Jase, whats that snorkel exhaust for? you going through big puddles or something?

Self-righting mechanism? :confused:

Chris

Would be interesting to find out more....

Chris

Not interesting at all. :thumbdwn:

Most things associated with Insurance companies are very dull & dreary.

They do thier best to sell everything to you in your policy, then when push comes to shove , like a claim, do some completely rediculous things (like this post suggested) to pi$$ you off.

I believe in reading the small print before I sign and mark/query anything that looks like an obvious get-out clause, since insurance will effectively revert to third part legal payout only (if you see what I mean).

Therefore, the company must be relying on an existing clause in its contract that it's trying to enforce, even if stretching it to its limits. IOW Something somwhere in the contract must have to suport this for an existing claim however tenuous, IMO.

Of course new get-out clauses will immediately be written if an insurance company does get away with not paying out for a graphic (on the face of the limited info given here), which is possible if it's not contested because "They said No and they know best."

I doubt anyone's taking this lightly, johnjohnhealy, in real terms. It's just so incredible that it is laughable - and you must think so, otherwise you wouldn't have posted.

This says three things to me: (1) the specific circumstances, (2) how these can e extended in the generality and (3) the wisdom (as you've said) of checking with one's own insurance company if in doubt.

Sorry for long post.

Regards

Mo

Well I can assure you that its not rubbish, and it is happening to a middle aged woman who had the website of her company written across the back of her vehicle,

Perhaps she only had S.D.P cover , but was using her car for business travel, which should be noteified.

Perhaps she only had S.D.P cover , but was using her car for business travel, which should be noteified.

Now that sounds like quite a plausible explanation.

Essentially they saw the stickers and refused the claim but it was actually done because they could show it was being used for business purposes.

Hi

This is quite possibly a correct course of action for the insurer. If the insurer can prove or reasonably state that the presence of the graphic was in any way contributory to the occurrence of the incident being claimed for, then they are within their rights, albeit tenuously, to refuse the claim.

A good scenario would be that a car has www.toolsales.com in the back. Someone breaks into the vehichle, as a result of reading said sticker, a claim has arisen caused by an undisclosed mod.

Equally, scanarios that may go against an insurer could be a "no tools left in vehicle overnight" sticker. Also, if I understand correctly, non disclosure will not generally void your policy if what was not disclosed had no bearing on the cause of the incident, no matter how much your insurer would like it to be otherwise. So if you had a set of non disclosed alloys and your car was stolen, the insurer could say they increased the desirability of the car and helped single it out for theft. However, if the car was written off as a result of an electrical fire, the insurer would not have to pay out for the wheels, but would have to pay the rest as if the car was standard.

Could be wrong on this as I only did 6 months in insurance claims years ago. Too boring by miles.

Chris

I will try and find out some more information next time i see the ex, but let me reassure you that neither me nor her are making this up, nor is this a chinese wispers type scenario, she is the senior claims manager of the company, and she's paid handsomely for her position, believe me, she wouldn't have said it if it wasn't correct.

The claim as it currently stands is being refused as the vehicle in question was rear ended and the 3rd party is stating that he was distracted by the writing on the rear of the vehicle. I will try and find out who is eventually held accountable, but as with all things insurance related - it could be a while, in the mean time, if you have these kind of graphics on your car, just check with your insurers.

the 3rd party is stating that he was distracted by the writing on the rear of the vehicle

Maybe the 3rd party should stay at home then, cos every other white van I come accross on my journey has the company name written in all sorts of lettering on he back, sides and front...

I will try and find out some more information next time i see the ex' date=' but let me reassure you that neither me nor her are making this up, nor is this a chinese wispers type scenario, she is the senior claims manager of the company, and she's paid handsomely for her position, believe me, she wouldn't have said it if it wasn't correct.

The claim as it currently stands is being refused as the vehicle in question was rear ended and the 3rd party is stating that he was distracted by the writing on the rear of the vehicle. I will try and find out who is eventually held accountable, but as with all things insurance related - it could be a while, in the mean time, if you have these kind of graphics on your car, just check with your insurers.[/quote']

Hi

It is the responsibility of the driver of the car behind to ensure they have plenty of time to stop. Even if the "victims" brake lights were proved to have been defective, the person behind is still in the wrong. Sounds like the lawyers are getting richer again.

Chris

Your right of course, and I do understand the stupidity of the case, but the amazing thing is, it's happening, i'm sure there must be some more to it and hopefully i'll find out.

