Baffle Warning
 

Just heard back form the garage fixing my bike... everything is getting replaced, but the bloke had a hard time convincing the insurance assessor to pay out because my can was unbaffled.

Only because I was not at fault, and the claim wasn't on my insurance has it gone through.

Watch out - no baffle could mean invalid insurance!!

Re: Baffle Warning
 

With most insurers that only applies if you state to the insurance company that the exhaust you have fitted is road legal, if you simply state it is aftermarket then it isn't an issue.

Technically though your insurance would be void if the vehicle is not road legal, whether car, bike, etc...

Re: Baffle Warning
 

It can break down like this...

A vehicle has to meet the constructiona nd use regulations, when a vehicle is released it passes this.

BUT... it only passes on the bits that are on the car at the time.. eg tyres.. if you change tyre manufacturer you are effectivly changing the spec of the vehicle. which is a no no.

However if its type approved then ur ok... but if a non type approved partis ues on ur car... (could be any spare part) technically its not road legal either..

Any way.. despite all that... method is.. u prang it.. shuv the baffles back in

Re: Baffle Warning
 

Yeap, this includes wrong size tyres (i.e. 70 profile front or 180 rear).

Re: Baffle Warning
 

I have a letter from my insurance company stating they are aware I have a non road legal, race exhaust fitted to my bike and are prepared to insure me with it fitted. :thumleft:

Re: Baffle Warning
 

But, what if your exhaust is still legal with the baffle removed........

Re: Baffle Warning
 

Which is fine.... unless the bike is unridable and is recovered from the scene by plod/other 3rd party.

I'll be leaving the baffle in when i get my bike back, just to be on the safe side. not worth the hastle!

Re: Baffle Warning
 

It won't be, no baffle means its too loud! All the cans on the market are not road legal with the baffle removed, this includes Blueflame because if you remove one baffle from there twin ports that is still non-road legal!

Re: Baffle Warning
 

What Dave says.

These cans that are stamped on the can and then have a removeable baffle are basicaly braking the law, plain and simple. You could still stand to be issued with a fine and in extreme case have your bike convisgated and crushed!

The cans with the baffle stamped, well, much the same. Just because a bike can now go through an MOT with an unstamped can, and byt he word of the MOT tester saying its ok, does not mean the bike is leagal and meets Consturction and use regs!

There are also some greay areas about being done for perverting the cource of justice, which can carry a prision scentance, but not 100% on them.

Re: Baffle Warning
 

So, if i take my baffle out it becomes illegal due to being more noisy.
What is the legal limit in DB for an exhaust, anybody know ????

Re: Baffle Warning
 

Re: Baffle Warning
 

Yes but a straight through can will be above that with baffle(s) removed!

Re: Baffle Warning
 

Pretty meaningless that, since it's got no measurement technique- there are new, unmodified bikes that are louder than that at the pipe exit.

The UK doesn't have universal type approval so it's NOT the case that fitting a non-approved part makes your car illegal, except where there are specific requirements (ie headlights, tyres, etc).

As for insurance, for an accident damage claim a loud exhaust cannot invalidate your insurance, unless it's directly relevant to the claim- which means either a) the other driver claims to have been startled by the noise, and crashed as a result, or b) you lied to the insurer about the exhaust. If you crash solo, and you've declared the exhaust, it's completely irrelevant whether it's legal or not. The insurers might use it to try and convince you they don't need to pay out, but this has been well tested in court.

Re: Baffle Warning
 

Correct.The insurer can only refuse to pay if the issue that was "wrong "with your vehicle was in some way related to the accident.
Thats why the first thing an assessor checks is the tyres.They are always relevant in a moving accident.

Re: Baffle Warning
 

Unfortunately for the past 5 years that hasn't been true, your insurance quote is taken on the basis your bike is totally OEM unless you state any add on or mod! Failure to inform your insuarnce company to any modification made to your vehicle is a breach of the verbal contract.

