probably is!

Colin

[Bartapuss]

It makes me sick when you hear motor insurance companies moan about uninsured drivers costing the industry millions, they've only got themselves to blame as they're totally uninterested in basic 3rd party insurance. I recently tried to get a quote for a cheap motor just to use as a get to work and back hack, most firms couldn't give a quote on 3rd party only and those that did wanted four times as much as fully comp, unbelievable. So in my opinion they've brought the whole problem of uninsured drivers on themselves and us the unsuspecting decent motorist, maybe its about time the government steeped in and brought out a cheap, 3 strikes and your out, 3rd party insurance scheme were the value of the motor is not relevant only to cover you in the event of an accident with someone else format. If they can do it for the banks then I can not see the problem.

[alan colson]

In answer to Colins question, my wife is changing her car this Saturday for a new one, when she asked to transfer the insurance they asked her if she had had any extras fitted, when she replied that she was having rear parking sensors fitted they told her she could not be covered by that company because the underwriters would not allow it. She explained that she had had them on her previous car which they had insured and when I made more enquiries on her behalf in the afternoon it was applied to my car as well.
You may notice that I have been unwilling to name the insurers and also our new insurers, please just be careful everyone.
I did explain that they had saved rear end insidents, I also explained that if a young child was behind my car when I selected reverse the sensor would make me aware and I could investigate. I then also said that if I had not had them fitted and ran a child over in this situation that in their eyes was OK, I said that in my eyes that would make them murderers, the person on the other end of the phone did not like my attitude.
Alan

[justboatonic]

My wife and I have just had our motor insurance cancelled   by the insurers. We both had reverse parking sensors fitted to our cars by the dealers when we purchased them new a couple of years ago. We have been told by our insurance company that the underwriters will not cover our cars because these had been fitted as an optional extra and are not standard. They say that this means thecar has been modified. I thought that modified ment a chipped engine or the addition of alloy wheels, maybe a body kit fitted. PLEASE check that you are covered, I would hate for any of you to have an insurance problem.
Alan

Then your insurance co is sh*t and you need to take this to the insurance ombudsman. Virtually every insurance co I know  factors dealer fit options into your insurance with no cost to your premiums. In any event, the cost of reversing sensors shouldnt invalidate your insurance.

I bought a BMW convertible last year. The dealer had fitted a host of extras to the car. I told the ins co when I insured about these ie auto transmission, sat nat, electric seats, cd player, 19" alloys etc and they said it didnt make a difference to the premium.

I'd seriously recommend you follow this up with the ombudsman.

Who are your insurers?

[Peter Fitness]

Friends of ours have just taken delivery of a brand new Nissan X-Trail. Because they tow a caravan, they had a tow bar and electric brakes fitted by the dealer, but when they tried to insure it, they were told that the electric brakes constituted an "engine modification"  , therefore the insurance company would not cover the car. They asked the insurers if it was OK to tow a caravan and were told it was. They then pointed out that it is illegal in NSW to tow a caravan weighing more than 750kg loaded, unless electric brakes are fitted to both the tow vehicle and the van or trailer. The insurance company checked, then finally agreed to cover them.

In view of the fact that in excess of 19000 new RVs are registered in Australia each year, you would have thought that a major insurance company, and its representatives, would be aware of the regulations  . Perhaps I'm expecting too much  .

Peter.

[alan colson]

justboatonic, I have been in touch with the Insurance Onbudsman and also the British Insurers Association with no joy, the BIA told me to get back in touch with the insurers and ask for a phone number of the underwriters, they told me that they are the agents for the underwriters and they would not give me a contact.
Peter Fitness, I am not sure exactly what these electronic brakes are, I tow a caravan with a maximum weight of about 1200kg which I tow with an X-Trail and I understand that this is perfectly within the law in this country.
Alan

[sweeper]

For general information of anyone concerned with this issue.

