Need Questions Answered about Insurance?

[Highlander]

After being claim free for 10 years with Sate I made a fairly decent claim on car, then a minor claim on House within 6 months now I'm with AMI.

State were dearer and service was shocking. Had no probs with AMI.

[NSR-Dan]

Hi NSR Dan. Company I deal with have been really reasonable although I haven't had need to claim. They cater for the distinguished and refined over thirties. When I started doing track days a few years back I was suprised to be told that as long as it wasn't racing I would be covered. I have felt smug about this ever since, only to have my bubble burst by a forum member last week. Apparently the indemnity form signed as part of registration for track days, means that insurance companies can't pursue other parties in the event of an accident. This then invalidates my insurance. True or false bro?

I think you will find that Insurance companys cant pursue other parties while racing, while you are riding on the road its covered under the normal policy. only companys that will insure race vehicles is classic (which insures through vero), vero and IAG.

vehicles are usually never covered while racing and even on a race track. i think with AA we cover cars on a race track but only if they are not racing (show days, saftey cars etc) and if they dont exceed the legal speed limit of 100kmh

[Highlander]

I checked with AMI before I went to a track day and after checking with the manager was told that as long as it was for rider training and not race training or a race day no problem.

[NSR-Dan]

I checked with AMI before I went to a track day and after checking with the manager was told that as long as it was for rider training and not race training or a race day no problem.

yeah thats fine, but there will still be an exclusion that your not covered if they can prove you were exceeding 100kmh.

[Highlander]

They'd be keeping that wee gem quiet until I made a claim I guess.

[Clivoris]

I think you will find that Insurance companys cant pursue other parties while racing, while you are riding on the road its covered under the normal policy. only companys that will insure race vehicles is classic (which insures through vero), vero and IAG.

vehicles are usually never covered while racing and even on a race track. i think with AA we cover cars on a race track but only if they are not racing (show days, saftey cars etc) and if they dont exceed the legal speed limit of 100kmh

I am with Classic cover and the definition I was given of racing was no racing start, no places awarded, no lap counting or timing. Does this make sense to you? Might I actually be covered? I s'pose the 100kmh limit stuffs that tho. Best not crash then.

[NSR-Dan]

I am with Classic cover and the definition I was given of racing was no racing start, no places awarded, no lap counting or timing. Does this make sense to you? Might I actually be covered? I s'pose the 100kmh limit stuffs that tho. Best not crash then.

I was meaning classic offers racing cover to race vehicles, its differrent to your standard bike policy, it comes under comercial cover i think, and most vehicle are generaly not road registered.

its there for the big sods that need insurance on there expensive cars and have advertisement contracts to keep. generaly that kind of insurance covers the minorist of events anyway like theft and malicious damage etc.

[NSR-Dan]

So lets see

pay 3.5 k for van bank balance reads $0 at this point
van stolen pay excess BB -$2000
bank gives you the difference BB$1500
buy van BB $-3500

yip that seems to work!>?

Shouldnt matter diddly squat what you paid for it! Its market value that they love to sput when it will make them a $$ so it should go both ways!

$2000 for excess. thats insane yours should be $300 unless your under 25 or not on a full licence and even then its no where near $2000.
if you buy anything cheap no one is goin to insure it for more than what you payed for it.

that would be unfare on everyone else who has insurance there still goin to loose there excess and get back what they payed for even if they paid full for there vehicle. so if it gets stolen you loose $300, which is still better than not having insurance at all.

its probably benificial to insure at a company that offers market value policies, instead of agreed value, that way you will get payed the market value of the van. so if you insures it for what you say its worth they will pay you the value of a replace ment van at the time of accident which they could say its only worth 4000 even though you payed premiums based on 5000 or so. still if the insurance company finds out you payed less than what you insured it for they will call fraud and get out of it. i have seen it many times in court rulings with other companys.

[Oscar]

I think you will find that Insurance companys cant pursue other parties while racing, while you are riding on the road its covered under the normal policy. only companys that will insure race vehicles is classic (which insures through vero), vero and IAG.

vehicles are usually never covered while racing and even on a race track. i think with AA we cover cars on a race track but only if they are not racing (show days, saftey cars etc) and if they dont exceed the legal speed limit of 100kmh

I think you'd best have another look at your policy document, Bub.

Firstly, if you sign an indemnity at a track day, you are technically prejudicing your insurers rights (of recovery). However, since 1)most indemnity forms hold the organiser harmless, not the other riders and 2) you can't contract out of negligence - you or your insurer can certainly have a go.

Notwithstanding that most motor vehicle insurance policies have some sort of exclusion dealing with "speed events", it is not correct to say that they are never covered on a race track. You would certainly be covered by any insurer if you were riding around a race track on your own.

Similarly, can you point to the exclusion in the policy that refers to speed limits? As the speed limit doesn't apply to a track, the insurer would have to rely on the "reasonable care" exclusion, which is much more restrictive.

[Zukin]

Hey

Why do insurance companies charge you more for insurance depending on the CC rating of the bike??
They dont do this with cars at around the same value

EG (these numbers are plucked out of the sky)
Model Value Premium
06 DRZ250 - $7000 $450
04 DRZ400- $7000 $570

This happend to me just last month, I asked them and they told me that the I pay more as the bigger CC bikes are more dangerous?? I said its the rider thats dangerous not the bike?
I then said if I brought a 1500cc Mini for $5000 and a V8 for $5000, would the premium be the same? Yes unless it was on the list of regularly stolen cars (Evos and WRX's etc)

Cheers

[emaN]

Thats fair enough what they said.

this is in place to protect insurance companys from fraudsters. as you could buy a car of a mate for 2000 when its worth 5000, you write it off 2 months later and they pay out $5000, you have now made $3000. im afraid this is not how insurance companys work.

thanks dude.
i'm a 10yr+ AA member now, last claim being theft in '00, so I (like to) think I'm getting a good deal.
think i'll have a look-see at others as our total package is a couple of houses, contents, van & bike. be interesting to see what i get quoted.

