Insurance fraud

[imdying]

Saw something on the svrider forum that made me wonder...

Motorcycle insurance fraud... it happens... you lend a bike to a mate, he bins it, you tell the insurance company that you were riding... do you think that that is acceptable?

If you've told your mate before he bins, that he has to pay the excess, and then he reneges, what do you do? Obviously it's bye bye mortgage if you get caught out for insurance fraud... do you consider this bad form, or merely karma biting you in the arse?

[Romeo]

<!--
Here's the context to my post!

I heard of a guy who was riding pissed, binned his ride and serverely injured himself (in the middle of a major intersection). His mates instantly got the van around and bundled the bike into the back, then got the ambos on the way. He then told the insurance company that he'd fallen off the back of someone elses bike, but he didn't know who - because he was conveniently pissed.





-->It's something I'd never do, but some people get away with it and save their licences and property. Is it my obligation to dob someone in in the same way that I'd dob someone in if I saw them steal $5,000+ from someone (say, an insurance company)? Doesn't feel the same somehow, even though in effect it's almost exactly the same.

[R6_kid]

Get a better insurance policy then it doesn't matter... call dave at Kiwibike, my mate got an all riders full cover on his RS250, with track day cover too... it's costing him less than it used to aswell.

If your mate turned on you and said nah not paying after crashing your bike then he's a cock, unless the cause of the crash was yours.


Is it my obligation to dob someone in in the same way that I'd dob someone in if I saw them steal $5,000+ from someone (say, an insurance company)? Doesn't feel the same somehow, even though in effect it's almost exactly the same.

Some insurance companies have been screwing people over for years... why not get them back? Probably because insurance fraud is the reason they are so skeptical about claims

[Mom]

Insurance fraudsters should be tarred and feathered!

The thought of "yay I can make some money here" obviously does not compute in their heads to more expensive premiums and innocent claims being investigated causing more stress for the claimant!

Wear it if your mate bins and your policy does not cover. Get a policy that does cover it, not rocket science really. If the agreement is your mate pays the excess should shit hit the fan and he/she does not pay, then they were not your mate anyway.

[McJim]

At the end of the day it's the poor honest sods that foot the bill. the reason our premiums are so high is to cover the cost of paying fraudulent claims. Best thing to do at an incident is get the cops along to rubber stamp what happened that way the facts are set in stone.

Fraudulent claims probably make up about 30% of my monthly premiums so I hate the c*nts with a vengeance.

[yod]

if your mate aint covered, dont let him ride it....

[ManDownUnder]

Check the size of the fraud squads in NZ...

The Police have (I think) 10 staff nationwide while the Insurance companies have 150+! Farud is costing me the addional bit that is ripped off the companies ($$$ wise) as well as the salaries of those tasked with catching them.

And that's a LOT of staff.

Na mate - it's nuts. I can see the temptation, but liken it to companies avoiding paying tax. They more they do it, the more my PAYE needs to get bumped up.

It's clever to get away with it sure... but at my incremental expense?

[miSTa]

Shoot the pricks, it's costing me money :2guns:

[jrandom]

I fucking hate people who defraud insurance companies.

I read somewhere that 25% of motorcycle theft claims are fraudulent. That's my premium payments those motherfuckers are getting.

Hang 'em high.

[janno]

You need to swap your yes and no on the poll to get it to make sense.

Agreed with all the above. Ripping off the companies just makes it all the more expensive for everyone. It's no different from nicking money from a stranger. Except the stranger is all the rest of us, including the person who's fiddling the books.

[Toaster]

The more people rip off the system, the more the rest of us have to pay in premiums to pay for thier dishonesty. Same goes for tax-dodgers and benefit fraudsters.

The lot should be shot and their families made to pay for the bullet.

[imdying]

You need to swap your yes and no on the poll to get it to make sense.You are so right, my apologies. I'll leave it be though.

Personally, I wouldn't let anyone else ride my bikes, and also why it's a pretty rare event for me to ride someone elses.

[rwh]

:bye: Another silly poll that's unworkable due to the stupid options.

Fraud is bad. If you want to be able to lend your bike, get insurance that covers it.

But hanging?

Richard

[avgas]

I'm not going to vote on this as i see it in a different light.
If you cover your arse by saying it was you on your bike, insurance co replace ya bike, you are no better or worse than before.
To me fraud is when you insure something, then need the money back - so you go outside and burn or "steal" it.
Am I the only one who thinks this?
Or do you all lock up your bike exactly how your explained to the insurance co over the phone, and dont ride recklessly when you crash (remember that whole "It wasnt my fault i failed to take that turn" thing)

[imdying]

But hanging?Yes, hanging, literally... Use the brain God gave you...

[imdying]

Or do you all lock up your bike exactly how your explained to the insurance co over the phone, and dont ride recklessly when you crash (remember that whole "It wasnt my fault i failed to take that turn" thing)The question isn't whether you use your bike outside of the insurance provisions, that is of course your right... the question is 'Is it acceptable to claim if something happens when you do so?'

