Insurance Cover - Parked Bike fall due to heavy wind :(

**Jai_Reddy** · 4th May 2020, 09:58

Hi Guys,

My Bike took a fall due to the heavy winds in welly

it been parked off road in our driveway since two months and has expired wof and rego.

Does insurance cover this ?

Regards,
Jai

**onearmedbandit** · 4th May 2020, 13:24

Originally Posted by Jai_Reddy

Hi Guys,

My Bike took a fall due to the heavy winds in welly

it been parked off road in our driveway since two months and has expired wof and rego.

Does insurance cover this ?

Regards,
Jai

If the damage was not a result of failure or defect of a warrant-able component they will have a hard time getting out of the claim. This was determined years ago by the insurance ombudsman. A few years back a friend was driving a freshly imported vehicle with no rego or warrant of fitness. As neither of these factors played a part in the accident (it was sunstrike) the insurance company paid out.

**Oakie** · 4th May 2020, 17:10

I would have thought so unless they claim an 'Act of God' (if that is an out in the policy). Regardless ... you need to make a claim pronto as the policy WILL say that claims have to be lodged probably within a day or so.

**HenryDorsetCase** · 4th May 2020, 17:54

Make the claim. Up to them to deny it. If they do, PM me for the name of the best insurance lawyer in the country.

**sidecar bob** · 4th May 2020, 18:02

Originally Posted by Oakie

I would have thought so unless they claim an 'Act of God' (if that is an out in the policy). Regardless ... you need to make a claim pronto as the policy WILL say that claims have to be lodged probably within a day or so.

Heres some guidelines outlining what constitutes an act of God.

https://youtu.be/Ec_EzwRaD3M

**jasonu** · 5th May 2020, 02:10

Originally Posted by Jai_Reddy

Hi Guys,

My Bike took a fall due to the heavy winds in welly

it been parked off road in our driveway since two months and has expired wof and rego.

Does insurance cover this ?

Regards,
Jai

They will do everything they can to get out of paying up. Cunts.

**Oscar** · 5th May 2020, 09:23

I see in typical KB fashion all the armchair experts are out and as usual, are talking crap.
So in no particular order:

1. It is unlawful for an insurer to rely on an exclusion that has no relevance to the proximate cause of the claim, in this case the lack of a WOF or REG (see 1977 Insurance Law Reform Act S11b).
2. There is no such thing as an Act of God (or even force majeure) in insurance contracts in NZ.
3. It is unlawful for an insurer to decline a claim based solely on a time limit. The insurer must be able to prove that so much time has elapsed as to have prejudiced their interests (1977 Reform Act S9).
4. If you willingly enter into a commercial contract with an organisation that you think …will do everything they can to get out of paying up”, you are the Cunt. Think about it.
5. If your first reaction to an insurance claim is to recommend a lawyer, see 4.

I am assuming here that you dorks actually have insurance on your bike, cars, house and contents etc.
Yet you all have comprehensively proved here that despite feeling the need to crap on about the subject on the interweb – you have never read these documents.
If you had, you will find nary a word about “Acts of God” or time limits or any of the other nonsense posted here.
So if you haven't read your own, why presume that any of your thoughts are valid?

The poor bastid asked for help, not half-baked opinions.

**Oscar** · 5th May 2020, 09:26

Originally Posted by Jai_Reddy

Hi Guys,

My Bike took a fall due to the heavy winds in welly

it been parked off road in our driveway since two months and has expired wof and rego.

Does insurance cover this ?

Regards,
Jai

Providing you have a comprehensive policy, yes it does.

**Bonez** · 5th May 2020, 09:49

Thanks for those references Oscar. I've cut n pasted them to a text document.

**Oscar** · 5th May 2020, 09:56

There are two law reform acts:

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/p...est/whole.html

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/p.../DLM75978.html

The 1977 one dealt with a lot of the misleading conduct that insurers got up to, as did the Fair Trading Act.
Stuff like the responsibility of the insurer to correctly determine underwriting information (much like the various finance acts dealing with reckless lending to consumers) and declining claims for late notification or irrelevant matters, charging huge time on risk premiums for cancelled policies and stuff like that.
It is interesting how hard the myths endure though. My favourite is that you are not insured for driving a car in jandals or bare feet...

**Oscar** · 5th May 2020, 10:01

Originally Posted by onearmedbandit

If the damage was not a result of failure or defect of a warrant-able component they will have a hard time getting out of the claim. This was determined years ago by the insurance ombudsman. A few years back a friend was driving a freshly imported vehicle with no rego or warrant of fitness. As neither of these factors played a part in the accident (it was sunstrike) the insurance company paid out.

I actually missed this one.
Good work, Sir!

**HenryDorsetCase** · 5th May 2020, 12:55

Originally Posted by Oscar

The poor bastid asked for help, not half-baked opinions.

Bro, do you even KB?

And re the recommendation for a specialist lawyer - you've clearly not had to deal with the aftermath of the earthquakes here. It was tongue in cheek anyway - this would not be a big enough claim for him to get involved.

Here is what I tell everyone. Yes, I am giving you free legal advice. You will want to copy this and paste it somewhere.

Banks and Insurance companies (which sadly are often intertwined) are each two separate companies which happen to share premises and a logo. The one that gets all the publicity is the hearts and flowers side, the "please give us your business" side that says "We are here to help you and we love kittens and puppies and flowers". The other side is the side you likely won't see. Thats the side run by Marcellus Wallace that has a duty to fuck you over by, for example, disputing clear policy entitlements, entering into fraudulent lowball repair contracts to force settlments, doing everything in their power to "add value for shareholders" by NOT paying people what they are entitled to. Ten years of dealing with insurance companies after the earthquakes down here and 25 years of dealing with banks when people get offside have taught me that. You, clearly, have only ever dealt with the puppies and kittens. If Marcellus comes calling though, well, you're on your own.

**HenryDorsetCase** · 5th May 2020, 12:57

Originally Posted by Oscar

There are two law reform acts:

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/p...est/whole.html

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/p.../DLM75978.html

The 1977 one dealt with a lot of the misleading conduct that insurers got up to, as did the Fair Trading Act.
Stuff like the responsibility of the insurer to correctly determine underwriting information (much like the various finance acts dealing with reckless lending to consumers) and declining claims for late notification or irrelevant matters, charging huge time on risk premiums for cancelled policies and stuff like that.
It is interesting how hard the myths endure though. My favourite is that you are not insured for driving a car in jandals or bare feet...

The current need for reform would be around innocent non-disclosure - as has been done for example in the UK.

**Jeeper** · 5th May 2020, 13:06

Banks and insurance have been through separation over the last few years. Westpac has the life insurance business, other banks have all pretty much sold underwriting business to insurance companies. Even AMP is splitting away insurance and wealth management.