Insurance

**motorbyclist** · 19th July 2009, 14:55

Why are we so tolerant of uninsured riders, and why hasn't this come up yet?!

In short, 3rd party as a minimum should be encouraged.

EDIT: this was for the rides working group, but a kind mod disagreed with me, infracted me thrice, and PD with all my threads. Wouldn't dare post this otherwise for the borderline trolling it would be, but it's here now. have fun.

**motorbyclist** · 19th July 2009, 14:57

I have full cover, so i'm (hopefully) ok, but I know of riders who have had the responsibility/common sense to have 3rd party, but then get shafted when hit by an uninsured rider/driver

while this isn't exactly safety orientated, it IS an important consideration, and comes up to by next thread....

**h_tron** · 19th July 2009, 21:02

yeah i think this is true, if your going to go ahead and buy a vehical you need to be resbonsible for your actions even thou you may think you might never crash. if you cant afford 3rd party, how are you going to pay for damage if you do crash

**cowboyz** · 19th July 2009, 21:19

the real question should be why dont motorcylist get pissed at people who use insurance to pay for their upgrades?

and when you break it all down insurance means one thing and one thing only.

You feel the need to pay someone to cover your mistakes because you do not have the confidence in your ability to avoid an accident.

**PirateJafa** · 19th July 2009, 21:45

Originally Posted by cowboyz

the real question should be why dont motorcylist get pissed at people who use insurance to pay for their upgrades?

Well he seemed pretty impressed actually when I used someone else's insurance to pay for my upgrade.

**motorbyclist** · 20th July 2009, 00:20

it was a mix of dismay, impressedness, and annoyance that we pay premiums for what was borderline fraud. (probably just jealousy, actually

)

NOTE:

this was for the rides working group, but a kind mod disagreed with me, infracted me thrice, and PD with all my threads. Wouldn't dare post this otherwise for the borderline trolling it would be, but it's here now. have fun.

**firefighter** · 20th July 2009, 00:31

Originally Posted by cowboyz

insurance means one thing and one thing only.

You feel the need to pay someone to cover your mistakes because you do not have the confidence in your ability to avoid an accident.

Wrong nutshell dude.

My reasons are different.

I don't want to write off a brand new mercedes, from whatever cause, and have to sell my house, and pay off a fucked car i'll never get anything out of for the rest of my life.......nor have to pay to replace a stolen bike...

Remember, if you can't prove it was caused by the other person, who took off, and it really was unavoidable (some things really are, no matter how perfect you think you are) Your mistake or not you could very well be paying out.....until you die.

Fucketh that.

**YellowDog** · 20th July 2009, 06:05

+1 for Firefighter.

Insurance can pay for both partes upgrades, but it also pays for saving you from losing your potential ability to finance any kind of life.

The insurance company doesn't care whether you are sure you were not at fault or. We all know that shit happens. Right and wrong are decided by someone else, not you. What about the idiot witness who didn't understand what was going on and says that you were in the wrong. Maybe he's a mate of the other guy.

No Insurance = Huge risk.

Safe motorcycling = Avoiding as many risks as possible.

**jono035** · 20th July 2009, 06:28

Originally Posted by firefighter

Wrong nutshell dude.

My reasons are different.

I don't want to write off a brand new mercedes, from whatever cause, and have to sell my house, and pay off a fucked car i'll never get anything out of for the rest of my life.......nor have to pay to replace a stolen bike...

Remember, if you can't prove it was caused by the other person, who took off, and it really was unavoidable (some things really are, no matter how perfect you think you are) Your mistake or not you could very well be paying out.....until you die.

Fucketh that.

Yep, got it in one.

I've always had full insurance, from my first car right on through. Would never drive without 3rd party for the reasons you mention, and always get full because there are idiots without any insurance out there.

3rd party insurance is a must, no matter how arrogant you are about your ability to avoid 'accidents' (although the word used should really tip you off on that score), because they are just that. Accidents. Yes, the vast majority are avoidable or could have been minimised at least, but they would still happen, because nobody is infallible.

If you get into an accident with a brand new merc/beemer without insurance and it isn't 100% clear who was at fault, then you're going to have lawyers crawling around in your ass for weeks. And will also end up paying for it. Probably for years to come or through filing for bankruptcy, which is awesome fun.

**cowboyz** · 20th July 2009, 07:05

Originally Posted by firefighter

Wrong nutshell dude.

My reasons are different.

I don't want to write off a brand new mercedes, from whatever cause, and have to sell my house, and pay off a fucked car i'll never get anything out of for the rest of my life.......nor have to pay to replace a stolen bike...

Remember, if you can't prove it was caused by the other person, who took off, and it really was unavoidable (some things really are, no matter how perfect you think you are) Your mistake or not you could very well be paying out.....until you die.

