Restriction... Is it 100% neccesary?

This is my first thread and nearly my first post so may i first of all give a very warm hello to everyone on this site.

My issue as the title suggests is, I have a restricted licsence and my sv650 is not restricted. Will the insureance need proof that the bike is restricted befor i can get cover? My father is going to be on the insureance also, will this effect it?

I have just bought a k3 pointy naked, how are they restricted and about how much does it cost? Thanks for your time.

welcome dude, good choice of bike, I cant offer much advice, but from what ive read the sv is one of the best out there for restricting as you have all the torgue and pull up through the gears but just lose a bit up top, however I may be wrong and im sure someone will be along shortly to confirm or correct....

as for insurance..depends how long your dads been riding etc id imagine?...


just wanted to say hi and welcome really!!! so hello!

Dads had a licence since 1977 lol. 3 years no claims i believe.

Welcome to the nuthouse!

If you have a restricted licence you HAVE to ride a restricted (<33bhp) motorcycle. Not sure how you would prove the restriction (afterall you could buy 2nd hand restricted bike) but your insurance will be null and void if you ride an unrestricted bike on a restricted licence.

Hello and welcome to the forum and to the SV.

Technically you will be riding without a licence as you are only allowed to ride a bike which produces more than 25kw (33bhp). There are some people out there that have gotten away with it, there are also some out there that haven't. It is your life and your decision.

[Mr Speirs]

Insurance company will need proof yes. You should get a certificate. You shouldn't see a massive jump in price on insurance by having your dad on there but it certainly won't come down.

If you dad has another bike and is using his 3 years NCB on that it cannot be used on the Sv policy. Plus if you are the policyholder it wouldn't matter anyway.

Hello and Welcome.

Originally Posted by DanAbnormal

Welcome to the nuthouse!

If you have a restricted licence you HAVE to ride a restricted (<33bhp) motorcycle. Not sure how you would prove the restriction (afterall you could buy 2nd hand restricted bike) but your insurance will be null and void if you ride an unrestricted bike on a restricted licence.

Granted. Although i did ride my 50cc unrestricted and also my 125 unrestricted under my CBT. I never got stopped or checked. I'm basically wondering if it is impossible to get insureance without a certificate(proof) of restriction.

Or just abide by the law.

Grow up a little (mentally and numerically)

Good to see a new rider flouting the law on his first 3 bikes. We all flout it, but your just taking the p1ss in this post arn't you?????

Have a crash, insurance is totally void. So your choice, but frankly, its good to see such a new rider with such a first sensible post.

Originally Posted by mikado

Granted. Although i did ride my 50cc unrestricted and also my 125 unrestricted under my CBT. I never got stopped or checked. I'm basically wondering if it is impossible to get insureance without a certificate(proof) of restriction.

It isn't so much being stopped and checked. If you crash and your bike was not restricted, then the insurance company and necessary authorities can quite rightly say that your crash was most probably due to the fact it was more powerful; you will not be covered.
I have heard that they can sometimes dyno the bike after a crash to see if it was restricted. Also, if the restrictor is physically not inside the bike, then it's obviously not restricted. This can be easily checked.

I havn't bought my bike yet, but i got a restrictor off this forum for £50 the over week. There is normally one for sale every now and then on here, and sometimes ebay. If you want to get the bike restricted officially at a dealer, it will cost you £150 as opposed to £50.
I have not yet decided how i am going to provide proof for restriction when i get insurance, but i will try my hardest to sort it out with the £50 restrictor i have (i'm not paying £100 more!).

Originally Posted by mikado

I'm basically wondering if it is impossible to get insureance without a certificate(proof) of restriction.

Not all insurance companies require to see a copy of the certificate, the certificate is really proof that the bike was at some point restricted and that whilst in your ownership (your name is on the certificate) you have had it de-restricted.

Originally Posted by Magnum

If you crash and your bike was not restricted, then the insurance company and necessary authorities can quite rightly say that your crash was most probably due to the fact it was more powerful; you will not be covered.

+ 1, it will leave your insurance invalid from the start. Not only riding with no licence but now no insurance, what ever you do don't bend down to pick up the soap!