To de-restrict or to not de-restrict that is the question

Originally Posted by rubberduckofdeath

I used to ride more quickly than I should, but that's another subject, don't you think?

I never drive vehicles I'm not insured on and I would never drive without an appropriate license.

Both involve braking the rules for your own entertainment so no, I don't think it's a matter of another subject.

What ever anyone else does on the road is of no real consequence until they hit you. So ultimately, whether someone was either speeding, driving dangerously or heaven forbid, riding a de-restricted bike, the end result's the same. Oh, 'cept one of those happens to be far less likely.

Originally Posted by BigApe

You know this "new" law about a restricted motorcycle licence was brought in for a damn good reason. People that flout it are being dumb and taking unnecessary risks.

Out of interest, were you subjected to the restricted test when you passed?

Originally Posted by BigApe

And for Jordan. I do not ride an un modified motorcycle. But my insurance do know all of my modifications. When I told them about the changes I had made with the fork internals, they were not interested. When I told them about the upgraded rear shock they were not interested. When I told them about my paint job (and the fact I did it myself and it was crap) they were not interested. And so on... The only thing they made an issue with was the exhaust. But I told them it was an illegal race exhaust and they were also not interested. But just to be sure I got them to write to me and confirm they were still willing to honour my insurance in the knowledge I had such an end can fitted.

Nice

[Biker Biggles]

Im sure it will do 165.My 2000 J1 could top 160.
As for the restriction thing,there is a clause in all insurance policies that says you must have and not be disquaified from holding a licence for the vehicle being driven/ridden.If your licence is for up to 33 BHP,and the bike is more than 33BHP you dont have a licence for it and you are not insured.
Whether anyone will notice,or find out is a different matter.

EDIT: the forum went nuts

EDIT: the forum went nuts part deux

In reply to the original question, if you consider the likelyhood of getting caught and the fun of a derestricted bike, I think it is worth doing. I know lots of people on restricted licences and almost none who are restricted. That's not to say that if you're not ready to derestrict you should just because you can, it's obviously better to wait until you're confident.

Originally Posted by fizzwheel

Apart from me editing the first post to give an explanation of where the thread has come from and by way of explanation as to why I locked the other thread I dont see anybody as making direct refences to him. the idea of spliting those posts out of the other thread was that so a discussion / debate could be had on the subject without him feeling like its all directed at him. If I didnt make that clear at the top of thread then thats my bad. But I notice that so far a discussion is being had on the subject matter without naming names until your post above...

Yes Fizz, you did make that clear mate so no worries there, but because the posts originally came from a thread about Plowsie, on a subject matter from that thread regarding his actions, there are a few intimated references.

When people have done something wrong they tend to feel worse when others carry on talking about it. You can’t stop that on a forum, it’s a discussion medium, it would be daft to say we can’t carry on talking about something.

I just read it from the perspective of "how would Plowsie feel reading this?", and putting myself in his position I would feel that the following were references to me. Rightly or wrongly, true/accurate or not, paranoid or not, human nature is human nature I would feel bad reading it as I'd think it was all just a continuation of the previous thread and therefore all about me.

from the there orginal plowsie thread

Someone decides to not conform to their insurance policy

Ho-hum, your life, your choice, just don't expect anyone to respect you.

You're both assuming he'd get caught.

If you want to ride unrestricted, it's nothing to do with the org, so don't brag about it.

Nobody has to agree with me or even think that I'm talking sense (Plowise might say I’m being daft), but I was just asking people to be sensitive (theres another thread about that too!) about how Plowsie would feel reading it and be careful to avoid any personal reference.

[fizzwheel]

I see where you are coming from but just to make sure I have PM'd Plowsie and to make sure that from my point of view anything thats posted in this thread is a hypothetical discussion of the issue and that its not to be used to discuss his own personal situation.

I realise that he might be feeling a bit sensitive about it and I dont want him to feel unwelcome on the forum as thats certainly not the case as far as I am concerned.

Shake my hand, you're the man

Originally Posted by -Ralph-

I don't think many folk would try to argue that riding a full power bike on a 33bhp license is a good idea.

But if Plowsie wasn't leaving before this thread, he's probably feels pretty crap about the .org now after reading a whole discussion about it.

I've never met Plowsie and don't know him from Adam, so this is a third party perspective judging only by what I've read in these two threads.

