View Full Version : sv650s restricted license insurance?
Joe Marcon
07-01-12, 12:11 AM
im on an A2 license(restricted to 33bhp)
i have an sv650s 2001 with restrictor kit. insurance ive got so far is £740 and a £90 cheque back (dont know why they just dont take £90 of price i do not know)
im getting cheaper quotes if i do not declare having a restrictor kit on, so can i say i havent got it on and ride ? what will happen if i ride and i crash (hope not) and they find out ?
im insuring bike on my birthday (12th January)i will b 19 years of age) as it goes down £200 . any ideas what would happen ? people say insurance void but i duno really :S hope some1 or a few can help . thanks alot
Joe
Hello Joe,I would suggest being totally open and honest with the insurance company. I'm pretty sure that they will look for any excuse at all not to pay out should the unfortunate occur, also if you do become involved in an RTC and the police get involved you could find yourself in a bit of a sticky situation. I'm happy I'm old (ish), my insurance is £71.15 on my unrestricted SV, you young lads have my deepest sympathy when it comes to buying insurance.
CarlosSV650S
07-01-12, 08:31 AM
i never told the insurance that mine was restricted few years ago, you didnt have to. just make sure you have a certificate to prove the bike is restricted, or maybe a dyno test results sheet maybe.
Joe Marcon
07-01-12, 09:19 AM
I always get mixed answers so its hard what to do lol. Hopefully some more answers soon
Modifications should be declared, failure to do so may result in voiding the policy. A restrictor, although not performance enhancing, is never the less a modification and as such should be declared. Ask yourself the question, would you be prepared to risk riding and getting punted off by a car driver only to find you weren't covered by your own policy? Then ask why insurance premiums are so high? Bingo!!!
Jayneflakes
07-01-12, 10:23 AM
I have always declared my restriction, along with my alarm and handle bar conversion. The response I have always had has been positive and my fully comp policy costs me about £200. When I had a bump, they supplied a restricted hire bike to me, so I would always mention it. I have been told that because it does not increase power, it does not effect the price. In your position, I would shop around and use a company that are a little more competitively priced.
i told my insurance but was also informed that even though its less horsepower, and therefore less speed, if you do chuck it down the road and write it off, it still costs the same in a payout.
didnt affect my insurance a bit when it came off, but they did ask for a copy of the certificate when i initially applied.
i told my insurance but was also informed that even though its less horsepower, and therefore less speed, if you do chuck it down the road and write it off, it still costs the same in a payout.
didnt affect my insurance a bit when it came off, but they did ask for a copy of the certificate when i initially applied.
Same here.
But remember, the certificate is not actually a legal document.. I'm not saying throw it away or burn it, I'm just saying if you don't have one then it's not the end of the world and you can still prove it through a dyno test.
yorkie_chris
07-01-12, 12:35 PM
IMO there is no reason to declare restrictor to insurance... it is not mod worth mentioning as it is just what is required for licence.
To be safe, use OE restrictor kit. For the pointy that's the only sensible option anyway.
Joe Marcon
07-01-12, 01:12 PM
I'll do the right thing and put restrictor down . An in 2 years time i will have a better bike with no restrictor and cheap insurance .
yorkie_chris
07-01-12, 01:17 PM
Don't take it as "the wrong thing" to say "the bike makes 33hp as required by my licence" rather than "it is modified".
IMO there is no reason to declare restrictor to insurance... it is not mod worth mentioning as it is just what is required for licence.
+1 the bike has to be restricted - I think I'm right in saying that at your age there's no other option? They could reasonably be expected to know that.
However, two notes of caution.
1. If you're asked the explicit question you need to answer it honestly. If the question was "Is the bike restricted?" you have to say Yes. If the question was "Is the bike modified?" you could say No.
2. If you've been getting quotes on broker or comparison websites with and without modification, then be aware that all those quotes are stored. It would be impossible for you to claim that you were unaware that there was a premium difference when they can see that you ran a quote through on that basis. If you've done that you're possibly boxed in to a corner now.
Don't take it as "the wrong thing" to say "the bike makes 33hp as required by my licence" rather than "it is modified".
That's how I would describe it.