This subject was first raised a number of years ago (in my case via my owners club magazine), and has caused a lot of arguement since.
Rather than fall foul of an invalid insurance in the event of a claim, I approached my firm (face to face) and asked them just what does a modification consist of.
The reply given was basically, any change in the construction of the vehicle or the equipment fitted.
Fair enough, tuned engines etc. you expect to get hit for. The list I was given went a whole lot further, tyres (fair comment), car audio, sat-nav etc.
Without compiling a list of anything you could fit (if you went down that road), the simple answer is "anything that is non-standard at the original build spec. time".
I asked if, for example, after-market steering wheel (not allowed), non-standard paintwork (not allowed) any modifications to the lighting, heating or cooling systems (not allowed), replacement exhaust system (dodgy ground there).

Luckily the guy I spoke with had a practical view of the car world. He came up with a very easy solution to my problem. As some may know from previous threads on this forum, I own (apart from my euro-box daily drive) a thirty plus year old car. Having been through a number of owners, each of them appear to have done slight mods in their time, there are a number of "non-standard" items fitted. Go through the car carefully and write down ANY changes that have been made in its life that you are aware of.
This I did carefully and went back with list of mods.which he then submitted to the company. His logic was this, if you inform them of any changes (in writing) when you apply for insurance, they have the right to accept the car as declared by you or refuse to insure you on those terms. But having accepted your statement, they cannot then renage on the insurance.
When I look at my list I sometimes wonder just which world I live in. An uprated electric cooling fan (must be worth at least 2MPH extra), non-standard steering wheel (since removed and original refitted as I hated the thing), wing mirror on passengers door (good for safety?)  and a slightly modified water system for cooling the engine (sensible on these cars). A different brand of tyres had been fitted (still the correct speed range) and the final touch, a new stainless steel exhaust system (two pipes for the V6).
None of these changes was questioned except for the exhaust. Is it a genuine manufacturers system? No. Why not? Because the company folded many years ago and you simply cannot buy them over the counter. Is it a big bore / noisy boy racer thing? No, its a nice quiet and damn good construction.

Not a complaint from them since - even at renewal time, simple question from them "any changes?" None. Insurance certificate issued.

Sorry to be lengthy over this, take my advice and notify your company of anything and everything that is non-standard. They can then only accept or refuse you!     

[Jimmy James]

One the question of sat nav what do they mean by fitted, I like many other's use a sat nav at times use a Tom Tom at times but it is not a perminate fitting but one I plug into the car lighter socket if I need it ... Dose this mean that if I use Mine I may not be insured??
Freebooter

[Colin Bishop]

On my last car, a Mondeo, I wired the feed from the screen mounted SATNAV into the cigarette lighter by running an extension wire from the corner of the windscreen, down behind the side trim, under the sill trim and under the front seat. I even fitted a power switch on the centre console! How much of a mod is that I wonder?

On my new car, a Mazda 6, there is a power socket in the armrest so i have routed the wire in a similar way but it just plugs into the power outlet using a normal car power plug so I guess that's not a mod as I have not actually changed anything on the car.

As far as tyres etc. are concerned I would have felt that as long as a replacement meets the manufacturer's specification as published in the handbook and other relevant documentation then it should be perfectly OK. otherwise things just get silly such as do you have to send off to Japan for a pack of top up oil with a particular manufacturer's label on it?

Reputable insurance companies should look at these things from a commonsense viewpoint. If my Mondeo SATNAV mod had caused a short circuit leading to the car being burned out I probably wouldn't have had a leg to stand on but if I'd just bashed in the bumper by ramming the car in front at a roundabout then it would have been quite irrelevant.

Companies which try and impose a blanket approach to changes should be treated with suspicion as their underlying motive is to do anything they can to get out of settling a legitimate claim.

That said, I'm thinking of changing the audio speakers - better check with my insurers on that one!

Colin

[Roger in France]

So right, Colin.

But that is not how insurance companies work!