I would say of course not... if you wanted to be covered in those situations, you should have brought a policy that accomodated that.

[rwh]

Yes, hanging, literally... Use the brain God gave you...

There's too many folks on here in favour for me to assume anything. I'm not voting for something I disagree with, whether it's intended as tongue in cheek or not. After all, the interpretations of those reading the results have to be taken into account as well. If you used your brain (whether God-given or (d)evolved), you could perhaps avoid over-emotionalising and distorting your poll.

Richard

[imdying]

Right... Sooo, Richard's pointless ramblings aside... If you knew of somebody who had done this, for a not so insignificant amount of money, how many would find it to be their moral obligation to alert the police or their insurance company?

[avgas]

The question isn't whether you use your bike outside of the insurance provisions, that is of course your right... the question is 'Is it acceptable to claim if something happens when you do so?'

I would say of course not... if you wanted to be covered in those situations, you should have brought a policy that accomodated that.
Really - so there is a "mad blat on SH1 weaving in an out of traffic at 140kph" policy?
Or the ever fabled "somehow the power kicked in and the wheel went up - thats how i broke the back off my bike" policy.
Next you will tell me you only do 50 in town.

[imdying]

Really - so there is a "mad blat on SH1 weaving in an out of traffic at 140kph" policy?So you think you should be covered for that then? :lol: You're having a laugh right?

As I understand it, there is a track day policy ...

[avgas]

So you think you should be covered for that then?
Of course i'm covered for that, why else pay insurance.
However if such and event happened it would be a case of:
"I had no idea what happend, i went to pass a car then i must have hit diesel and the back spun up....next thing im in a paddock looking after my wounds"
Yes it would be a lie - but fraud is such a heavy word.
Consider it a lie for a lie, dont expect the insurance company to pay anywhere the value of the vehicle....even though they state the value it is insured for.
You mean to tell me that if you crashed at 110 on your bike, you wouldn't claim your were doing 100?

[Grahameeboy]

Really - so there is a "mad blat on SH1 weaving in an out of traffic at 140kph" policy?
Or the ever fabled "somehow the power kicked in and the wheel went up - thats how i broke the back off my bike" policy.
Next you will tell me you only do 50 in town.

Insurance covers carelessness because that is how accidents happen.

Wrecklessness is a way out for Insurance, however, onus of proof is high.

[Grahameeboy]

Of course i'm covered for that, why else pay insurance.
However if such and event happened it would be a case of:
"I had no idea what happend, i went to pass a car then i must have hit diesel and the back spun up....next thing im in a paddock looking after my wounds"
Yes it would be a lie - but fraud is such a heavy word.
Consider it a lie for a lie, dont expect the insurance company to pay anywhere the value of the vehicle....even though they state the value it is insured for.
You mean to tell me that if you crashed at 110 on your bike, you wouldn't claim your were doing 100?

To be honest most riders / drivers say they were goi ng slower, however, the salient point is whether saying you were doing 90kph when you were doing 130kph is totally relevant to what happened and if it was not you have not benefitted from lying about your speed so this is not Fraud and if you did lie then this would not invalidate your claim but would possible affect the question of liability.

I mean, most drivers will try and blame the other driver. They make the details suit them but it is not really fraud and if the truth comes out thne you just lose your NCD.

More than 50% of household claims involve some fraud......when I dealt with claims I did some investigation on a $85,000 house theft claim and the silly bugger produced a photo of jewellery, always a dodgy sign, which has the development date on the back which was after the date of the theft...he tried to make out it was US date......I confronted him.....claim not pursued.

[Usarka]

Haha it's like someone else crashing your bike at a trackday and saying you crashed it on the road. not that anyone would do that but if they did it means we end up paying higher insurance! goddammit not like it's not high anyways!

[Grahameeboy]

You may also be surprised that Insurance Companies are also guilty of fraud........ one common eg is they will often not advise that a customer has $10,000 death benefit under a Motor Policy because they say "Well it is up to the Insured to read the policy'.......

Even Insurance Brokers.....:yes:

[McJim]

Right... Sooo, Richard's pointless ramblings aside... If you knew of somebody who had done this, for a not so insignificant amount of money, how many would find it to be their moral obligation to alert the police or their insurance company?

It depends how sure I was of the facts. If I was a witness I'd prolly advise them at the time that I wasn't going to back their bulshit up if they make a fraudulent claim - then they know where they stand.

If, however, I heard from a fella who was a friend of a dog whose budgie heard something....well then I'd say I wasn't sure of my own facts and would wonder if I should contact a higher authority.

[imdying]

Ok, given that it seems most people are against it, what about the rest of the story...