I'd personally be happy to not disclose this one and argue the toss if they had a problem with it in the event of a claim. I'm very confident I'd eventually win that argument but I've got 25 years insurance experience, almost unlimited patience for this kind of thing and access to other transport. At 19 my situation was very different.
To be on the safe side, phone the top broker on your premium search and, when they ask if it's modified, say No and put it to them as per YC's suggestion.
Joe Marcon
07-01-12, 02:55 PM
So dont declare it? Not understanding lol. Sorry
Sorry if it's a bit woolly, but that's the situation unfortunately.
The only way to be 100%, dead cert that there won't be a problem is to declare it.
I wouldn't declare it, but I can't guarantee that there wouldn't be some dispute in the event of a claim - particularly as you're already on record with insurers getting quotes with the restriction declared as a mod.
It may not happen, but if you have a claim and your insurers (wrongly) decide the restriction is an undeclared mod then you have a problem unless you can convince them otherwise.
If it was me I'm happy with my own ability to deal with the consequences of that and eventually get a result but I don't know how well resourced you are. I'm reluctant to see a young lad potentially without a bike for a period of time, and involved in an argument he may not be equipped for, because of my advice.
Hence;
To be on the safe side, phone the top broker on your premium search and, when they ask if it's modified, say No and put it to them as per YC's suggestion.
Don't assume that front line insurance staff necessarily understand what they're talking about. Many don't.
What YC is suggesting, and I am supporting, is to word it in such a way that you have disclosed it to them but without them ticking "yes" in the modifications box. Keep a note with your docs of the date/time and the name of the person you spoke to.
yorkie_chris
07-01-12, 04:28 PM
So dont declare it? Not understanding lol. Sorry
You are informing them of it just in a different way. Covering your *rse in a way that doesn't lead the spastic on the phone doesn't think you've fitted a turbocharger instead.
What Tam is saying about quotes is true, but I would suggest the way around that is to say you were considering modifying it* but had not done so, and instead you didn't modify it**.
If questioned in the event of a claim, which is unlikely.
*Like with a non-OE restrictor kit
**By 33hp'ing it by suzuki method
N.B
Modification boxes on comparison sites are a waste of time too, they never end up being in any way related to the premium you get. My bike is very modified and I have tried every which way, always best to simply quote for the bike and ask about mods later.
Joe Marcon
07-01-12, 04:41 PM
Gunna go the legit way. Get some miles done and time will come after 2 years when it all changes . Thanks guys :) alot of supporting help here :)
robbie09
07-01-12, 08:35 PM
If you survive a year (without ditching the restrictor) youll be doing very well...
Fallout
07-01-12, 10:13 PM
You can get cheap insurance by bending the rules, not disclosing modifications, lying about your age etc etc. You end up with a policy that costs much less, and if any cops run your plates, you will flag up as covered. So you have ticked the box. However, if you want to actually get any cover in the event of a crash, you need to be 100% honest. If it's anything other than a cheap prang, they will check all their details thoroughly before you see any money.
Basically, if you're going to bend the truth, you might as well lie about loads of other things, cos you're only buying a tick in the box with no insurance payout. Just my two pence/cents.
You can get cheap insurance by bending the rules, not disclosing modifications, lying about your age etc etc. You end up with a policy that costs much less, and if any cops run your plates, you will flag up as covered. So you have ticked the box. However, if you want to actually get any cover in the event of a crash, you need to be 100% honest. If it's anything other than a cheap prang, they will check all their details thoroughly before you see any money.
Basically, if you're going to bend the truth, you might as well lie about loads of other things, cos you're only buying a tick in the box with no insurance payout. Just my two pence/cents.
Not really, because saying you don't carry pillion passengers when you only do it maybe 20% of the time is definitely a not the same as saying you're 46 and held your licence for 30 years when really you're 19 and held your licence for 3 days.
I say this because I say that my bike is garaged, when it's not. Because I don't want to pay £500 extra just because it's not... I'd rather pay £150 extra and get some proper security where I park it.
Fallout
07-01-12, 11:05 PM
Ok, so not all details will invalidate your policy. That's fair enough, and you've made the call that it makes more sense to save the money and protect the bike yourself than have it covered for theft. If you're confident it won't get nicked, then I'd say you're making the right choice. When you're talking those sums of money, I see why you'd do that.
