Lose an hour of your life.

[doubleboost]

So you basically told him to get stuffed then i am guessing . I wonder how many accidents and deaths are caused by shoddy customising.

I wanted to
I just refused to test it
He had to take it to the area testing station
I think it was eventually crushed
You can modify vehicles no problem
But in a accident situation you could find your self with no insurance
Just putting bigger wheels and tyres on is classed as a modification

 

[BrokenBiker]

one of the lads in work put some air ride suspension on his audi a3 and got done after being pulled. Copper asked if his insurance knew about the mods, lad said no, copper issued a fine and points

 

[ukracer]

one of the lads in work put some air ride suspension on his audi a3 and got done after being pulled. Copper asked if his insurance knew about the mods, lad said no, copper issued a fine and points

Copper needs to go and catch some criminals......he could start with Maria Miller!

 

[BrokenBiker]

Copper needs to go and catch some criminals......he could start with Maria Miller!

is driving without valid insurance not a crime? would you like someone like him to drive into you then find out his insurance want nothing to do with it because he didn't declare his mods?

 

[ukracer]

is driving without valid insurance not a crime? would you like someone like him to drive into you then find out his insurance want nothing to do with it because he didn't declare his mods?

The point is its the line drawn about what is a mod, when its not a mod. The copper had no need to fine him and give him points. Just get him to declare the mods............which most likely made the car handle better anyway. I have had air ride on two vehicles and both were transformed when it was added.

 

[BrokenBiker]

The point is its the line drawn about what is a mod, when its not a mod. The copper had no need to fine him and give him points. Just get him to declare the mods............which most likely made the car handle better anyway. I have had air ride on two vehicles and both were transformed when it was added.

in sorry but completely changing the suspension system, a safety critical area, is most definately a declarable mod in anyones book. Insurance policies state that all mods must be declared. He didn't declare them, therefore in a crash his insurance would refuse to deal with it, especially if the crash was caused by him. This means he is driving without insurance which is a criminal offence. He didn't declare the mods because when he enquired about it his premiums went up, so he decided to take a chance, which some would argue is insurance fraud as a he specifically told them he didn't have mods in order to get a lower price. I'm all for people modding cars and bike, i do it myself, but i declare every single one on any of my vehicles, even changing the wheels, or the seat unit on my bandit, because the insurance policy states just. If i don't, then i don't have insurance, and depending on the mood of the copper could ultimately mean no more license

 

[Pete.]

is driving without valid insurance not a crime? would you like someone like him to drive into you then find out his insurance want nothing to do with it because he didn't declare his mods?

Can't happen the way you say it. If you hold a valid insurance policy for your vehicle, mods declared or not, then your insurer HAS to honour third party cover when you're on the road whether you're ******, high, no MOT or driving the wrong way up the M1 in rush hour. They can't get out of that. What they can do however is pursue you for the money they have shelled out afterwardsand of course they won't cover you for any losses YOU have incurred.

You could argue (and would probably win in court if you did it right) that getting points for undeclared mods is wrong since the minimum legal requirement is to have a policy indemnifying you against third party risks and since you do hold that and the insurer under the road traffic act HAS to honour it you're fulfilling your legal obligation. The insurer will of course cancel your policy when they find out but you will not have been penalised legally.

 

[BrokenBiker]

Can't happen the way you say it. If you hold a valid insurance policy for your vehicle, mods declared or not, then your insurer HAS to honour third party cover when you're on the road whether you're ******, high, no MOT or driving the wrong way up the M1 in rush hour. They can't get out of that. What they can do however is pursue you for the money they have shelled out afterwardsand of course they won't cover you for any losses YOU have incurred.

You could argue (and would probably win in court if you did it right) that getting points for undeclared mods is wrong since the minimum legal requirement is to have a policy indemnifying you against third party risks and since you do hold that and the insurer under the road traffic act HAS to honour it you're fulfilling your legal obligation. The insurer will of course cancel your policy when they find out but you will not have been penalised legally.

that is all well and good until you read the line that is stated in all my bike policies that any insurance provided for the vehicles covered in this policy may be voided in the event of the vehicle being modified without declaration.

now in my eyes that word 'may' will almost certainly mean 'will' as insurance companies will always try and get out of paying for anything if they don't have to.

this is what would be used to bat you down in court if you tried appealing against the points and fine

 

[Pete.]