Before I came to my senses and got a proper job, I worked for a major insurance company. We were instructed to do our utmost to avoid paying out on claims. We were rewarded for finding loopholes which let us out. If there was a major incident overnight or at a weekend the Chief Clerk had a search made to see if we insured anyone in the area and if so we got our excuses ready in advance.

Come the Revolution my list for going against the wall is: 1. Churchmen. 2. Clearing Bankers. 3. Insurance men 4. Cold callers!

Roger in France

[Colin Bishop]

True in many respects Roger, but to be fair, both my Daughters have had occasion to make car insurance claims with DirectLine in the recent past and in each instance they have been treated both promptly and fairly with nothing to complain about. In the last few weeks another friend was obliged to make a claim with Directline and again the service was exemplary.

When I had a full size boat I needed to make a claim for colliding with an aircraft carrier and that claim was settled promptly too with no hassle. But I used a recognised company which did not charge the lowest premiums. Another company which advertised very low premiums at the time required claimants to make a personal submission to their offices - in Holland!

Colin

[DickyD]

My son is a regular claimant on Direct Line and he has had excellent service.

[Colin Bishop]

My son is a regular claimant on Direct Line and he has had excellent service.

The word 'regular' suggests that the situation may change in the future....

Colin

[alan colson]

I read with interest all the comments made so far.

My car is a special edition, when you give the insurance companies the reg number they say it's a Nissan X-Trail 2.2ltr Diesel Sport. No I say it's a special edition FatFace model, which is based on the sport but has Sat Nav, 17" Alloys and a couple of other small things thrown in as standard.

Right now if you buy my car secondhand will you know what is standard and what is additional, even I can't remember now as I have had the car 4 years.
 
I know I had the sensors fitted (I did not pay for these the dealer fitted them for me to get the sale) and I ask the insurers if I could tow a caravan so they know I have a towbar fitted, the paint is metallic (I did not pay for this the dealer swallowed the cost of this when I told him I want paint on the car but I'm not paying extra for it as I was quite happy with a standard colour, but they could not get hold of one, again to get the sale the dealer paid), this was an optional extra, should I have informed the insurers of that?

Did you tell your company that you paid extra for that special paint? It may be metallic, pearlesant or even just Black, but you pay extra for it under normal circumstances.

Alan

[Peter Fitness]

I am not sure exactly what these electronic brakes are, I tow a caravan with a maximum weight of about 1200kg which I tow with an X-Trail and I understand that this is perfectly within the law in this country.

Alan, as I said, it is illegal in NSW (and, I believe, in most other states of Australia) to tow a trailer of any kind which weighs over 750kg loaded, without having electric brakes fitted. They operate on a magnetic principle, controlled by the amount of pressure on the car's foot brake, and are extremely effective. The amount of braking effort can be pre-set on the in car unit, which must be placed within reach of the driver. Caravans weighing over 2 tonnes must also have a breakaway system fitted, which automatically applies the caravan brakes in the event of the van becoming detached from the tow vehicle. Safety chains are also mandatory.

Some info on electric brakes here http://www.lets-getaway.com/electricbrakes.htm

and here http://www.openroad.com.au/travel_camping_totowornottotow.asp The NRMA is the NSW equivalent of the British AA.

I hope this explains the situation here.

Peter.

[alan colson]

Thanks Peter for that information, we do have breakaway systems fitted and over run brakes on the caravan so that when you apply the car brakes a damper system on the drawbar of the caravan compresses which applies the caravan brakes.
Alan

[sweeper]

This topic certainly gets people hot under the collar!
From the replies above, it would appear that people fall into two camps. (1) Exterminate all insurers (2) As for (1) but only after they pay my claim.

I'm no great lover of these companies although in my motoring lifetime of nearly forty years I've had pretty good dealings with the firms and brokers that I have dealt with. The few claims that I have submitted have been settled promptly and fairly (only one was my fault thankfully). I can however see that the prospect of making a claim for a Brand X Model Y car and then trying to claim extra in terms of equipment fitted may just get the insurance company rather upset. Try it on yourself and see what you would say! £20000 for your car (as per spec), yes, they may not be delighted but you would likely get most of the cost but then try the touch "oh yes, there's the little matter of £xxxxxx that I want for my extra gear". Would you be a happy little camper? When you consider that many of the cars stolen today are stripped or cloned, how can you prove that the stuff was fitted or even worse, how can your insurers verify that it was installed?