Plowsie's done a bit of a daft thing riding unrestricted and a dafter thing by admitting to it on a public forum, but are all those folk (including me) on the "What speed have you had out of your SV?" threads any better? 125, 135 mph, many on a public road?

He's got a new bike now and he says it's being restricted before he picks it up. Everyone deserves the chance to correct a daft thing that they've done and do the right thing in the end. I'm not saying we shouldn't discuss our views on the riding of unrestricted bikes, but regards direct references to Plowsie, lets give him a break.

[northwind]

Originally Posted by Defender

I am fed up of paying high car & bike insurance premiums because people are selfish and have no regard for others.

I reckon someone who has an accident and is riding illegal, as you would be, would be more likely to ride off then hang around.

For the first point there, it doesn't actually weight your premiums if people do it unless they have more accidents. Do they? Who knows. I honestly think the average DAS pass on a full power isn't significantly safer than a A1 pass on a 33bhp SV. Most bike crashes don't happen because of the power, and a restricted bike is still plenty quick enough to be a big unguided missile. I think most power-derived crashes tend to be pretty much single-vehicle incidents as you highside yourself up a tree. Most people insuring a bike they're not allowed to ride will be smart enough to do it TPF&T, since claiming against the policy yourself is russian roulette.

For the second... I think you're probably right. I also reckon some (but not all of course!) people who choose to ride a bike they're not licenced for will also generally speaking be feckless scumbags and would ride off on general principles. Not pointing a finger at anyone of course, least of all He Who Will Not Be Named.

Originally Posted by Dangerous Dave

Trust me, it doesn't have to have been a 'contributing to the accident' modification for the police and insurance companies to take a bad look on things!

Yup, this is the main reason I disclose all of mine... If I ever do end up having to make a big claim, I don't want it to be any more complicated than it has to be. In your case any competent insurance specialist should have been able to prove your case, and there are other resorts if it hadn't worked out in court which would almost certainly have got you satisfaction, but just having to deal with the hassle, and maybe getting delays on your settlement, possibly while recovering from the accident, I can do without.

Originally Posted by Larry

In reply to the original question, if you consider the likelyhood of getting caught and the fun of a derestricted bike, I think it is worth doing. I know lots of people on restricted licences and almost none who are restricted. That's not to say that if you're not ready to derestrict you should just because you can, it's obviously better to wait until you're confident.

If you do get caught, you can be completely ****ed. A lot of people think it's a low risk thing, and there's only a very small risk of getting caught, but if you do and the authorities or insurers decide to make something of it, you will not laugh it off. The insurance will try to recover any costs from the claim from you, and will withhold 1st party payouts if applicable... They will also quite likely bring charges against you for insurance fraud, which can get you the jail but will also leave you as a financial hole in the ground afterwards- it's almost impossible to get motor insurance in these circumstances so to all extents and purposes it's a 3-year ban (that's the disclosure period). And the police may also choose to get involved, the offence is driving without a licence, which can also get you prison time and further bans.

It very rarely happens, that. In practice, when an insurer finds a fraud case like this they'll generally just go after you for costs, and dependant on the sum involved quite likely for fraud. The police generally won't charge unless there's a related charge, ie dangerous driving, etc. But I can tell you that at least 3 of the UK's biggest insurers (not brokers, insurers) have a standing policy of inspecting any restricted bike if they can lay their hands on it, and of checking for proof of restriction if they can't, after any accident involving a payout.

Chances are you'll never get caught on the street, but after an accident, it's a real risk. Don't misjudge this. By all means do it, but know the stakes you're playing for.

[northwind]

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

(bennetts wanted £1000 extra because of twin lamps)

Bennetts I had the Virago insured with them, I called up to tell them I'd fitted permanent saddlebags. "Are they performance enhancing". Yes, they're turbo saddlebags, dsigned for fitment to funnybike dragsters and adapted for road use. "Are they visible on the bike" No, they're invisible saddlebags- though you can see my shopping hanging there as if suspended on a thread, only the bags themselves are invisible. £120 they quoted, the whole comprehensive policy for the bike was £53.

They also increased my mate Stuart's premium after he fitted an alarm, since that's a modification, and the flashing LED was visible- they recorded it under "aftermarket lighting"