Resend my activation email : Register : Log in 
BCF: Bike Chat Forums


Motor insurance to cover offroad - Vnucked

Reply to topic
Bike Chat Forums Index -> Biking News & Rumours Goto page 1, 2  Next
View previous topic : View next topic  
Author Message

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 15:59 - 22 Dec 2016    Post subject: Motor insurance to cover offroad - Vnucked Reply with quote

tl;dr version - Slovenian peasant was knocked off a ladder (DANGEROUSE) by a tractor on a farm, got compo knocked back, went to Strasbourg, bawwed, won.

The verdict is that all insurance policies in the EU must cover any use of a vehicle that is consistent with the normal function of that vehicle. They can't be limited to road or public place use as ours are.

Tractors gotta tract, sportsbikes gotta sport, right?

The UK is finally getting around to stitching us up over it, and have launched a "consultation" (nobody laugh):

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/motor-insurance-consideration-of-the-vnuk-judgment

The doomsday scenarios are:

1) An end to all motorsport.

2) All bike insurance policies becoming prohibitively expensive.

3) Sportsbike policies becoming prohibitively expensive (oh noes, Ninja!)

4) All vehicles, including pure offroaders, will need to have insurance.

1 and 2 are probably over-egged. 3, well, they already factor in likely use. I imagine that it'll be another risk factor checkbox, like pillion use (not pillion cover). 4 is a real possibility. Sorry, quadbois.

If you fancy a rant, you can vent your ill-informed spleen online. I find it very cathartic. Whistle
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

G
The Voice of Reason



Joined: 02 Feb 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 16:15 - 22 Dec 2016    Post subject: Re: Motor insurance to cover offroad - Vnucked Reply with quote

Rogerborg wrote:

4) All vehicles, including pure offroaders, will need to have insurance.

This has of course been all over racing-related places.
Where it would be pretty easy to enforce.
The ACU has spoken to insurance companies that have of course laughed at them - the issues with insuring a race vehicle for 3rd party liability is why there's big 'Motorsport is dangerous' signs everywhere

Of course the typical sort you see with motocross bikes riding through town no-helmet won't care.
Another easy target will be anyone with a V5 in their name - now it's not just a Sorn fine, but proof of insurance that will be expected. Would free up some space in my garage(s) - alas, losing a good bit of money. Good call for those that want a cheap project however.
Electric wheel chairs?
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

stinkwheel
Bovine Proctologist



Joined: 12 Jul 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 16:59 - 22 Dec 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote

Replied as follows (in precis). Bit's I'm most pleased with in BOLD

Ammended directive. Yes

Comprehensive drective would make things worse in terms of cost and administrative burden.

I have suggested we sunset the fuck out of it, leaving it up to insurers to provide optional "euro cover" as they always used to. Make UK legislation appropriate to the will of the UK population post brexit.

I have responded strongly in favour of adding a "used in traffic" clause so the original intent of the legislation is most accurately represented.

Adding "areas where the public has access in accordance with national law" as an insurance requirement would be unduly onerous in terms of cost and create an insurmountable administrative burden.

I have suggested we derrogate all vehicles not registered for road use.

I have responded that Enforcement in either case should be reactive rather than proactive. So we don't go looking for uninsured vehicles, a penalty would apply if you are involved in an accident for which you ought to have been insured.

NO to register of newly in scope vehicles.
____________________
“Rule one: Always stick around for one more drink. That's when things happen. That's when you find out everything you want to know.
I did the 2010 Round Britain Rally on my 350 Bullet. 89 landmarks, 3 months, 9,500 miles.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Andy_Pagin
World Chat Champion



Joined: 08 Nov 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 17:05 - 22 Dec 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote

I suspect almost all the damage will be prevented by liberal interpretation and creative translation from Slovenian to English (via ancient Greek, Hebew and Latin).
It wouldn't be the first time, Eg. the Euro ban on all military calibre firearms in the 1990s. In theory it would have banned practically all firearms, but clever interpretation limited it to one obscure antique Russian pistol that even most Russian collectors had never heard of.
____________________
They're coming to take me away, ho-ho, hee-hee, ha-haaa, hey-hey,
the men in white coats are coming to take me away.
Yamaha Vity -> YBR125 -> FZS600 Fazer -> FZ1-S Fazer
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

G
The Voice of Reason



Joined: 02 Feb 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 17:13 - 22 Dec 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote

Having a look through the report:
Quote:
dodgems

Wow.

I can see it now!

Two dodgems collide.


"Oooo, me back..."
"We better exchange details."