I do get where you are coming from. If people want to lie about the biggest/obvious things, they might as well lie about everything.
Basically, if you're going to bend the truth, you might as well lie about loads of other things, cos you're only buying a tick in the box with no insurance payout. Just my two pence/cents.
I totally agree with the principle that you should always tell the truth. I normally would advocate total honesty and have spelled out the consequences in other threads of not doing that.
However, this restricted bike mod thing is one of the exceptions. It's to do with how this business is written nowadays and a conscious trade-off by insurers of convenience over doing things properly.
The OP got quotes supposedly with and without restriction. The quote without the restriction was cheaper. So are insurers really saying that, if the OP rides an unrestricted bike in contravention of his licence, he should be entitled to a premium discount?
Off course not. What they have decided is that they want to do large volumes of business as cheaply as possible. That means reduced online question sets that can't deal with all the different risks and poorly trained staff who do what the computer tells them. All they need to do is write a bit of code that deals with this but they can't be bothered to do it.
I say this because I say that my bike is garaged, when it's not. Because I don't want to pay £500 extra just because it's not... I'd rather pay £150 extra and get some proper security where I park it.
I don't have any problem with that either TBH as you seem to understand that you are foregoing theft cover and making alternative arrangements to prevent it. Fine. It doesn't affect anyone else and you presumably won't be crying about it if you're unlucky.
Edit: sorry I quoted the wrong person, must have been a glitch.
Yea I sort of agree, but like I said. I would rather risk saying my bike is garaged and secure it myself in other ways. But I wouldn't risk saying I don't carry pillions when I do, or I wouldn't say I've held my licence for 10 years if I haven't. Because if I'm involved in an accident, they're not gonna come round and check the garage, they will just check that the relative information is correct.
And yes, I have been involved in an accident and they never checked the garage. I also said I was employed and didn't tell them I was a student and still my insurance was not void and the other persons insurance paid out.
btw, I love your custom SV 'TamSV' (Y)
Jayneflakes
08-01-12, 12:33 AM
When I tell insurers that my bike is restricted, I do not tell them that it is modified, I just say that it is restricted, then I have to list my comfort mods. When I have spoken to a good insurer, they know the difference between restricted and modified.
However, there are some out there who have not the first clue as to what a motorcycle is, let alone how to ride one and trying to get insurance out of them is a waste of time that could be spent watching paint dry or grass grow!
Explaining that the bike is restricted comes down to saying that you are on a restricted license not a modified bike.
Fallout
08-01-12, 12:42 AM
However, there are some out there who have not the first clue as to what a motorcycle is, let alone how to ride one and trying to get insurance out of them is a waste of time that could be spent watching paint dry or grass grow!
This is definitely true. You have to find the right insurer. I used to have a modified car. Most insurers just hike up the premiums when you start listening mods, irrespective of what you've had done. When you shop around and find insurers with the right policy types, they handle the mods correctly. For me it was the difference between £700 going up to £1500 with Churchill, or £600 no matter what mods I have with A-Plan's Japanese Import Modified policy.
And I wrote that car off and got it's full value paid out! :mrgreen: It's definitely about finding the right insurer who knows what they're doing. Perhaps brokers are the way to go.
I know common sense rarely applies to insurance, but wouldn't declaring a restricted bike lower your quote? After all your bike is now at less than half power.
I know common sense rarely applies to insurance, but wouldn't declaring a restricted bike lower your quote? After all your bike is now at less than half power.
Not really, there's not much correlation between outright power and accidents, which is why the 2 year power restriction is a waste of time. That's a subject for a different thread though. :)
Fallout
08-01-12, 12:28 PM
Yeah, it's all statistics based. Half of the insurers don't even work it out for themselves. Some other body provides them with the figures. You might think working as a motorcycle stunt rider means you're more capable and get a lower premium, but all it takes is a freak accident one year where a procession of motorcycle stunt professionals crash in a freak pile-up causing 50 high value payouts, and next year it'll cost you an arm and a leg to get insurance if you work in that profession. Dodgy example, I know, but you get my point. Silly, isn't it?
yorkie_chris
08-01-12, 01:53 PM
Basically, if you're going to bend the truth, you might as well lie about loads of other things, cos you're only buying a tick in the box with no insurance payout. Just my two pence/cents.
