Declare everything. If in doubt, declare it again. Declare it in writing.
If they charge you an additional premium for it, or they refuse to cover you, then just be thankful they didn't find out for the first time after an accident or other claim.
And if they say its ok, then get that in writing as well.
Don't think just because it doesn't affect the performance they don't care, Aprilia's experience would not be unusual.
Better safe than sorry.
|
The whole thing is utterly ridiculous and is yet more excuse for insurance companies to extract money from us.
Some examples.
My car has a genuine Ford styling pack fitted to it. It was available on my model is a factory option. It is was also available on a similar trim level, as a standard fit item. Both cars look identical, both cars have the same insurance group. A quote on a standard 2.0 Ghia X and a quote on a standard 2.0 Zetec-S is exactly the same. Despite this, I have to pay an extra £50 a year and have my car classed as modified becuase the styling pack was not standard. Work THAT one out - it's just as 'desireable' (I use that word begrudging, its a V reg Mondeo ffs) to theives as the identical in appearance and performance Zetec-S, yet costs more to insure. Bizarre.
Some more issues - I wondered about fitting a longlife airfilter like a K&N, to reduce the ability to have to keep changing filters. Can't do that, thats a modification. Must pay the insurer more. But apparently the Halfords air filters are fine. Err, whats the difference? Either its manufacturer made or not, why can you fit a Halfords airfilter without charge yet not one made by another brand?
Another even more interesting one is things which genuinelly DO increase performance - such as Optimax fuel on Japanese performance cars, and performance tyres on any car. You can corner quicker with decent tyres, do you have to inform your insurance company if you change tyres and the tyres selected are not the ones the car came out of the factory with? If so, why? If not, why not? Why don't Impreza owners have to class Optimax as a mod if it gives them another 20bhp?
Why do I have to declare my stainless steel backbox as a modified exhuast system when the only reason I bought it was becuase it wasn't any more expensive than buying one from Ford, and offers zero performance gains?
Why, when I had 3 buckled wheels last year, did I have to spend time going around looking for another set of the Ford wheels instead of the far easier method of just buying a whole new set becuase otherwise I'd have to pay more insurance? And even if I had bought other wheels, paid extra, then had them stolen, they'd not have paid out! They take your money for these 'modifications' but dont ACTUALLY cover them. Money for nothing, IMHO.
I appreciate the need to inform the insurer, and pay an extra premium, if your car is modified in such a way that it's quicker, or that it's more likely to be stolen but in the above examples I think it's an absolute mickytake.
My insurer were more interested in taking money off me becuase of the Ford produced styling pack than for my 3 points for speeding! Which do YOU think is the biggest indication of risk!
|
My insurer were more interested in taking money off me
>>
most commercial firms exist to make a profit. insurance companies exist not to provide a service to their loyal customers, but to make a profit.
now if they all were like the fireservice that aprillia so loves, or other state sectors, then you could demand that your mp take up the matter in parliament and give you your insurance free of any extra charges.
( actually, i tell a lie, because you will find that most state sectors now charge you fees for this and that. for example, you cannot photocopy a page from the highway code because that would breach crown copyright and you must buy the full version instead. )
|
|
|
|
Almost anything different from factory spec is a 'modification'. I fitted a front strut brace to one of my cars. The insurance company regarded this as a mod because (according to the guy at the call centre) this would indicate that I like going around corners fast and so am more likely to have an accident.
Crazy insurers. You could argue that superior handling means you are less likely to spin off the road or hit another car if forced to swerve! Take your point on board that must declare everything.
|
Would that include non-standard wheel-trims? If so most of my neighbours are uninsured!
Also would minor cosmetic mods affect third-party claims against you in an accident?
(I know they can affect theft claims because they supposedly increase the risk.)
|
|
What about all those people with windscreens so dirty, they can hardly see out?
|
|
I had a new windscreen fitted my RAC autowindsceens, it might not be a Ford one, is that a modification? ;)
|
When I had my wheel arch resprayed, the body shop was not a Renault one. So presumably I am uninsured because I have non-original paint on it...
On this basis practically every car on the road is uninsured since when one needs new tyres, how many of us fit exactly the same make and type as the car left the factory with?
|
|
You must declare all factors which are material to the risk. If you are not sure whether a factor is material or not, then to be safe you should declare it anyway since the onus is upon you to ensure that your insurer is aware. If you are unable to decide whether different water in your water bottle is a modification, then you have bigger problems than your car insurance.
|
The other part is how the insurer must behave if there is a non-disclosure - aprt from showing that it is a non-disclosure he must then show that it would have caused him to handle the risk differently.
If it would simply have caused him to charge an additional premium, then pretty much all he is allowed to do now is charge that premium, not dodge the claim.
For him to refuse your claim and recover third party expenses from you he will almost certainly have to show that he would have declined the risk had that fact been disclosed by you and perhaps that you intentionally didn't disclose it.
SO the fact that you didn't disclose non-standard paint would probably be irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
On this basis practically every car on the road is uninsured since when one needs new tyres, how many of us fit exactly the same make and type as the car left the factory with?
Tyres are made to a standard so if you fit tyres of the same size and load and speed rating you are fine, anything outside this though and you need to tell your insurer.
It is easy to fall foul of this when buying a second hand car, afterall how does the 3rd or 4th owner know what the correct spec tyres are, whether it has a K&N filter fitted or perhaps something even more internal such as a highlift cam etc.
|
|
Yes and increasingly these days the use of chips to increase the power. How would anyone know when buying a car? Is the responsibility on the seller to inform the buyer or is it up to the buyer to ask these questions?
|
Chips and ECU mods are a good example, also if for instance a car is bought from a dealer then the dealer can only inform the buyer if the previous owner has in turn told the dealer.
Nevertheless I suspect .. sorry Mr Insurer I did not know it was a mod, it was like that when I bought it .. would not wash.
|
|
|
|
be honest, truthful, and ask or declare anything you are not sure of, and as no-fm2r says, get it in writing.
interesting case here, where the ombudsman found in favour of polciyholder in respect of modifications, but she lost the claim due to other facts not disclosed:
www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ombuds...m
When the insurer investigated a new claim, it came to light that the car had been fitted with oversized alloy wheels, spoilers, and chrome wheel arches, and that the policyholder?s husband, a named driver on the policy, ...
...
On the evidence presented, we accepted the policyholder genuinely believed the car was not modified when she bought it. ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
>> Almost anything different from factory spec is a 'modification'. >> >> I fitted a front strut brace to one of my cars. >> The insurance company regarded this as a mod because (according >> to the guy at the call centre) this would indicate that >> I like going around corners fast and so am more likely >> to have an accident. >> Crazy insurers. You could argue that superior handling means you are less likely to spin off the road or hit another car if forced to swerve! Take your point on board that must declare everything.
Or Devil's Advocate: the standard spec provides adequate handling for everyday driving. Improving the specification would/could imply that you wish to drive in a more, um, competitive (?) way, thereby increasing your risk profile.
|
|
|
|
|