It's very simple an insurance policy is either valid or cancelled. If it's valid they are obliged to cover third parties which is your minimum obligation. Saying that it'll be void in the small print is not the same as cancelling the policy. They CAN'T get out of their minimum obligation, the RTA required it of them. If the guy you know had not taken the fixed penalty and gone to court, shown the court that there was a policy in place and pointed outthe RTA's requirement he would probably have been sent on his way.

 

[CompoSimmonite]

Mate bought a brand new Volvo 340 and had dealer fit factory option rear spoiler. His insurer increased the premium by £5 due to the modification (not an admin fee !). He is now retired but at the time was a serving Police Sergeant !
BTW I bought the Volvo off him when it was 3 years old and my insurer wasn't bothered about the spoiler.

Paul h

 

[Pete.]

Here you go:

1988 c. 52
Part VI
Compulsory insurance or security against third-party risks
Section 148

148 Avoidance of certain exceptions to policies or securities.

(1)Where a certificate of insurance or certificate of security has been delivered under section 147 of this Act to the person by whom a policy has been effected or to whom a security has been given, so much of the policy or security as purports to restrict—

(a)the insurance of the persons insured by the policy, or

(b)the operation of the security,

(as the case may be) by reference to any of the matters mentioned in subsection (2) below shall, as respects such liabilities as are required to be covered by a policy under section 145 of this Act, be of no effect.

(2)Those matters are—

(a)the age or physical or mental condition of persons driving the vehicle,

(b)the condition of the vehicle,

(c)the number of persons that the vehicle carries,

(d)the weight or physical characteristics of the goods that the vehicle carries,

(e)the time at which or the areas within which the vehicle is used,

(f)the horsepower or cylinder capacity or value of the vehicle,

(g)the carrying on the vehicle of any particular apparatus, or

(h)the carrying on the vehicle of any particular means of identification other than any means of identification required to be carried by or under [F1the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994].

In short:

Where a certificate of insurance has been delivered under section 147 of this Act to the person by whom a policy has been effected
so much of the policy as purports to restrict the insurance of the persons insured by the policy
by reference to any of the matters mentioned in subsection (2) below shall be of no effect.

Which basically says that where there's a policy in place they can't get out of paying up for third party claims for any of the reasons listed under (2a) to (2h).

So they can't void any cover without actually cancelling the policy for any of the following reasons:

(2)Those matters are—

(a)the age or physical or mental condition of persons driving the vehicle,

(b)the condition of the vehicle,

(c)the number of persons that the vehicle carries,

(d)the weight or physical characteristics of the goods that the vehicle carries,

(e)the time at which or the areas within which the vehicle is used,

(f)the horsepower or cylinder capacity or value of the vehicle,

(g)the carrying on the vehicle of any particular apparatus, or

(h)the carrying on the vehicle of any particular means of identification other than any means of identification required to be carried by or under [F1the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994].

Note use of the word 'purports' in the legislation. It tells you that they know that insurers put the small print in saying that the insurance will be void under and they have added this section to specifically prevent them doing it.

 

[ukracer]

It's very simple an insurance policy is either valid or cancelled. If it's valid they are obliged to cover third parties which is your minimum obligation. Saying that it'll be void in the small print is not the same as cancelling the policy. They CAN'T get out of their minimum obligation, the RTA required it of them. If the guy you know had not taken the fixed penalty and gone to court, shown the court that there was a policy in place and pointed outthe RTA's requirement he would probably have been sent on his way.

I know that is the case as I was hit by an Audi Quatro from behind. He had stolen the car, registered in his own name and paid for insurance with a a bouncing cheque for the deposit. In court he had RTA cover which meant he could not be prosecuted for that offence.

He did however get six years for drug offences as he was an import company...........lol