Stay insured on a sold bike...?

Originally Posted by slark01

I told Express insurance to shove the £50 cancellation fee up their 'you know what' when I sold my bike. A couple of months later I checked with them and the fee had been squashed. So I insured with them again for a seperate bike ( i'm now a proud owner of a gsxr 600 ).
I had also told them at the time that I had just been made redundant and the fee was extortionately high and that I would take it up with the Office of Fair Trading. NCB was not affected at all and I managed to get a good deal due to Suzuki doing a deal with them.

Ste.

yes i was with express on one of my bikes, they are very cheap for suzuki bikes. But all there terms and conditions are rubbish and they have huge fees to change your bike halfway through a policy.

i went from 2002 sv650s to 2005 sv650s after being 3 months into a policy.

They wanted £100 admin to change the numberplate on their system + £170 as the bike was newer and worth more.

The policy cost £280 for 12 months and just because i change to a newer model sv they wanted another £270 in total for the remining 9 months.

what a rip off! They had me by the ******** as the cancelation fee was £100

[fastdruid]

Originally Posted by G

I am pretty sure that is not right. It is the person that is insured, not the vehicle. The person who was driving the stolen car would be driving without insurance, there no way the insurance company would pay out for the third party, only the person the car was stolen from.

I know someone hit by a stolen car and they got bugger all and had to claim through some goverment scheme, the person the car was stolenfrom had no further dealings.

As for leaving the bike insured you can't do that either, as you can't have two policies on one vehicle.

http://www.thompsons.law.co.uk/Road-...n-vehicles.htm

If the driver responsible for the road traffic accident has stolen the vehicle involved in the accident and is identified by the Police then any insurance policy taken out by the owner of the vehicle may compensate innocent victims of injury. This decision will be down to the discretion of the insurance company involved. If they are not willing to deal with it or if there is no insurance policy in force for the vehicle at all, the only course of action would be to make a claim through the MIB.

and

One particular story which may be of interest is about a man who was knocked down outside his house by an uninsured driver. The 60 year old, who was recovering from a knee replacement operation and using a stick, was walking his dog when a car mounted the pavement and collided with him, knocking him unconscious.

The 15 year old driver of the car obviously had no valid driving licence and no valid motor insurance; however, the car was insured by the employers of his 21 year old passenger who had been provided with the vehicle as a company car. Thompsons' specialist personal injury lawyers recovered £8,000 compensation for the injured man from the insurance company who settled the claim even though they didn't insure the driver.

Druid

I was 3 months into the policy when I sold the bike ( just before xmas ). With me being "unemployed" and selling the bike due to that, they had no chance of getting any money out of me. Plus with the threat of OFT getting onto them I guess they thought it was not worth it.
I'm a believer of not paying any fees until they can prove that the fee is an actual cost to them. Normally it takes a few seconds to cancel any contract ( utilities, insurance, etc ) by just going onto their computer system an adjusting the details. The Fees should cost around £1 to £5 depending if a letters are sent or not.
For most people it is wiser and easier to just pay the fee, but i'm the type of person who will argue until i'm blue in the face.

Ste.

[G]

Originally Posted by fastdruid

http://www.thompsons.law.co.uk/Road-...n-vehicles.htm



and




Druid

All of that is just goodwill of the insurance company, they didn't have to do bugger all.

[Stu]

Originally Posted by G

All of that is just goodwill of the insurance company, they didn't have to do bugger all.

Then why does a car parked on the road need insurance even if it doesn't have a driver?
It is a combination of the vehicle and the driver that's insured

[madcockney]

Originally Posted by Messie

IIRC you can't insure something in which you have no insurable interest, ie, it's not yours. I tried that on my daughter's car, which was registered in her name. I wanted to insure it in my name with her as a named driver. I couldn't.

So your policy is void anyway, I think

Not quite true though I had an insurance company that tried to state that. Then I pointed out that surely it's the registered keeper and not the owner. I was for a brief time employed by a Danish company and I was their sole employee in the UK. The car was owned by them, but I was the registered keeper and the regular user. So in a sense I had an interest, but not a financial one, and I was able to insure that.

In your daughter's situation if you had registered the car in your name, though she owned it then you would probably have been able to insure it. There is a down side in that if she was involved in an accident and didn't own up to it, then they would seek out you.

I'm with Messie on this. You have no insurable interest - you have no ownership right in the bike.

[Stu]

Originally Posted by Ed

I'm with Messie on this. You have no insurable interest - you have no ownership right in the bike.

I can understand that you can't take out a policy on a bike you have sold, but does this really make you have to cancel it, or just not claim on it anymore?

[fastdruid]

Originally Posted by madcockney

Not quite true though I had an insurance company that tried to state that. Then I pointed out that surely it's the registered keeper and not the owner. I was for a brief time employed by a Danish company and I was their sole employee in the UK. The car was owned by them, but I was the registered keeper and the regular user. So in a sense I had an interest, but not a financial one, and I was able to insure that.

In your daughter's situation if you had registered the car in your name, though she owned it then you would probably have been able to insure it. There is a down side in that if she was involved in an accident and didn't own up to it, then they would seek out you.

Both me and my wife are insured for both our bikes on my policy, they asked the question "is it registered to you" I replied "no, its in my wifes name, it could be in my name if need be but would rather not". They went away, came back and said no problem, they'd just make a note of it on the file.

Druid