Thousands of restricted riders unwittingly uninsured

http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/Ne...gly-uninsured/

I think this is VERY worrying.

There is no option of an restricted licence, and I do have a full UK licence, whether restricted or not?

Luckily my bike is SORN, but this could worryingly lead to a massive increase in premiums as I, according to insurers, do not have a 'full' licence?

I imagine there's many riders in the same situation as me on here, thought I'd point it out.

[MisterTommyH]

How surprising that the insurance ombudsman sided with the insurance companies.

Is this right?

Or MCN's usual garbage?

Originally Posted by Tommy H

How surprising that the insurance ombudsman sided with the insurance companies.

It's such a load of crap, entirely! How are you meant to declare it when no category for a restricted licence exists? It certainly isn't a provisional, and according to them it isn't a full licence..

[Bibio]

i think the one big thing that they have omitted is the fact that you are not required to pass a further test, therefore you have a full motorcycle licence but have a restriction for two years unless you are old enough to do direct access.

it's a load of bull to get more money out of the public. time for MAG to get involved.

but it may just be MCN spouting crap as per usual.

[Geodude]

Originally Posted by Bibio

i think the one big thing that they have omitted is the fact that you are not required to pass a further test, therefore you have a full motorcycle licence but have a restriction for two years unless you are old enough to do direct access.

it's a load of bull to get more money out of the public. time for MAG to get involved.

but it may just be MCN spouting crap as per usual.

Spot on Bib, but worrying if they can get away with it

[Dave20046]

WHen I was restricted upon getting each quote I asked the insurance company to verify me being restricted wasn't an issue most said it wasn't and the ones I went with put it on record... I knew it all was a bit smoke and mirrors... as with any dealing with insurance companies-not to be trusted

And the ombudsman's quote is technically incorrect ~ he isn't restricted from riding bigger bikes at all , just using all the power

[yorkie_chris]

Load of bollox.
If you are restricted and insured currently, let sleeping dogs lie, IMO.

[TamSV]

The headlines are a bit dramatic IMO.

The Ombudsmans decision was about whether or not eBike were justified in charging a fee. It doesn't mean that bloke, or anyone else, is not insured.

He was asked if he had a full or restricted bike licence. He answered "Full". He was then asked how long he had held that licence and he included the period of his restriction. He got it wrong and there was a small premium adjustment which he refused to pay. That's what the complaint was about.

It's easy to see where people might go wrong - that's what happens when you try to shoehorn new regulations into frameworks that don't support them (hence DVLA's made up A2 classification). Hopefully there will be some clarification but no-one currently on a restricted licence needs to worry.

In the meantime, when buying insurance online, make sure you answer the question that you're actually being asked.

[yorkie_chris]

I've usually answered that with "I passed my bike test in June 07".

Vague, not the answer to the question posed, simply a statement of fact and if they've f***ed up knocking 2 years off not my problem. I reckon...