Fucketh that.

heres the kicker. ignore the whole.. I insure my bike incase it gets stolen because otherwise youd insure it for theft.
The real reason you are insuring your bike for accident is that you think it is concievable that you might hit a brand new mercedes, from whatever cause, and have to sell my house, and pay off a fucked car i'll never get anything out of for the rest of my life.

**cowboyz** · 20th July 2009, 07:09

Originally Posted by jono035

Yep, got it in one.

. And will also end up paying for it. Probably for years to come or through filing for bankruptcy, which is awesome fun.

And here we have how insurance companies make money. Operate on fear and ones basic lack of self confidence on the idea that something might go wrong.

Add to the mix that they want full disclosure without offering the same in return.

**jono035** · 20th July 2009, 07:18

Originally Posted by cowboyz

And here we have how insurance companies make money. Operate on fear and ones basic lack of self confidence on the idea that something might go wrong.

Add to the mix that they want full disclosure without offering the same in return.

As opposed to what? The assumption that I am a driving god who will never have an accident, ever?

Insurance companies make money, yes. They do so by providing a service. Most people would rather pay them something to ensure than when something goes wrong, the effects of it are minimised.

The problem is, you're looking at it in an average sense. On average everyone pays the insurance company some amount, who then pays out on claims. This all works out even except that the insurance companies make a profit, which I'm guessing is what your beef with them is. They basically work to make sure that if something bad happens, it doesn't completely and utterly cripple your life (has happened and to people I know, so cut the BS about spreading fear).

You can take that risk if you want, but at least get 3rd party so you don't end up being one of those wankers who writes someone elses car off while driving/riding with no insurance then sticks their fingers in their ears and goes 'lalala it wasn't my fault because I am a driving god lalala' at the top of their lungs.

Originally Posted by cowboyz

The real reason you are insuring your bike for accident is that you think it is concievable that you might hit a brand new mercedes, from whatever cause, and have to sell my house, and pay off a fucked car i'll never get anything out of for the rest of my life.

I'm not sure what part of this statement you are saying is unreasonable? Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. In history, people who are careful drivers have had accidents and you don't get to choose the type of car you get into an accident with.

**Owl** · 20th July 2009, 07:42

Originally Posted by cowboyz

the real question should be why dont motorcylist get pissed at people who use insurance to pay for their upgrades

I did exactly that cowboyz, but it was fully disclosed to the insurance company and approved.

I guess there are good and bad ways about doing it.

**cowboyz** · 20th July 2009, 07:46

Originally Posted by jono035

As opposed to what? The assumption that I am a driving god who will never have an accident, ever?

Insurance companies make money, yes. They do so by providing a service. Most people would rather pay them something to ensure than when something goes wrong, the effects of it are minimised.

The problem is, you're looking at it in an average sense. On average everyone pays the insurance company some amount, who then pays out on claims. This all works out even except that the insurance companies make a profit, which I'm guessing is what your beef with them is. They basically work to make sure that if something bad happens, it doesn't completely and utterly cripple your life (has happened and to people I know, so cut the BS about spreading fear).

You can take that risk if you want, but at least get 3rd party so you don't end up being one of those wankers who writes someone elses car off while driving/riding with no insurance then sticks their fingers in their ears and goes 'lalala it wasn't my fault because I am a driving god lalala' at the top of their lungs.

I'm not sure what part of this statement you are saying is unreasonable? Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. In history, people who are careful drivers have had accidents and you don't get to choose the type of car you get into an accident with.

I find this interesting on a few counts.

let me list the points out to make it a little clearer, as always, you might want to correct any point I have misunderstood.

1. You think that getting a bike from point A to point B on a public road with other traffic on the road without damaging any vehicle requires a god-like riding ability

2. You do not think that you have god-like riding abilities

3. You pay a premium so someone else pays for the majority of your mistakes

4. accidents are inevitable and will happen

Just to clear a few points up on my side.

1. I have no problem with any company making a profit - thats their job.

2. I didnt say it was unreasonable for you to have lack of confidence in your ability to avoid an accident. I havent seen you ride. You may be fully justified in your fears of crashing into an expensive car and being lumbered with a huge debt.

Whos history are you baseing the requirement for insurance on? My personal history? 20 years of road riding with zero at fault accidents? I have been in a position where I have argued with anothers insurance company where they were at fault and they didnt want to pay. The paid up after a few discussions so it worked out well but again, if the other driver was paying attention and didnt run me over he wouldnt have needed insurance.
He obviously thought that his skill set in operating a vechile on a public road without causing an accident was lacking and did not want to foot the bill for his own mistakes so he paid a company to cover the costs for him. He happened to be right and he did not pay for his own mistakes. His insurance company paid me instead.