OH GOD...my insurance may not be valid....
Discussion
My jag guy has just pointed something out to me that I had not given any thought at all...
Last year i had my windows professionally tinted, 'light smoke' on the sides and 'Dark Smoke'rear screen (pretty dark but you can see through it in daylight from outside) and i never thought about mentioning it to my insurance company and it has no negative effect on my vision.
When i called my Insurance co to report the accident, they asked me if the car had been modified in any way, and i told them there were no engine mods but the car was immaculate and has had a complete body restoration and all the suspension and brakes have been replaced with new (the truth) and it has been tinted and had a new headlining etc...
My mechanic thinks I could be in trouble because of the tints, because i did not tell my insurance co when i did it..
What do you guys think? This could be really bad if they decide to not pay out over a technicality.
If the worst happens Could I not say my windows were all open when i crashed? The back window being darkened would have no bearing on me driving up someones arse....
I am little worried...lets hope the insurance examiner doesn't notice i guess...But i told them on the phone...what a pratt, i didn't even think about it.
>>> Edited by hedders on Wednesday 21st January 21:21
Last year i had my windows professionally tinted, 'light smoke' on the sides and 'Dark Smoke'rear screen (pretty dark but you can see through it in daylight from outside) and i never thought about mentioning it to my insurance company and it has no negative effect on my vision.
When i called my Insurance co to report the accident, they asked me if the car had been modified in any way, and i told them there were no engine mods but the car was immaculate and has had a complete body restoration and all the suspension and brakes have been replaced with new (the truth) and it has been tinted and had a new headlining etc...
My mechanic thinks I could be in trouble because of the tints, because i did not tell my insurance co when i did it..
What do you guys think? This could be really bad if they decide to not pay out over a technicality.
If the worst happens Could I not say my windows were all open when i crashed? The back window being darkened would have no bearing on me driving up someones arse....
I am little worried...lets hope the insurance examiner doesn't notice i guess...But i told them on the phone...what a pratt, i didn't even think about it.
>>> Edited by hedders on Wednesday 21st January 21:21
depends on your insurance company Hedders.
some, when mentioning POWER increasing mods, dont bat an eyelid (when they could increase premiums) when explained that they are similar, but better quality to standard products.
your just going to have to sit this out. i dont think arguing that your windows were down will help. you didnt "declare" so the insurance is invalid before you were driving on that day
good luck, big-lad
some, when mentioning POWER increasing mods, dont bat an eyelid (when they could increase premiums) when explained that they are similar, but better quality to standard products.
your just going to have to sit this out. i dont think arguing that your windows were down will help. you didnt "declare" so the insurance is invalid before you were driving on that day
good luck, big-lad
In my experience, since this has no bearing on the accident, they'll not be concerned.
Insurance companies get bad press on marginal decisions, but unless you get particularly unlucky with a moody loss adjuster, you'll be fine.
I've seen insurers settle okay in every case I've known of. Not least an Impreza turned on it's roof with undisclosed engine/exhaust mods and a Tamora writen off by a driver with inadvertently undeclared points.
>> Edited by CarZee on Wednesday 21st January 21:24
Insurance companies get bad press on marginal decisions, but unless you get particularly unlucky with a moody loss adjuster, you'll be fine.
I've seen insurers settle okay in every case I've known of. Not least an Impreza turned on it's roof with undisclosed engine/exhaust mods and a Tamora writen off by a driver with inadvertently undeclared points.
>> Edited by CarZee on Wednesday 21st January 21:24
I guess i could have the tints removed, before the inspector sees it, and then say i was thinking of a different car i had had tinted when i was talking to the insurance co...i was still in shock etc...
Can they be removed or would i need to replace the glass? Is it illegal to drive without side windows?
I could have teh jag guy remove them
Can they be removed or would i need to replace the glass? Is it illegal to drive without side windows?
I could have teh jag guy remove them
I remember reading in The Manchester Evening news a few years ago about this young lad that had his car nicked, worth about £1000 and the insurance refused to pay out because he had fitted some after market PLASTIC wheel trims worth around £20..
They argued he had made the car more desirable and should have declared it....
btw: I,m going to Liverpool next week to visit my wheeltrims......
They argued he had made the car more desirable and should have declared it....
btw: I,m going to Liverpool next week to visit my wheeltrims......
dragstar said:
depends on your insurance company Hedders.
some, when mentioning POWER increasing mods, dont bat an eyelid (when they could increase premiums) when explained that they are similar, but better quality to standard products.
your just going to have to sit this out. i dont think arguing that your windows were down will help. you didnt "declare" so the insurance is invalid before you were driving on that day
good luck, big-lad
Well if it makes any difference, the car is on Classic car insurance. I am not sure if they look at things differently from normal insurers..i have no experience of insurance claims..this is my first time.
I have claimed against other peoples insurance before..and i hoped it would stay that way.
My XJ-S has a dark tinted rear-windscreen. I assume that it came from the factory like that, and know nothing if the insurance co ask. Are you sure that you didn't buy the car with it already tinted, and that the PO told you that the car was like it from new? 
I mean how awful that the PO lied to, but hardly your fault!!!!!!!!
I mean how awful that the PO lied to, but hardly your fault!!!!!!!! Sheepy said:
My XJ-S has a dark tinted rear-windscreen. I assume that it came from the factory like that, and know nothing if the insurance co ask. Are you sure that you didn't buy the car with it already tinted, and that the PO told you that the car was like it from new?
Thats true...could have happened, only problem is that I bought it from the guy that will be making the claim for me...My 'jag guy' ..
He is an independent jag specialist, all the local mechanics call him up (including the Jaguar franchises) when they can't figure the problem out
So he would have known...
I was reading the small print at elephant and also direct line while searching for a renewal quote on my car.
Both of them said that ANY modification from standard must be declared regardless of it being on the car when you got it or not.
That really leaves it wide open for a smart ar$ed claims assesor to work his/her evil magic.
Both of them said that ANY modification from standard must be declared regardless of it being on the car when you got it or not.
That really leaves it wide open for a smart ar$ed claims assesor to work his/her evil magic.
As a fellow PH'er I hope you're OK.
BUT
I worked for AXA in motor claims last year, their official policy is to refuse claims whereby a policy holder attempted to escape paying the premium increases due to modifications.
The claims system almost certainly will have flagged it up as an undeclared modification, however, if they haven't mentioned it so far I expect you will be OK.
I wouldn't worry about removing the tints etc personally.
If you need any advice, mail me through my profile.
BUT
I worked for AXA in motor claims last year, their official policy is to refuse claims whereby a policy holder attempted to escape paying the premium increases due to modifications.
The claims system almost certainly will have flagged it up as an undeclared modification, however, if they haven't mentioned it so far I expect you will be OK.
I wouldn't worry about removing the tints etc personally.
If you need any advice, mail me through my profile.
I have spent approx £7000 bringing the car up to scratch in the four years i have had it insured with these guys, and i have not declared any of it...as far as they are concerned it is only worth market value...I am an idiot.
So i have to get them to fix it and then i have to get the value of the car confirmed and get an agreed value sorted out, cos its worth three times what they would pay out based on market value..
they would probably only pay out a £1.5k for an 82 Daimler, but you don't see (m)any as nice as mine these days...to the right buyer it is atleast a £5k car.
But to be honest my main concern is that if they say my insurance is not valid, will i be liable for the damages from the guy i hit? or will i still have third party insurance?
>> Edited by hedders on Wednesday 21st January 22:27
So i have to get them to fix it and then i have to get the value of the car confirmed and get an agreed value sorted out, cos its worth three times what they would pay out based on market value..
they would probably only pay out a £1.5k for an 82 Daimler, but you don't see (m)any as nice as mine these days...to the right buyer it is atleast a £5k car.
But to be honest my main concern is that if they say my insurance is not valid, will i be liable for the damages from the guy i hit? or will i still have third party insurance?
>> Edited by hedders on Wednesday 21st January 22:27
mungo said:
I think you will be fine. I once had an accident and the insurance company needed a copy of my license which I sent to them. They noticed I had 3 points I never declared...
Rather than just invalidate my insurance they simply asked me to pay the difference on my policy before they instructed repairs...
Thats another thing...I have 3 undeclared points too...
scameras... OK - despite insurance companies often trying to use excuses as this - the key thing is "was the modification material to the event"?
The example of the wheel trims potentially was because if it did make it more desirable to being nicked that that is material.
The tints I can't see would be material - if they get arsy go to www.theiob.org.uk/ and search on "modifications" on their archive (the FSA now deals with this).
A quick look shows some gems...
"MODIFIED VEHICLES
See also: NON-DISCLOSURE AND MISREPRESENTATION; PROPORTIONALITY
1. Addition to a body kit - whether vehicle had been ' modified'
Following the theft of the applicant' s Ford Orion Ghia the insurer advised him that it considered he had not made full disclosure regarding modifications to the vehicle. Spoilers, skirts, special road wheels and a special steering wheel had been added. The applicant asserted that the vehicle had been altered but not modified.
