Insurance, What is it with these people.?

[markiii]

Just got off the phone to Liverpool & Victoria

5 phonecalls and different versions later, I have some consistency.

1. Any suspension/appearance mod is covered. Photographs needed, and preferably supporting evidence such as receipts.
2. Performance mods covered including turbo/supercharger kits.
3. Exceptions to item 2 above are nitrous or capacity increases, or engine swaps, i.e any engine that wouldn't have been in the car when new.
4. No trackday cover at any price. This is a recent change.

5. And the killer, while all of this is noted on the "system" they will give you ZERO supporting evidence in writing of any of it. In the event of a claim where they disagree you can name the person you spoke to, time and date and because the call is recorded everything will be fine sir.

Now call me cynical but if we are in dispute they are going to produce evidence proving I'm in the right are they? Not convinced.

Why if they are so to be trusted will they not fully document the terms of my policy? Especially as they claim to be their own underwriter.


and on a seperate not DIG have increased their trackday excess to £2000, taking the piss.

bastards

[Bongo]

if they're recording the call then surely they won't mind if you record the call for your records, will they?

Would that help in the event of a claim?   s:? :? s:?

[markiii]

The thought did occur. not sure how you would prove the call was to them though or when it was made.

[Peter Wright]

if they're recording the call then surely they won't mind if you record the call for your records, will they?

By law you have to tell them that you are recording the call as they do with you

Pete

[Bongo]

yes, i just thought they could hardly say "all calls are recorded for our records (etc)"  and then say "no sir, we object to you recording this call".

It would seem a bit odd - don't you think?

[Anonymous]

Markiii's right though... if you did have a recording it would be a tad tricky to prove when it came to the crunch, that it was them.

All this does sound highly sus to me.  They've been around as a company long enough mind, but this really does sound ropey.

[filcee]

The thought did occur. not sure how you would prove the call was to them though or when it was made.

Just write to them when you get off the 'phone.  Standard letter should suffice ... e.g.

"Further to my telephone call with <NAME> on <DATE> at <TIME>, I understand that you are offering to insure my vehicle <REG PLATE> for <AMOUNT>.

The policy you offer includes coverage for the following:

<BULLET LIST OF MODS>

I understand your require the following proof of modification

<LIST>

which is enclosed with this letter.

I have agreed this policy, and paid by credit card <REF>.  I understand you will send me <FORMS, WHATEVER>, and that I need to sign and return these.  In the meantime you will send me <TEMPORARY COVER NOTE, WHATEVER>.

With thanks for your assistance in this matter,
<SIGN>
<PRINT NAME>"

Don't forget to keep a hard copy of the letter with your insurance details.  We all know how reliable computers are  s;-) ;-) s;-)

Sure, it's not cast iron, but it has set out what you understand has been offered, and you have informed the insurance co. of what you understand has been offered.  The prime point of reference will still be the insurance policy documents, but if the recorded call is 'lost', at least there will be some record of the discussion, and the outcome, and the documentation you forwarded to support you insurance requirement.  A little bit of due diligence might go a long way in a dispute, especially if a large, profitable company with a lot of resources at its disposal cannot find the evidence of the initial agreement  - whereas you were careful enough to keep some sort of rudimentary record  s;-) ;-) s;-)

HTH,
Phil

[Anonymous]

This is exactly what they said to me, gave them a miss as it 'just wernt right geezer'

[markiii]

yep DIG got my business again this year. At least you can argue a point, explain your point of view and they understand what your saying, gives a slightly better chance of a co-operative underwriter.

Of course if they refuse to insure my turbo in a few months I shall probably curse them as well.

[filcee]

.
.
4. No trackday cover at any price. This is a recent change.

.
.

and on a seperate not DIG have increased their trackday excess to £2000, taking the piss.

This has to be a function of the popularity of track days now you can't exploit your car's capabilities on the public highway (not an activity condoned by the club in any event).

[markiii]

not wishing to to lump all Mk2 owners with teh same label, but thsi seem by enlarge to relate to teh amount of idiots who keep totaling their cars, on and off track while stacked to teh nuts with mega horsepower mods that often the insurance doesn't know about.

typified by teh response to one of my questions on IMOC lately.

I asked who people were using for insurance to cover certain mods that were proving difficult to insure.

the response,

"well you don't think we tell them do you"


what can I say, if I mod teh car I don't reasonably expect the insurance not to go up.

I just object to having my balls in a vice just because muppets  who aren't honest with their insurers tar us all with teh same brush.

I blame teh fact that mental turbo jap imprts are now so cheap that Nova boy is graduating to better cars,. Unfortunately he still has Nova boy mentality.

[filcee]

 s:idea: :idea: s:idea:  IDEA  s:idea: :idea: s:idea:

(It's OK, I'll understand if you start to panic).

We have two known to this club car control courses - North Weald, and the one MRMike has organised in the North West.  Is there any mileage in finding out if this would help with insurance for track days - where it is known/expected the car will be driven near/at/beyond the limit?

Nothing ventured ... nothing gained ...

[markiii]

yes and no

if you go to a mainstream company, it won't be a tick box on their screen so no.

get a good broker and maybe. Your premium is more than you realise determined by the conversation your broker has with teh underwriter. And thats basically person to person.

hence a lot of personal discretion on teh part of teh underwriter based on anything your broker tells them, or even if they like each other.

conclusion tell your broker, ask them to discuss it with teh underwriter and see what happens.

I would suggest a little sense in how the course is discussed though, the emphasis needs to be on car control, and driving within teh cars limits, don't give them teh impression it's a how to flog the bollocks off my car while driving it as fast as I can type course.

It was also mentioned to me recently that one issue with insuring us, is that many people do not typically have experience of rear wheel drive these days, and in particular mid engined cars. hence their is a perception that we would be more likely to stack it.

not an unreasonable thought.

however in teh case of Woodendummy who had driven midengined cars for 10 years, or RogerH who's on his 7th MR2 this should make you less of a risk. You just need to ensure your broker is having that conversation with teh underwriter.