Insurance fraud

**Deano** · 10th August 2007, 15:42

Originally Posted by 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 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** · 10th August 2007, 15:43

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

**jetboy** · 10th August 2007, 16:06

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** · 10th August 2007, 16:09

Originally Posted by imdying

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** · 10th August 2007, 16:13

Originally Posted by avgas

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** · 14th August 2007, 13:55

Originally Posted by jetboy

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** · 14th August 2007, 21:55

Originally Posted by jetboy

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** · 15th August 2007, 15:46