Mate agrees to pay $250 (USD) if he bins the bike he is borrowing (the excess), crashes, they do the insurance thing, owner gets paid out $5300, and then the friend refuses to cough up the $250 citing that the guy has been paid out by the insurance company. What sort of friend is that??? Assuming he isn't in hard times or something to that effect, that seems pretty low :/

Given the consequences of the insurance company finding out, should this 'friend' turn snarky, I think he should just take the hit and learn the lesson. Pretty sad state of affairs and it's hard to feel sympathetic, but isn't a deal a deal? :(

[McJim]

Moral of the story? Don't lend your bike to that c*nt. My missus has loaned her bike out to other riders for licence tests. Each rider has been aware and agreeable to the fact that if they break it they bought it.

Thanks jrandom and Hellraiser :)

[Pancakes]

I think we all know the rule. As you hand the keys over/are given the keys the phrase comes as a statement and question of comfirmation.... "You know the rule". I have turned down rides and drives cos I wasn't in the position to carry thru on the terms of the rule should things turn a bit hairy. I've lent my cars and bikes and other stuff but firstly to people I really trust (as oppased to dodgy fuck's but your young and want to seem cool/can't say no too) and also keep in mind if I don't get it back (they are carjacked etc) will that be ok? If you have to have your wheels for work etc just say no!

Can't comment on the poll, I work for a finance co and work closely with the fraud team, can say that there are some really smart and motivated fraudsters out there but greed will undo them in the end.



PS, man i write like a real geek! I'm cool, I promise.

[Pancakes]

Oh, your friend's dogs friend is a cock, don't worry about the money, it is a tie to some asshole you really don't need ties too until they pay up and who's got that long? Just let them know if you see them again they'll be spending more than that at the Dr's!

[Deano]

I think we all know the rule. As you hand the keys over/are given the keys the phrase comes as a statement and question of comfirmation.... "You know the rule". I have turned down rides and drives cos I wasn't in the position to carry thru on the terms of the rule should things turn a bit hairy.

I have only let one other person ride my Repsol.

And that's cause he was crass enough to ask. When I say ask, I think he said chuck me your keys.

I am always a bit dubious about lending or swapping bikes - that's when Murphy often decides to ruin your day.

[imdying]

Was from an American forum... I think $250 was probably a pretty cheap life lesson myself :yes:

[jetboy]

Insurance fraud is one of the factors that contribute to increased insurance premiums.

The whole point of insurance is to put you back as close as possible to the position you were in before your loss - you are not supposed to make $$ out of a claim!

So to those of you who complain about increased premiums: have a look to see who voted "yes its sweet to commit fraud" on this poll and complain to them!

[jetboy]

The question isn't whether you use your bike outside of the insurance provisions, that is of course your right... the question is 'Is it acceptable to claim if something happens when you do so?'

I would say of course not... if you wanted to be covered in those situations, you should have brought a policy that accomodated that.
Bingo. Remember - insurance companies are just that - companies. They offer a service on their terms and conditions; if you don't like it then no one is forcing you to insure with them. The same applies vice versa: if the insurance company does not want to insure you they are under no obligation to do so.

[jetboy]

Consider it a lie for a lie, dont expect the insurance company to pay anywhere the value of the vehicle....even though they state the value it is insured for.


Most insurers pay the market value of a vehicle. The insurers I deal with put the onus on you to tell us what your bike is worth (read: what the market value is, not what you think it is worth) because, again, the point of insurance is to put you back as close as possible to the position you were in before the loss. So if you write off a $2,000 corolla then dont expect anything more than $2,000.

Common sense really.

[Usarka]

So to those of you who complain about increased premiums: have a look to see who voted "yes its sweet to commit fraud" on this poll and complain to them!

Not an open poll dammit.

Big time penalties for fraud though.......

[sAsLEX]

Most insurers pay the market value of a vehicle. The insurers I deal with put the onus on you to tell us what your bike is worth (read: what the market value is, not what you think it is worth) because, again, the point of insurance is to put you back as close as possible to the position you were in before the loss. So if you write off a $2,000 corolla then dont expect anything more than $2,000.

Common sense really.

Then how come you pay for a service and you end up having to do the leg work?

How come they only pay out market value when it suits them not when the value of the bike has increased whilst being insured?

How come they don't insure for acts of god? I am an atheist or whatever those that believe in science are, to me there is no god why should I pay for things he does?

Why is there a terrorism clause?

[Pancakes]

Why is there a terrorism clause?

Terrorism schmerrorism!

I must be supa hardcore! I have damage from nuclear warfare rulled out in mine!

[imdying]

Then how come you pay for a service and you end up having to do the leg work?That hasn't been my experience?

How come they only pay out market value when it suits them not when the value of the bike has increased whilst being insured?You're free to increase your cover at any time...

How come they don't insure for acts of god? I am an atheist or whatever those that believe in science are, to me there is no god why should I pay for things he does?I think it's pretty obvious that it's a historical term to cover things that can't reasonably be covered without a significantly higher premium. Most people are going to consider those things an acceptable risk, and not want to pay the higher premium... you can of course organise to have Acts of God covered, but you'll pay a premium that reflects that.

Why is there a terrorism clause?See above.

[avgas]

"At state we pay out over 2000% of genuine claims"
Classic