Do you think the writing on number plates could be seen as distracting? Mine advertise a friends business, he does make number plates up as well as other things.

Do you think the writing on number plates could be seen as distracting? Mine advertise a friends business, he does make number plates up as well as other things.

Hi Moose and welcome home back. As a quick synopsis, I think johnjohnhealy is saying that if you want to be on the safe side, then it is best to check with your own insurer. However, you might have missed this recent thread on numberplates:

http://www.briskoda.net/forums/styling-car-care/removing-dealer-stickers/49962/

Regards

Mo

It's considered a cosmetic mod IIRC and there are probably guidelines etc. I doubt a small briskoda logo in the side windows would cause a problem, but having one on the rear window might if it's a full-size banner one.

That said you could argue a TV screen in the back of a 4x4 is distracting too. You've gotta get so darn close to follow the story - seriously though, it's probably just a cosmetic mod and in that case you'd have to submit photos of the vehicle following the insurer's guidelines.

Kinda hoping mudflaps won't warrant that kind of treatment though :eek:

Kinda hoping mudflaps won't warrant that kind of treatment though :eek:

If it's not standard spec, then you have to declare it

You must declare anything that your car has above it's standard trim level, even dealer fitted options such as Xenons, Sunroofs, Alloys, etc.

They're all on the form, next to the 'proper mods' - and btw the Xenons aren't dealer fit, they're factory fit so you don't have to declare those. Dealer did fit my Parrot Bluetooth kit and that was declared separately.

They're all on the form, next to the 'proper mods' - and btw the Xenons aren't dealer fit, they're factory fit so you don't have to declare those. Dealer did fit my Parrot Bluetooth kit and that was declared separately.

You do have to declare anything that is over and above your trim level, so even factory options must be declared, if your car doesnt come with xenons unless you tick the box and pay the extra (or even if the dealer gives them as a no cost option) you must declare them, only if they are standard fit for your trim level do you not have to declare them.

Glad it's all on file then

You do have to declare anything that is over and above your trim level, so even factory options must be declared, if your car doesnt come with xenons unless you tick the box and pay the extra (or even if the dealer gives them as a no cost option) you must declare them, only if they are standard fit for your trim level do you not have to declare them.

Thats something that insurance companies tell different stories about.

Some seem to class any optional extras as mods and will load your premium exactly the same as remaps etc.

Others treat factory fit extras as no extra risk and just include the cost in the value of the car. Some want them declared , others don't care.

You must declare anything that your car has above it's standard trim level, even dealer fitted options such as Xenons, Sunroofs, Alloys, etc.

1. Read my post above John

2. Since when were Xenons and sunroofs dealer fit options. You mean factory fit and these DO NOT affect your insurance

Hope this helps to alleviate your worries and concerns

Since when were Xenons and sunroofs dealer fit options. You mean factory fit and these DO NOT affect your insurance

Hope this helps to alleviate your worries and concerns

Yes they do.

Either factory fit such as the items mentioned or dealer fit such as parking sensors, sill plates, extra badges etc etc.

Anything that is not standard for your model MUST BE DECLARED.

Yes they do.

Either factory fit such as the items mentioned or dealer fit such as parking sensors' date=' sill plates, extra badges etc etc.

Anything that is not standard for your model MUST BE DECLARED.[/quote']

I'm sorry but you are wrong!! Options fitted either by a dealer OR the factory do NOT affect the insurance. However, if you start fiddling with air intakes and the like then they do.

When i had my Peugeot, it was only an LX, so came with steel wheels. I had Peugeot alloys put on, paid the extra and had Peugeot insurance for a year but when i switched to a different insurance company, i never declared my alloys and i was still paid out when my car got written off a few years later.

I'm sorry but you are wrong!! Options fitted either by a dealer OR the factory do NOT affect the insurance. However, if you start fiddling with air intakes and the like then they do.

He isn't wrong, although it varies with difefernt insurers and you need to read your policy carefully. For example Elephant (and most of the rest of the Admiral group) state that they will "only meet the cost of replacing parts needed for the car to meet the manufacturer's standard specification. Manufacturers optional extras are only covered where they are declared and we have agreed to cover them." Personally I think its an outrageous clause but its there in many policies and worth checking.

Exactly, I know this from first hand experience, my Superb has many options on it and I had to declare them to my insurers or they wouldn't have covered them.

Also my Ex works for one of the largest uk based insurers, and she's says thats how it is too so there :haha: