How many of you declare your bike mods

[andrewsmith]

Originally Posted by barwel1992

the insurers that wanted to know every thing even wanted to know about non OEM brake pads

this was my list i dident know weather to include after market bolts lmao

that list technically makes yours a custom bike

apparently not because i haven't modded the frame (according to most of the insures i phoned)

[Wideboy]

i've got no mods to declare

[andrewsmith]

suprised that their is the rule. What do they class yours as?

No mods to declare :3 only mod i would bothere with on most bikes though is an aftermarket can

Originally Posted by Wideboy

i've got no mods to declare

lol yehh ...

Originally Posted by andrewsmith

suprised that their is the rule. What do they class yours as?

just modded

[TamSV]

The principle here is that you must disclose any material facts. A fact is material if it would affect the decision of a prudent underwriter to either accept the risk or apply additional terms.

So if you fail to disclose a modification and have a claim, the outcome will depend on what the underwriters view would have been at the outset. One of three things will happen;

a) that particular insurer doesn't care about those modifications, so your claim gets paid.
b) had they known about the existence of the modification they would have charged a premium for it. You pay that premium and your claim gets paid.
c) had they known about the modification at inception they would have refused to insure you. You stand a good chance of getting your claim declined.

Non-disclosure alone is not enough for the insurer to avoid your claim.

The problem is, you don't know what that particular insurers attitude is to modifications so you have to disclose everything to be sure you're covered. Every insurer can set their own underwriting parameters and can vary these from time to time so there is no single answer to this question.

I'm a commercial insurance broker and tell my customers to disclose everything to me, but I don't then necessarily disclose that information to the insurers. I know what is material to that particular underwriter (and, if required, I can prove it with precedent) but my customer doesn't.

With regards to the disqualification issue, insurers can't take account of convictions that are spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act. There is a big discrepancy in time periods for disqualification where the conviction must still be shown on your licence yet is spent under the ROA. No insurer could avoid a claim for not disclosing - in fact they are in breach of the law if they take account of a spent conviction (even though it's still on your licence).

[TamSV]

And I've voted that I don't declare all my mods.

I didn't disclose my Zunkus tail tidy.

[the_lone_wolf]

Originally Posted by TamSV

With regards to the disqualification issue, insurers can't take account of convictions that are spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act. There is a big discrepancy in time periods for disqualification where the conviction must still be shown on your licence yet is spent under the ROA. No insurer could avoid a claim for not disclosing - in fact they are in breach of the law if they take account of a spent conviction (even though it's still on your licence).

I don't recall saying it was spent...

[TamSV]

Originally Posted by the_lone_wolf

I don't recall saying it was spent...

I know you didn't and I wasn't having a pop at what you were saying - sorry if that was unclear. I was just setting out a scenario where you could have a major conviction on your licence that the insurer wouldn't take into account.

I also thought it might be a useful contribution to point out that the time periods where convictions are spent differ between the driver licencing regs and ROA, and the ROA takes precendence. A drink driving offence stays on your licence for 11 years but is "spent" after 5 so doesn't need to be disclosed.