[bane]

The whole idea of insurance is to protect your belongings and if any thing unexpected happens is to put you back in the same financial positition that you were in before the time of loss.

this is in place to protect insurance companys from fraudsters. as you could buy a car of a mate for 2000 when its worth 5000, you write it off 2 months later and they pay out $5000, you have now made $3000. im afraid this is not how insurance companys work.

Obviously my experience with AA must be atypical. A few years back I bought a 6 month old "demonstrator" (car) from a dealer. The dealer was keen to quit stock, and I paid 40%+ under rrp.

When I went to AA, they never asked me what i'd paid, they asked what I wanted to insure it for. I suggested a figure approx $5k above what i'd actually paid, not to rip the insurer off (in 10 years Ive never claimed on any insurance), but to make sure I could purchase a similar replacement vehicle should the worst happen.

The AA agent looked at her PC and suggested my figure was just under their suggested range, and that I may be under insuring! (the inference being I could be risking problems by underestimating the risk to the insurer..)

Thats how I view agreed value, what would it cost to replace the asset (in the same condition), as opposed to what I may have paid.

[NSR-Dan]

I think you'd best have another look at your policy document, Bub.

Firstly, if you sign an indemnity at a track day, you are technically prejudicing your insurers rights (of recovery). However, since 1)most indemnity forms hold the organiser harmless, not the other riders and 2) you can't contract out of negligence - you or your insurer can certainly have a go.
Notwithstanding that most motor vehicle insurance policies have some sort of exclusion dealing with "speed events", it is not correct to say that they are never covered on a race track. You would certainly be covered by any insurer if you were riding around a race track on your own.

Similarly, can you point to the exclusion in the policy that refers to speed limits? As the speed limit doesn't apply to a track, the insurer would have to rely on the "reasonable care" exclusion, which is much more restrictive.

i was implying there is comercial insurance available for race vehicles, the superV8s have insurance on there vehicles other wise if its in a total loss crash they would be out of pocket a few million dollars. i work for motorsport auckland (voluntary) so i know that racers have insurance on vehicles. and most race vehicle insurers are aware of the indemnitys you sign when racing.


the indemnity for you sign on race days is so that you insurance company cant recover costs of other racers and the track.

and all personal lines insurance have exclusions that you vehicle wont be covered while exceeding the nationa NZ speed limit of 100km regardless if you are offroad, on a road or on a race track. and most say your vehicle is not covered on a race track full stop unless you have been given approval by your insurance company first. at AA we wont even insure a car that has a roll cage becuase we see that the car has been built with the intention of being raced.

[NSR-Dan]

Hey

Why do insurance companies charge you more for insurance depending on the CC rating of the bike??
They dont do this with cars at around the same value

EG (these numbers are plucked out of the sky)
Model Value Premium
06 DRZ250 - $7000 $450
04 DRZ400- $7000 $570

This happend to me just last month, I asked them and they told me that the I pay more as the bigger CC bikes are more dangerous?? I said its the rider thats dangerous not the bike?
I then said if I brought a 1500cc Mini for $5000 and a V8 for $5000, would the premium be the same? Yes unless it was on the list of regularly stolen cars (Evos and WRX's etc)

Cheers

As far as i know it does, on our systems there is an area that we put the cc rating of the vehicles, but vehicle are generaly rated on the type of vehicle it is, like how many of that type stolen in each year, price of parts for that vehicle and then how many have been in accidents etc.

i would say a V8 would cost more in insurance than a 1500, but there may be other factors, like the mini could have a higher theft risk than the V8.

Bikes on another hand, all types have been in accidents and the theft risk of the bikes is so similar between models that most companys take the cc rating as the main area to rate premiums on.

also an insurance company may have say 10000 cars insured and 400 bikes, so most of the companys resources goes into researching car types instead of bike types.

[NSR-Dan]

Obviously my experience with AA must be atypical. A few years back I bought a 6 month old "demonstrator" (car) from a dealer. The dealer was keen to quit stock, and I paid 40%+ under rrp.

When I went to AA, they never asked me what i'd paid, they asked what I wanted to insure it for. I suggested a figure approx $5k above what i'd actually paid, not to rip the insurer off (in 10 years Ive never claimed on any insurance), but to make sure I could purchase a similar replacement vehicle should the worst happen.

The AA agent looked at her PC and suggested my figure was just under their suggested range, and that I may be under insuring! (the inference being I could be risking problems by underestimating the risk to the insurer..)

Thats how I view agreed value, what would it cost to replace the asset (in the same condition), as opposed to what I may have paid.

naughty agent, if its a new car we should allways ask what the purchase price is.

if you do however pull a cheeky you can sometimes insure your car for more than what you payed just dont tell the agent what you did pay for it. but then there is the downside, if the value you say alot higher than the estimation on the companys systems they can request a valuation before accepting your value, and sometimes if it comes to a total loss claim, and the company thinks it was insured to high they will ask for your purchase agreement and then pull up the recorded call when you took out the insurance to see if what you told the agent and what your purchase agreement states adds up. (when you signed your decleration at all companys there is a bit that states "you agree that everything you have stated is the truth" etc.