The specific question on the proposal form was ' has [the] vehicle been modified?' , to which he answered: ' No' . There was little doubt that the additions were the kind of feature which the insurer would have wished to know about, since they increased the risk of theft by making the car look more attractive. However, in the Ombudsman' s view, the use of the word ' modified' could well be taken to mean fundamental changes to the original performance specification, with emphasis on ' fundamental' .. Car accessory shops were full of items which car owners might place in or fix on to their vehicles, and the insurer accepted, for example, that if the only alteration made had been the painting of stripes down the side of the vehicle that would be a matter about which it need not know. It was not easy to say where the dividing line was to be drawn, but the point of the Statement of General Insurance Practice was that such questions were for insurers to make clear, and not for the public to judge.
It was considered that the body kit and other items fitted to the vehicle were merely accessories, or ' bolt-on' additions, and not fundamental modifications. Were the applicant to tell a friend that he was driving a modified Ford Orion, the friend might well visualise a vehicle which had been dramatically changed, perhaps by the fitting of a different engine. Possibly, the analogy of a car adapted for rallying had some relevance, but if all that was meant was that a body kit had been fitted, the word ' modified' might be overstating the changes. Certainly, the Ombudsman was not persuaded that the word ' modified' was sufficient to alert policyholders to the need to disclose alterations of the kind which had taken place here. Accordingly, whatever information the insurer might have wished to know, the applicant had in fact made proper disclosure on the proposal in response to the question which was actually asked of him. "
To whit the insurance company had to pay out even for a "material" change
The IOB (and now the FSA) is your friend in cases such as this - and the process is really easy if they get arsy.
I wouldn't worry about it - but *do* get the car properly valued once the repairs are done and get it onto the policy correctly.
J
The example of the wheel trims potentially was because if it did make it more desirable to being nicked that that is material.
The tints I can't see would be material - if they get arsy go to www.theiob.org.uk/ and search on "modifications" on their archive (the FSA now deals with this).
A quick look shows some gems...
"MODIFIED VEHICLES
See also: NON-DISCLOSURE AND MISREPRESENTATION; PROPORTIONALITY
1. Addition to a body kit - whether vehicle had been ' modified'
Following the theft of the applicant' s Ford Orion Ghia the insurer advised him that it considered he had not made full disclosure regarding modifications to the vehicle. Spoilers, skirts, special road wheels and a special steering wheel had been added. The applicant asserted that the vehicle had been altered but not modified.
The specific question on the proposal form was ' has [the] vehicle been modified?' , to which he answered: ' No' . There was little doubt that the additions were the kind of feature which the insurer would have wished to know about, since they increased the risk of theft by making the car look more attractive. However, in the Ombudsman' s view, the use of the word ' modified' could well be taken to mean fundamental changes to the original performance specification, with emphasis on ' fundamental' .. Car accessory shops were full of items which car owners might place in or fix on to their vehicles, and the insurer accepted, for example, that if the only alteration made had been the painting of stripes down the side of the vehicle that would be a matter about which it need not know. It was not easy to say where the dividing line was to be drawn, but the point of the Statement of General Insurance Practice was that such questions were for insurers to make clear, and not for the public to judge.
It was considered that the body kit and other items fitted to the vehicle were merely accessories, or ' bolt-on' additions, and not fundamental modifications. Were the applicant to tell a friend that he was driving a modified Ford Orion, the friend might well visualise a vehicle which had been dramatically changed, perhaps by the fitting of a different engine. Possibly, the analogy of a car adapted for rallying had some relevance, but if all that was meant was that a body kit had been fitted, the word ' modified' might be overstating the changes. Certainly, the Ombudsman was not persuaded that the word ' modified' was sufficient to alert policyholders to the need to disclose alterations of the kind which had taken place here. Accordingly, whatever information the insurer might have wished to know, the applicant had in fact made proper disclosure on the proposal in response to the question which was actually asked of him. "
To whit the insurance company had to pay out even for a "material" change
The IOB (and now the FSA) is your friend in cases such as this - and the process is really easy if they get arsy.
I wouldn't worry about it - but *do* get the car properly valued once the repairs are done and get it onto the policy correctly.
J
Muncher said:
A very, very worst case scenario would be them paying for the third party damage, then asking you to re-imburse them. That is very unlikely though.
Which company are you with?
My broker is Footman James, the insurer is Avon.
Another wierd thing is, I mentioned earlier that its classic insurance which means no business use and a limited mileage (5k a year) but i just renewed a few days ago (the policy that was current when i crashed ran out two days afterwards) and my new policy is unlimited mileage, i even called them to confirm and they said it was right...so i now have fully comp insurance on a V12 Daimler with unlimited mileage for £260 a year! But it will probably go up if they honour this claim...
Actually...I have already paid for my next years insurance (just got my new policy today) so can they increase it now?
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff