View Full Version : Do slip-on cans affect insurance?
Slip on cans don't affect performance, aparantly.
Does this mean that insurance shouldnt be affected on a restricted bike?
timwilky
07-01-09, 02:33 PM
no, insurance IS affected irrespective of there being no performance increase. If they ask you for any modifications you must declare it. Otherwise you give them the opportunity to walk any from any claim.
Some insurers will simply not accept after market cans, end of. Even though in the event of a claim it can be a cost reduction in the claim valuation compared to replacing an OEM system.
I would definitely agree that you should declare what you've got.
I've got a scorpion street extreme getting fitted to my SV and my insurance company (mce) simply asked whether it would affect the bhp, I said no and so they said that I didn't need to declare it...
i got told by carol nash when taking out my policy that if there is now power increase of more than 5% i think they dont put up the price give them a try?
Dangerous Dave
07-01-09, 03:40 PM
No matter what the modification you should tell your insurance company to protect yourself in the event of a claim, just me I have been on the wrong side before. As said above, some insurance companies will not insure you with a race can, this will make your insurance invalid and in the event of a claim leave you with no insurance and operating a vehicle without insurance which is illegal.
Most of the common modifications you make will have no effect on a premium.
MattCollins
07-01-09, 03:41 PM
4fold, you might want that in writing, or declare it anyway.
Cheers
Edit: Oh Crap! Too slow.
slightly OT but, as i said Carol nash said they wont add anything to the premium as it has no impact on power, however nothing on my policy mentions ive fitted it...should i bring this up with them as i definatly stated it and they definatly asked about the power increase?
ArtyLady
07-01-09, 04:13 PM
slightly OT but, as i said Carol nash said they wont add anything to the premium as it has no impact on power, however nothing on my policy mentions ive fitted it...should i bring this up with them as i definatly stated it and they definatly asked about the power increase?
I had this problem - although I told them about my can they did not mention the modification on the policy documents so I queried it. They said dont worry its on our system and the company you're with do cover non road legal cans - I said can I have that in writing please and they sent me a letter the next day confirming it. :cool:
No matter what the modification you should tell your insurance company to protect yourself in the event of a claim, just me I have been on the wrong side before. As said above, some insurance companies will not insure you with a race can, this will make your insurance invalid and in the event of a claim leave you with no insurance and operating a vehicle without insurance which is illegal.
Most of the common modifications you make will have no effect on a premium.
It's a scorpion street extreme, so being road legal isn't a problem.
When declaring modifications, does this include purely visual mods such as screens and tail tidy? or is this just covered in the price you insure the bike for? (which by the way i plan to insure the bike for £3000 when it's only costing me under 2 grand).
kwak zzr
07-01-09, 04:50 PM
declare it, they will look for any reason not to pay out in the event of a claim.
Declare everything and make sure you have it in writing. It's all very well saying "it's fine, we have it recorded on our system", but in the event of a crash, you have no proof that you declared if you haven't been sent it in writing, which would make it easy for them to deny ever knowing.
Dangerous Dave
07-01-09, 05:15 PM
slightly OT but, as i said Carol nash said they wont add anything to the premium as it has no impact on power, however nothing on my policy mentions ive fitted it...should i bring this up with them as i definatly stated it and they definatly asked about the power increase?
Should be written on the certificate, other wise there is no proof it is covered.
It's a scorpion street extreme, so being road legal isn't a problem.
Some question anything not OEM, although there are very rare complaints/comments about this now.
When declaring modifications, does this include purely visual mods such as screens and tail tidy? or is this just covered in the price you insure the bike for? (which by the way i plan to insure the bike for £3000 when it's only costing me under 2 grand).
Here is an example for an an*l insurance company, an SV650S Sport is covered to have lower fairings but an SV650S is not unless you declare them.
Be sensible with what you declare, especially with saftey items like brakes and susupension as that can lead you into trouble. If you fit an aftermarket part to your bike and expect it to be repaired in a claim then declare it.
To insure the bike over market value you have to have a fixed value clause. Typing in 3000 as it's value won't give you this. I told insurance about the lower fairings and CCC can and they didn't care, just said as long as it's not a full system or have BHP gains. He went on to say that anything cosmetic done to the bike (a la fairings) they wouldn't need notifying; heated grips, tail tidy and so on.
mike_avfc
07-01-09, 09:39 PM
dont think if you say its worth 3 grand then they will pay this, they'll pay what they think is market rate for the bike at the time of the incident.
works the other way as well in home insurance, if you are insured for say 20k and you claim a burglary but they think you had 30k's worth of stuff, this means you are underinsured by 33%, therefore they will calculate the payment and redcuce it by 33% due to you being under-insured. unrealted i know, but something i read about a few times.
yep i tell my insurance of every aftermarket thing on the bike but their really good about it and send me a letter to confirm that i had informed them of the changes and no extra charge result.
sv-robo
09-01-09, 07:03 PM
No matter what the modification you should tell your insurance company to protect yourself in the event of a claim, .
+1
Agreed, & it's a right ball-ache when insuring the rr.
I declare all modifications and never had a problem. When I damn near wrote the bike off in January last year they paid up without a murmer, and the bike had all manner of mods done, all declared.
Policy doc came through today and there's no mods listed, I told them 3 times and everytime they just said anythings fine as long as there's no performance increase. Should I try and get it in writing?
Dave20046
09-01-09, 08:25 PM
No matter what the modification you should tell your insurance company to protect yourself in the event of a claim, just me I have been on the wrong side before. As said above, some insurance companies will not insure you with a race can, this will make your insurance invalid and in the event of a claim leave you with no insurance and operating a vehicle without insurance which is illegal.
Most of the common modifications you make will have no effect on a premium.
Bottoms
Policy doc came through today and there's no mods listed, I told them 3 times and everytime they just said anythings fine as long as there's no performance increase. Should I try and get it in writing? probably be as well to ask for a confirmation in writing bud just incase.:D
ArtyLady
10-01-09, 11:16 AM
Policy doc came through today and there's no mods listed, I told them 3 times and everytime they just said anythings fine as long as there's no performance increase. Should I try and get it in writing?
I did - with Carole Nash. She said it was very unusual and that she would need to get help with writing it :rolleyes:
Ive never said to my insurance companies that i dont have an aftermarket can, but when they say 'does it increase power of the bike', i say 'i dont know as ive never had the bike dynoed and it does not increase the top speed of the bike', what ive said is true as ive never dynoed the bike and i cant see the bike being any faster and anyway you should not be braking the speed limit :p twist on words
yorkie_chris
10-01-09, 07:18 PM
this will make your insurance invalid and in the event of a claim leave you with no insurance and operating a vehicle without insurance which is illegal.
Not that simple.
But you should declare mods anyway...
ArtyLady
10-01-09, 07:39 PM
Not that simple.
But you should declare mods anyway...
I've often wondered what happens if your insurance is declared invalid? (Ive declared everything to try and ensure it doesn't happen to me) Do they still pay out for third party?
I've often wondered what happens if your insurance is declared invalid? (Ive declared everything to try and ensure it doesn't happen to me) Do they still pay out for third party?
Well if you have put a can on and not told them, they could say that the performance was affected, making your crash more likely because the bike was 'faster'.
yorkie_chris
10-01-09, 07:42 PM
Yes, but then they can sue you to reclaim what they paid out. For that they would have to show that undisclosed mods actually caused the accident though.
Edit: All AFAIK, I'm not a lawyer.
ArtyLady
10-01-09, 07:43 PM
Well if you have put a can on and not told them, they could say that the performance was affected, making your crash more likely because the bike was 'faster'.
edit just seen YC's post - and that's what I thought.
Dangerous Dave
13-01-09, 06:28 PM
Do they still pay out for third party?
Do you mean for the third party, if so then no. The third party will have to make the claim through the *can't remember the name of them now but it is a slush fund used for uninsured driver accidents* and they will them make a claim against you to recoup the money.
St0rmer66
13-01-09, 07:44 PM
Do you mean for the third party, if so then no. The third party will have to make the claim through the *can't remember the name of them now but it is a slush fund used for uninsured driver accidents* and they will them make a claim against you to recoup the money.
