insurance without cosmetics worth it?

[RantyDave]

with insurance costs being as expensive as they are and all too often seeing bikes appearing on trademe from star insurance that really have very little damage but are uneconomical to repair because of the replacing scratched parts policy I was wondering if there was a market for insurance cover that only fixes your bike back to WOF conditions and get the bike running.

I would certainly be keen. I've always thought it unfair that bike manufacturers get away with charging thousands of dollars for lumps of plastic purely because the insurance companies are going to foot the bill. I also know that if it were my money fixing up my now busted bike I'd be significantly less picky than the 'back to mint' level that the insurance company is contractually obliged to provide.

I'd want to see "no cosmetics" insurance being significantly cheaper though - like at least half price.

Dave

[ynot slow]

Sounds like a good idea.
Wonder if it is feaseable for an insurance company to do it,maybe say Swann or specialist bike company.Ask the company if you take an option of repair to wof quality and plastic welded as you say,then handed back to customer.Might get put in the too hard basket.

[YellowDog]

I think the riders on KB are split between owners with 'old functional bikes' and owners who see their bikes as an item and 'statement of beauty and perfection'.

If you have a bike you are proud to own, clean it regularly, and also ensure that everything is 'just right' then it will always have to be perfect. No scratches, no dents, nothing but perfection will do.

The 'We'll just makes sure the wheels turn' policy option is a pointless non-starter for this group.

[James Deuce]

The insurance companies won't offer it because there is a significant amount of work involved in sourcing non-OEM parts. Especially as NZ businesses in the motorcycle arena have either been around for decades (established shops with a vested interest in selling OEM parts) or last 3-5 years before the bank stops lending the business money.

The only way an insurance company would offer a service like that at a reduced cost would be if it required less work from them. In other words, "Here's your half price insurance premium excluding cosmetics and we will discuss how much it will cost to repair in the event of an accident and you will be sourcing repair quotes, organising repairs or performing them yourself, and performing any WoF checks, all at your cost and we will reimburse you IF the bike is roadworthy."

I understand why the Insurance companies go for OEM over repair, given some of the dodgy #8 fencing wire repairs that still go on in the car industry. With a bike, things HAVE to be right, because the repercussions of things being wrong are much more likely to result in injury or death.

You'd need to set up your own insurance company that specialised in that type of repair, and carry significant indemnity insurance yourself.

[avgas]

I can do cosmetics for 1/10 of what the insurance crowd can do it for. So yes i would get full blown cover if cosmetics were not covered and the policy (and excess) were alot less.
I wrote off and RG150 once as i broke 2 indicators, 1 mirror and scratched (not break) 1 side fairings.
$2500 worth of damage in their eyes, i had it fixed and normal looking for 10 hours hard work and $300.
Plus policy's would get cheaper if you didn't have to pay so much for squids.
So YES, and my current bike is 01. But also YES if my bike was less than 5

[Oscar]

Why don't just get insurance with a voluntary excess?

[cowboyz]

care to elaborate?

[cowboyz]

The insurance companies won't offer it because there is a significant amount of work involved in sourcing non-OEM parts. Especially as NZ businesses in the motorcycle arena have either been around for decades (established shops with a vested interest in selling OEM parts) or last 3-5 years before the bank stops lending the business money.

The only way an insurance company would offer a service like that at a reduced cost would be if it required less work from them. In other words, "Here's your half price insurance premium excluding cosmetics and we will discuss how much it will cost to repair in the event of an accident and you will be sourcing repair quotes, organising repairs or performing them yourself, and performing any WoF checks, all at your cost and we will reimburse you IF the bike is roadworthy."

I understand why the Insurance companies go for OEM over repair, given some of the dodgy #8 fencing wire repairs that still go on in the car industry. With a bike, things HAVE to be right, because the repercussions of things being wrong are much more likely to result in injury or death.

You'd need to set up your own insurance company that specialised in that type of repair, and carry significant indemnity insurance yourself.

the repairer may opt to quote using some OEM parts. Nothing stopping them using quality OEM parts, the idea is simply to take out the expensive bits that dont mean anything to the way the bike performs or handles. Under current policies if you scratch your muffler (let alone dent it) it will be replaced with a brand new one. Theres about a $12-2000 savings for the insurance company right there.
Of course, I never proposed that the insurance policies as we know them now be abolished either. Just more choice.
There are some who value the look of their bike and are quite happy to pay full insurance to ensure that if something does go wrong the bike will be back in perfect condition. Thats fine.

[Oscar]

care to elaborate?

Certainly.
Most retail insurers have a set of standard rates, which are based on their standard excess. However they will almost certainly discount the rate for a higher excess. Insurers don't generally offer this unless you ask.

I'll do some research tomorrow and come back to you (I am an Insurance Broker, but I normally do Business/Corporate stuff so I'm gonna have to ask one of the motor insurers).

[cowboyz]

but if you altering your excess while may save you a few dollars a month (not a whole lot) in premiums you will get hit hard if you need to repair your bike.

the whole cheaper excess/cheaper premiums at a cost of not having your bike repaired cosmetically is attractive to me.

[cowboyz]

might just add. After 40 votes 9% of people who have bikes less than 5 years old think it is an idea and 38% of people with bikes older than 5 years think it is an idea.

[mark247]

I voted no. Firstly if i was to get stuff fixed on my bike i wouldnt want second hand parts used by the insurance company. I dont mind using second hand parts myself but i want to know what is and what isnt new. Also, my bike is a 93 and fibre glass replacement fairings are readly available ( im not sure if the insurance company would use them tho, im guessing no. ) but if they did use them, im sure the cosmetic side of things would cost tooooo much.

For me having full insurance is for the piece of mind that if i do bin it, i will have my bike back how it was with no work done on my behalf ( or cash equivelent to get another simular bike ). If i was expecting to be doing work to fix up the fairings, in my opinion i may as well ( if the frame is still straight ) fix the rest of it as well.

[discotex]

Given how much image is a part of riding I can't really see the point.

If I trash the fairings I want new ones. Period. All that technological wizardry is meaningless if the bike doesn't look cool

A more suitable option would be a "Streetfighter/Stunter Policy". Bike returned to WOF standards and made cool without the fairings.

[Squiggles]

Interesting, it would be good as an option, but fairings make some bikes why you brought em. I know tl fairings can be gotten for f'all offshore, and same for some other bikes, depends on how much insurance is going to cost still

Like, if im going to pay $1000 a year with a $1000 excess for full cover, or $500 per year with a $1000 excess, then i'd say its worth it if nothing happens in two + years, but thats all about evaluating the risk

Where it really comes down to it would be the excesses, if i had a much lower excess then yeah, i'd do it. As i see the yearly cost as like paying for the risk (less that you get boned, more that you hit someone else or bike gets stolen), and the excess as what happens when things dont go your way and you get boned. So a lower excess, like $500 instead of $1500, and perhaps slightly less cost per year, fuck yeah.

But it'd have to beat the $300 excess the tl has for full cover (and im only 19)

[cowboyz]

who is that through? and how much you paying to get it?