I still consider the attitude taken by my broker to be the most sensible that I have come across in many years. Be honest with your declaration when buying insurance. The vast majority of the gear people have mentioned will not attract an increase in premiums. It's only when you don't put it up front and then make a claim that you hit problems. Safety items should never be a cause for concern to your company.
Of course, if you are good with a set of spanners and have changed your engine set up to one which will get you to warp 8 in 2 seconds, can you blame them for getting a bit ratty? 
In terms of the vehicle description (model etc), the details are all logged on the data base. I was not aware that my daily drive was a special edition. The insurance company told me that, even the main dealer I bought it from didn't disclose the facts!
Strange old world ain't it?

   

[dodgy geezer]

"...I can however see that the prospect of making a claim for a Brand X Model Y car and then trying to claim extra in terms of equipment fitted may just get the insurance company rather upset..."

I think the reasoning is a little more complex than that - though claiming for extras is certainly an issue.

Insurance companies have armies of actuaries pouring over detailed claim figures, trying to devise statistical algorithms which lead to the most profit. If cars are not randomly crashed or stolen, and you can determine a property which co-relates with claims, you will be able to arrange for your batch of insured cars to have less claims than your competitors, which means more profits for you. This is why you get all sorts of complex questions to answer before buying insurance.

So a 'go-faster' stripe probably co-relates with boy racers, and insurance companies would rather someone else insured that risk. Thus the premium goes up and the service goes down, to try to persuade you to go elsewhere. I would guess that anyone modifying their car at all probably means that they like their car, and drive it a lot - an insurance company would prefer to insure a car which spends most of its time parked at home. Anyone adding a safety feature like rear bumper sensors is probably worried about bumping the rear of the car - another good reason to avoid them....

These features do not even have to have anything to do with the car - if an actuary determines that people with green front doors have more accidents, do not be surprised to have to answer questions about your house's paintwork.....

[Colin Bishop]

Interesting points DG and no doubt correct. However I would disagree with your comment about parking sensors. With some cars, because of the design, it can be very difficult to judge just where the rear bumper is because you cannot effectively 'see' the back of the vehicle. In that situation the things can save you a lot of grief and money.

I think there is also the other side of the story in that a lot of people see the insurers as easy targets. If somebody has collided with you then one of the first things they will ask is 'how many people were in the other car?' A common scam is for the other driver to claim that there were a couple of passengers and that they all need compensating for whiplash.

Most people's views are coloured by experience. People often say to me that they have got a really good deal on their insurance compared with me to which I would reply ' waiit and see how they deal with your claim.' If it's cheap then there is a reason.

As Sweeper says, being upfront with a reputable firm gives you the best chance of avoiding hassle.

Colin

[alan colson]

I thought when I took out my insurance that I was being totally upfront, we get the comparison sites rammed down our throats on TV, this is were I got my insurance from and also the wifes, it asks is your car modified, click YES has the engine been chipped, has it been fitted with Alloy wheels, has it got tinted windows and so on and so on, about 40 things you can tick. Can you click has the car had REAR PARKING SENSORS fitted, can you Bo*****s. Was I wrong, or was the insurance company wrong, or is the comparison site wrong?
Alan

[dodgy geezer]

"...With some cars, because of the design, it can be very difficult to judge just where the rear bumper is because you cannot effectively 'see' the back of the vehicle. In that situation the things can save you a lot of grief and money..."

My point is that the insurance company actuaries won't be thinking "Here is a person who is taking due care to avoid an accident". They will be thinking: "He cannot effectively 'see' the back of the vehicle? I don't want that insurance on my books...".