At the time of my first major accident I had the GSXR front end freshly fitted to the 750, at this time I had not disclosed it to the insurance company. This accident involved me being stationary and being hit and trapped under a car which struck me from the right hand side. I was stationary and yet my modified brakes were a legal hassle, not OEM and not disclosed! The opinion of 'if it isn't a contributing factor to accident you are ok' is nolonger applicable, this was decided many years back after claimants where running up the costs of repairs because they were replacing aftermarket parts that were more expensive than OEM.

The leading insurers Norwich Union, Bennetts, etc will validate my comments. I am still going through a claim now for my second major accident, and I have been through all this with my solicitors and insurance company and this time there are no undisclosed mods on the 750.

Re: Baffle Warning
 

I think that was what Northwind was actually saying, as long as the mod is declared, it's legality is not a relevent factor in a claim.

Re: Baffle Warning
 

Most insurance companies will still honor the third party element of an insurance policy in the event that the machine is found to have undeclared modifications. This means your policy still meets the legal requirements so you won't get prosecuted. However they most certainly will use it to negotiate out of paying you anything for your "comprehensive" element of your policy. If you read the small print on some policies they have also extended this to include something like "The vehicle must be maintained in a roadworthy condition" which is the wriggle they use if they find the removed baffle.....or a bald tyre.

Re: Baffle Warning
 

I think you will find they have to honur the thrid party part of any clain even if you had no MOT, it just means they will come back after you for any costs from it.

Re: Baffle Warning
 

Yup, but that's not what I was talking about (why I said "b) you lied to the insurer about the exhaust.".) If you fail to declare a part, that's a problem, since you're specifically required to declare any modifications. (that's not a new thing, it's been around since the birth of modern motor insurance.) But, if you declare the part and they accept the contract then it's irrelevant whether it's legal or not- unless it causes or an accident.

Your example's a bit odd though, why are you claiming on your insurance when it seems like you were the innocent third party? Your declarations should only be relevant when claiming against your own policy. If you're claiming against the other party's, then things are very different legally.

Anyway, in this case- say you fit an exhaust with a removable baffle, and tell the insurance "I've fitted X exhaust". If they ask you if it's road legal and you lie, you're in trouble. If they don't ask, then you're covered. If they ask if it's road legal and you say yes, then remove the baffle, you're in trouble again. It's not just breach of contract, it can be interpreted as insurance fraud.

The usual result is that the insurer doesn't pay out for the modified parts at all- that's a fairly industry standard approach and it's one the FSA back. Very few cases like this go to court, because it's expensive and not very productive in most cases.

The irony is, a slipon is cheaper than an OEM exhaust :D

Re: Baffle Warning
 

Apologies Northy, I mis-read your post!

It was spotted by the vehicle inspector who put it in the report which is seen by both parties. The fact that it wasn't disclosed on my policy made them (other guys insurance) trying to claim my insurance was invalid, this would lead to me being prosecuted for having no insurance despite being the innocent party. What made it all worse was the fact that the brakes had relevance to the accident, a vehicle inspector has to inspect the whole vehicle whether the item(s) he is inspecting is relevant to the accident or not (the inspector has no idea what caused the accident when he attends an inspection, also the same examiner is not allowed to examine both parties vehicles).

Re: Baffle Warning
 

Yep, now THAT's a legal mess :cool: This is the sort of mess I wish people heard more about though, people just don't get the possible implications of playing fast and loose with your insurers. I think the only way it would get worse would be if the same insurer covered both vehicles.

What do you think the final result will be?

Re: Baffle Warning
 

Oh... this one is done and dusted (right leg), solicitor managed to persuade them that whether or not this mod was disclosed it would have no effect on the outcome of the accident (took 11 months for this to happen, guess they didn't think I would keep fighting it).

Now in the process of a claim regarding another near fatal accident (left leg injuries), looking good so far (legal wise).

Re: Baffle Warning
 

Nice one... Yeah, quite often in complicated insurance cases the law's not the important part, it's more down to patience/stubbornness who wins. So good on yer.

Re: Baffle Warning
 

94db in Australia. Mine's pushing 104db -eeks!