Payout vs possible personal liability in an at-fault claim? Really disagree with your way of thinking here.
Not really, because saying you don't carry pillion passengers when you only do it maybe 20% of the time is definitely a not the same as saying you're 46 and held your licence for 30 years when really you're 19 and held your licence for 3 days.
I say this because I say that my bike is garaged, when it's not. Because I don't want to pay £500 extra just because it's not... I'd rather pay £150 extra and get some proper security where I park it.
Why not just get TPO cover instead then?
I do get where you are coming from. If people want to lie about the biggest/obvious things, they might as well lie about everything.
Once again, a little bit of truth bending with plausible deniability is one thing, blatant taking the p*ss can land you right up the creek.
Fallout
08-01-12, 01:56 PM
Payout vs possible personal liability in an at-fault claim? Really disagree with your way of thinking here.
I'm always 100% honest with all my insurance. I think that's the only way to go really.
yorkie_chris
08-01-12, 02:15 PM
As Tam says honesty is the safe bet.
However you are dealing with idiots at the front end of an impersonal and clunky system that doesn't work very well, the trick is in making the truth easily digestible for it.
mikeladhams
08-01-12, 02:26 PM
Try "wicked quotes" they were the most reasonable for me. At 19 I pay £250 full comp (3 years no claims though) and an FZ6 Fazer with them with everything declared.
im with wicked quotes and im paying £265 fully comp, 4 years no claims on sv but i live in a not so desirable area called erdington :) by far cheapest insurance i have ever had,
Joe Marcon
09-01-12, 03:17 PM
I am not declaring the restictor as iv thought that it isnt a performance or modification . It is just a legal requirement for my bike . Doesnt really change price but does take my excess down from £650 to £150 with swinton platinum :) thanks
When I had my restriction kit on I used thebikeinsurer my insurance was £230 (3 years no claims) they gaurantee to beat any quote on there website if you fill out the online quote form there is no tick box to indicate a restrictor kit and a insurance company like this should know that a restrictor kit is needed.
Joe Marcon
10-01-12, 02:18 PM
When I had my restriction kit on I used thebikeinsurer my insurance was £230 (3 years no claims) they gaurantee to beat any quote on there website if you fill out the online quote form there is no tick box to indicate a restrictor kit and a insurance company like this should know that a restrictor kit is needed.
ive gone with a diff company . but i havent put restrictor. i will argue case if i get hit or crash that "i dont see the insurance needing to know its restricted as its a legal requirement for me. not for them" . and what else i will say is " too the insurers "you should no its restricted as im 19 years old and i am not aloud to do DAS 500cc course as im not old enough so neeeerrrrrr :P:P:P ":winner::winner::winner::winner::winner::winner:
then i win against insurance :)
Just another wee point to throw in if anyone ever has to have this argument.
I don't know anyone with a provisional licence that's ever declared the restriction they have on their 50cc or 125cc machines.
Insurers don't seem to throw out claims because of this non-disclosure.
What's the material difference with the 33bhp restriction?
yorkie_chris
10-01-12, 03:40 PM
One argument that could be used is they're supplied as 14.6bhp (or whatever...) as new. I reckon the fact that suzuki have their own restrictors as OEM parts negates that but it could be relevant I suppose?
I suppose that argument might be made, but presumably the only reason they're supplied like that is because that's how almost everyone wants them.
I've never asked, but I can't see why a dealer wouldn't sell me a full power 125 if I wanted one - in the same way as they'd sell me a restricted SV.
I think Aprilia have maybe sold a full power RS through dealers in the past?
The question now is, assuming I've bought my full power 125, should I disclose the DE-restriction as a mod? :)
My bike has a load of mods, none of which improve the performance. I am with Swintons and declared them all. As there were more than 3 mods they couldn't do it it automatically and had to get approval from Aviva which took a day or so. All in all no problem and no increase in premiums. They have a list of my mods for reference, and that is all they need.
I would would speak to someone and forget these comparison sites. Our son found them frustrating when looking to renew his restricted GS500. The all just banged up the price when you say you have mods, no matter what they were.
when i got my insurance when the bike was restriced there was no where to put that it was restricted. best option is to phone them up instead of using comparison sites
vBulletin® , Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.