No, the insurance company will ALWAYS pay out for the third party. It is then up to the insurance company whether they claim this cost back from you.
yorkie_chris
13-01-09, 07:59 PM
Bikesure didn't put my policy up by a penny when I told them about full system, GSXR suspension, "uprated" (ahem) headlights. Cool.
Dave20046
13-01-09, 08:12 PM
Bikesure didn't put my policy up by a penny when I told them about full system, GSXR suspension, "uprated" (ahem) headlights. Cool.
**** I 'might' be with them...really should have done anounced if I needed to shouldn't I.
Dave20046
13-01-09, 08:12 PM
Bikesure didn't put my policy up by a penny when I told them about full system, GSXR suspension, "uprated" (ahem) headlights. Cool.
**** I 'might' be with them...really should have done announced if I needed to shouldn't I.
I'm with bikesure and they told me it wouldn't cost anything, they seem very relaxed
I'm with bikesure and they told me it wouldn't cost anything, they seem very relaxed
+1, just renewed with bikesure myself. The end can, the doubling of mileage, the other accessories fitted and whether i kept it in a shed or on driveway, nothing made a difference to the quote.
vardypeeps
15-01-09, 01:35 PM
I would definitely agree that you should declare what you've got.
I've got a scorpion street extreme getting fitted to my SV and my insurance company (mce) simply asked whether it would affect the bhp, I said no and so they said that I didn't need to declare it...
Phew. I'm with MCE and have a slip on can so that's good news
timwilky
15-01-09, 01:55 PM
No, the insurance company will ALWAYS pay out for the third party. It is then up to the insurance company whether they claim this cost back from you.
No this is definitely not the case.
Many years ago, I was the inspecting engineer for a car that had rolled down a hill, hit 4 cars on the way, and through a house wall causing the house to be declared structurally damaged and consequently demolished.
As a result of my report into the defective breaking system (Lack of maintenance) the drivers policy was declared void and payment to the car/house holders refused.
again I through out a claim for a highly customised morris minor years ago that had run into the back of another vehicle, the owner had an agreed value on his car. The reason, he had not declared the V4 2000 engine that was sat on a jag rear axle and standard moggie minor front brakes. no way could it be expected to stop with all the extra power/weight.
Declare everything.
The car/house holders all successfully sued the car owner for liability for the damage to their property and then the car owner sued his insurance company.
At that point when I attended the high court, there were 6 barrister present, 4 simply to declare an interest plus our for the insurance company and one paid for by the car owners union. (It turned out that his union offered legal assistance to their members).
His claim was the brakes were effective and provided an MOT inspectors report as to their efficiency. My report was simply that at the time of my inspection, the brakes were ineffective. Any change in circumstance between my and his MOT mans inspection was open to question.
However, we and the insurance company won our day in court. His union took a battering as the costs were enormous and he was bankrupted as he had to sell his assets to meet his obligations.
As a result of my report into the defective breaking system
4 cars and a house? thats a very effective breaking system!
timwilky
15-01-09, 02:09 PM
sorry I mis typed braking. ok, dumbass me
ArtyLady
15-01-09, 03:18 PM
No this is definitely not the case.
Many years ago, I was the inspecting engineer for a car that had rolled down a hill, hit 4 cars on the way, and through a house wall causing the house to be declared structurally damaged and consequently demolished.
As a result of my report into the defective breaking system (Lack of maintenance) the drivers policy was declared void and payment to the car/house holders refused.
again I through out a claim for a highly customised morris minor years ago that had run into the back of another vehicle, the owner had an agreed value on his car. The reason, he had not declared the V4 2000 engine that was sat on a jag rear axle and standard moggie minor front brakes. no way could it be expected to stop with all the extra power/weight.
Declare everything.
The car/house holders all successfully sued the car owner for liability for the damage to their property and then the car owner sued his insurance company.
At that point when I attended the high court, there were 6 barrister present, 4 simply to declare an interest plus our for the insurance company and one paid for by the car owners union. (It turned out that his union offered legal assistance to their members).
His claim was the brakes were effective and provided an MOT inspectors report as to their efficiency. My report was simply that at the time of my inspection, the brakes were ineffective. Any change in circumstance between my and his MOT mans inspection was open to question.
