'Collateral' lies need not spoil insurance claims

[Marlin]

In the news today "'Collateral' lies need not spoil insurance claims, rules Supreme Court"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36845617

Hopefully means less need to worry about insurance claims being refused for non-relevant errors in disclosure?

[arry]

Has nothing to do with non disclosure. It's to do with fraudulent claims nothing more.

Basis of contract law was sorted with the CIDRA reforms in 2012 and are making their way into non consumer insurance from August this year courtesy of the Insurance Act.

[Marlin]

[Kawasaki Jimbo]

I've been trying to un-pick this story and I don't get it. "Collateral" -definition in law? Does that mean if I'd said the bike would be garaged overnight but on the night of the theft it wasn't, I'd still be covered for theft? I insured against theft, it was stolen, so pay out. (?)

[CaNsA]

For example.

If your laptop was stolen and you fabricated a receipt to prove its worth, and that value wasn't fraudulently inflated, that is classed as a "collateral lie"

[Vracktal]

I'm guessing for motorbikes this would be like telling your insurer you store your bike in your work car park while at work, and in a garage while at home, but really you park it on the road while at home. Then one day it's stolen from your work car park.

The ruling suggests your insurer can't invalidate your claim because of where you store it at home, because that's irrelevant since it was stolen at work and you were truthful about where you stored it at work.
____________________
2007 BMW R1200R: On road
2009 BMW G650X Challenge: On road
1975 Norton Commando 850: Off road, awaiting recommissioning

[Polarbear]

I'm sure the insurance companies will find a way to wriggle out of anything.

That's after they have put their prices up of course
____________________
Triumph Trophy Launch Edition

[CaNsA]

[arry]

[Nobby the Bastard]

[stevo as b4]

I'm with Polar bear on all this.

Would it not be better if insurance companies covered nothing but third party personal injury and loss claims, and to have your bike covered for theft there had to be some proof or evidence of it being taken such as CCTV footage, ANPR video or evidence or several reliable witnesses all giving the same story?

Also another thing that would make it harder for insurance companies to wriggle out of claims would be if they did not cover the vehicle whilst parked at the proposers home address, and also that you had to provide a list of a limited number of agreed locations that the vehicle could be kept overnight, such as parents house,girlfriends house, or offsprings house etc?

I say all this because there are some stupid ignorant and nieve twats out there who don't take home security seriously and rely on the 'its ok as I've got fully comp insured so I'm not bothered about putting any effort into keeping my stuff safe' types out there.

If we all had to keep our belongings safe and defend them against theft or damage because they weren't insurance covered at home, then we'd be very vigilant and do whatever it takes to keep our possessions.

If that means keeping bikes full of fuel In a heated house so be it, or if it means having to give up because the area we live in is impossible to keep hold of nice belongings without them being stolen, robbed or us being bike jacked or ambushed and forced to give up our stuff to armed gangs, then fair enough.

I bet insurance companies would struggle then in other situations to avoid paying out as it would cut both fraudulent claims and blasé can't give a toss owners attitudes too.

[Nobby the Bastard]

[techathy]

[ScaredyCat]

[stevo as b4]

I agree we should be able to trust people and have our stuff respected, but that ain't ever gonna happen in the UK is it?

My point was more from an insurers point of view, in that if they could refuse to cover home parking and low effort or can't give a fuck attitudes to leaving the bike parked in places etc, then it should in theory be harder for them to try to wriggle out of pay outs in other situations like traffic accidents and theft from secure locations etc.

Oh and like Itchy once said we in our country need to be a bit more proactive towards looking after our stuff, and defending our property and homes, instead of sitting behind the curtains hiding or ringing the police as a first port of call.

If you get home to find someone smashing the locks off your shed, you should be allowed to knock the fucker out and tie them up to a lamppost, maybe remembering when you have time to call the police and report a captured thief.

If you injure or hurt someone when dealing with a person who's trespassing on your property it's fair enough too. If they have tools for breaking in or weapons, make sure your's are bigger. Make sure the knife goes into them in the struggle etc.

All it would take to reduce some forms of crime especially those relating to burglary and theft is fear of retribution and I do like think like Stinkwheel that levels of crime would drop significantly.

[Wonko The Sane]

[arry]

[stevo as b4]

Brummy here mate, though I'm living closer to the black Country these days.

I do get what your trying to say, but I'm prepared to lay down on a slab for my stuff. Sure I don't ever want to see or catch a thief, but if I do, and if I can I want to do whatever I can to make sure the person that's stood in front of me will never be able to do it again to anyone else.

I've let alot of shit slide in my life, in my teens and 20's I was a walk over at times. For however long I've got left on this planet I've lost all my compassion and sympathy for scum and shit, and those that want to do harm to other innocent people.

And no I'm definitely not American as I don't believe the public should have any access to own their own fire arms, certainly not in the civilised world anyway.

[Nobby the Bastard]

[Ste]

They've got to pay out but is there any reason why they couldn't or wouldn't also cancel your policy?

If you get caught out lying to them then that invalidates your insurance and it gets cancelled, why would it be any different any different when they've had to pay your claim?

[arry]

[Nobby the Bastard]

[arry]

[Nobby the Bastard]

So, to summarise...

Your insurance company can cancel your insurance at any point BUT is still liable to pay out any third part claims up until that point.

they can then pursue you for their losses, but are only likely to be successful if the lie/ommision was material to the reason why they had to pay out in the first place and so

[stevo as b4]

Can Arry answer a quick question off topic I'm afraid?

But why is it when you ring up a specialist insurance company and when they ask if your vehicle is standard, even some of the performance specialists are wary of covering many common modifications?

Also I find it painful when they ask what changes your vehicle has over std. I think all they want you to say is brakes, suspension, wheels, etc etc.

If you say you have a 4-1 equal length manifold, an external wastegate, higher lift cams with adjustable timing gears, 3bar map sensor etc, they often have no clue what your on about, and all they say is ''Is that a performance modification?''

Should specialist insurance companies, reasonably have staff that know their stuff about modified vehicles? If not why not?

It's at the stage now, where when they ask me about modifications, I say I've got uprated brakes and suspension, a big exhaust and air filter, and a few bits of red silicone pipework under the bonnet.

Who's right and wrong here? Do I need to make them understand my engine mods or that I've got 2piece discs with 4pot calipers etc?

How do you sit with the if they can't see it, they can't quote it kind of modifications too? I'm happy to declare everything, they can even have a copy of my rolling road printouts and compressor wheel flow tables, but if they cant understand any of it is there any point?