However, we and the insurance company won our day in court. His union took a battering as the costs were enormous and he was bankrupted as he had to sell his assets to meet his obligations.
How comes there was so much discrepancy between your report on the brakes and his MOT report? (Im assuming you were trained in MOT procedures to carry this out?) If he provided an MOT inspectors report that the brakes were effective that should have stood up in Court?
timwilky
15-01-09, 03:44 PM
Oh such fun was had that day.
The MOT man who had checked the brakes after I had thrown out the claim was asked of his qualification and replied "City & guilds, MOT approved etc". When asked of mine, BSc in mechanical engineering and currently employed as senior braking systems engineer for Leyland (car by the way was a knackered old allegro). The vehicle handbrake was tested far in advance of MOT requirements for compliance against C&U which gives it its type approval to be on the road in the first place.
It failed at first attempt. the handbrake was poorly adjusted that it did not pull the brake actuating levers which were in turned siezed from a lack of operation.
There was a 17 month delay between my report and his test. You have to remember that after his insurance was thrown out he had to be dragged through the courts by each car and the house holder. before he was in a position to sue his insurers. The owner had had the car returned to him after the roll away. There was enough conjecture that remedial maintenance had been done to the vehicle between inspections that the judge reminded the owner of the implications of perjury.
I had been an independant consulting engineer for some time then. I was experieinced in giving evidence in a court, had advised the barrister as to what questions should be asked and was even able to provide photos of a DTI placed againt the actuating lever in the applied/released conditions.
I felt sorry for those who lost, but not for a prat who fails to maintain his vehicle and causes loss/damage as a result.
ArtyLady
15-01-09, 04:09 PM
Oh such fun was had that day.
The MOT man who had checked the brakes after I had thrown out the claim was asked of his qualification and replied "City & guilds, MOT approved etc". When asked of mine, BSc in mechanical engineering and currently employed as senior braking systems engineer for Leyland (car by the way was a knackered old allegro). The vehicle handbrake was tested far in advance of MOT requirements for compliance against C&U which gives it its type approval to be on the road in the first place.
It failed at first attempt. the handbrake was poorly adjusted that it did not pull the brake actuating levers which were in turned siezed from a lack of operation.
There was a 17 month delay between my report and his test. You have to remember that after his insurance was thrown out he had to be dragged through the courts by each car and the house holder. before he was in a position to sue his insurers. The owner had had the car returned to him after the roll away. There was enough conjecture that remedial maintenance had been done to the vehicle between inspections that the judge reminded the owner of the implications of perjury.
I had been an independant consulting engineer for some time then. I was experieinced in giving evidence in a court, had advised the barrister as to what questions should be asked and was even able to provide photos of a DTI placed againt the actuating lever in the applied/released conditions.
I felt sorry for those who lost, but not for a prat who fails to maintain his vehicle and causes loss/damage as a result.
Gosh! Impressive stuff!
Im glad our vehicles are given plenty of tlc!
custard
15-01-09, 05:19 PM
i recently tried declaring all my mods, cans; power commander; suspension; braided lines, paintwork etc for my thou.
premium came back....7k
Dangerous Dave
15-01-09, 06:33 PM
As a result of my report into the defective breaking system (Lack of maintenance) the drivers policy was declared void and payment to the car/house holders refused.
My point exactly, I have had an insurance company try this on me. An undeclared modification could lead to your insurance being invalid.
yorkie_chris
15-01-09, 06:37 PM
Still, a noisy exhaust isn't going to be any grounds for causing an accident, so should be alright. (though I'm all for declaring such things)
Even with the gixxer swaps etc they'd have a job on proving having 3x the braking power available caused an accident.
i recently tried declaring all my mods, cans; power commander; suspension; braided lines, paintwork etc for my thou.
premium came back....7k
You're using wrong insurer then.
Dangerous Dave
15-01-09, 06:41 PM
Even with the gixxer swaps etc they'd have a job on proving having 3x the braking power available caused an accident.
+ 1, my undeclared GSXR gripe came from an accident with me stationary and being hit from rear/side. Exactly how a modified front end would have caused, or even prevented, the accident was the point we fought.
vBulletin® , Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.