Five weeks later....
Other driver receives documents with doctors reports regarding five cases of whiplash from his friend's and family that were passengers.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

arry
Super Spammer



Joined: 03 Jan 2009
Karma :

PostPosted: 09:49 - 27 Dec 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote

We're currently working through the ramifications of the potential outcomes. It's not massive for my type of book - affects fork lift trucks mainly - but it still needs some careful mulling over.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 11:04 - 27 Dec 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote

Any feelings about which way it's likely to go?

The thing I'm bearing in mind is that more insurance = more insurance tax = more Workfare in Swansea.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

arry
Super Spammer



Joined: 03 Jan 2009
Karma :

PostPosted: 12:04 - 27 Dec 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote

In short, no. But nobody in the industry appears particularly fussed about it from a treating it as a money grab. That said the industry doesn't really move that fast for anything unfortunately.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Robby
Dirty Old Man



Joined: 16 May 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 13:24 - 27 Dec 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote

Moving away from doomsday thinking, I'm wondering how much of a financial impact this would actually have for most affected parties. Some changes in policy wording would be required, but in many cases insurance is already in place.

Take a warehouse with forklift trucks. Insurance will already be in place covering the people working there, and probably anyone that has managed to walk in off the street. The site owner still has a responsibility for keeping the people on-site safe, and some of this responsibility will be covered by buying insurance to cover anyone on the site. The legislation will change and affect the wording of the policy to class the forklift trucks as vehicles carrying motor insurance, but the overall risk hasn't changed.

The same goes for a building site or a farm. If someone gets mangled, an insurance policy is (or should be) already in place to protect them.

Some of the domestic changes are new - ride-on lawnmowers and kid's electric cars, but I suspect a comprehensive home insurance policy would already cover them. Keeping a register of vehicles would be difficult. I could probably commit an interesting new crime by important a container of hoverboards and not registering them with DVLA.

The real problem is areas that are currently not insured, where insurance is prohibitive, and people taking part know this and take the risk anyway. Motorsport is the only example that comes to mind, but I assume there are more.

I certainly wouldn't want to own a segway in Bradford right now.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

thx1138
World Chat Champion



Joined: 06 Oct 2005
Karma :

PostPosted: 20:12 - 27 Dec 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote

I ride off road sometimes. (Most of the pics I post, are on trails, public highways).

Go to a few pay and play places, and the odd event held on friendly farmers land.

Hmm.
Confused
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Wonko The Sane
World Chat Champion



Joined: 20 Jan 2013
Karma :

PostPosted: 20:52 - 27 Dec 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote

Robby wrote:


Take a warehouse with forklift trucks. Insurance will already be in place covering the people working there, and probably anyone that has managed to walk in off the street. The site owner still has a responsibility for keeping the people on-site safe, and some of this responsibility will be covered by buying insurance to cover anyone on the site. The legislation will change and affect the wording of the policy to class the forklift trucks as vehicles carrying motor insurance, but the overall risk hasn't changed.

The same goes for a building site or a farm. If someone gets mangled, an insurance policy is (or should be) already in place to protect them.

The real problem is areas that are currently not insured, where insurance is prohibitive, and people taking part know this and take the risk anyway. Motorsport is the only example that comes to mind, but I assume there are more.


The first two, fork lifts on site and the farm example should both be covered by employer's / public liability insurance, so why has the guy who was injured while working on a farm not claiming on the EU mandated employer's liability insurance?



With motorsport, the teams in the higher levels of motorsport probably have liability insurance in place, it's the lower levels, grass roots and things like goodwood that may suffer as people can't / are unwilling to participate
____________________
Looking to pass your CBT / Bike tests in Bury Lancashire? try www.focusridertraining.co.uk Would recommend.
They're also on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/pages/Focus-Rider-Training/196832923734251
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Enduro Numpty
Could Be A Chat Bot



Joined: 31 Oct 2012
Karma :

PostPosted: 15:18 - 05 Jan 2017    Post subject: Re: Motor insurance to cover offroad - Vnucked Reply with quote

G wrote:
Rogerborg wrote:

4) All vehicles, including pure offroaders, will need to have insurance.

This has of course been all over racing-related places.
Where it would be pretty easy to enforce.
The ACU has spoken to insurance companies that have of course laughed at them - the issues with insuring a race vehicle for 3rd party liability is why there's big 'Motorsport is dangerous' signs everywhere

Of course the typical sort you see with motocross bikes riding through town no-helmet won't care.
Another easy target will be anyone with a V5 in their name - now it's not just a Sorn fine, but proof of insurance that will be expected. Would free up some space in my garage(s) - alas, losing a good bit of money. Good call for those that want a cheap project however.
Electric wheel chairs?


Just more of the same shit, where the generally law abiding public get shafted. I can get an automatic fine for forgetting to renew my road tax, an automatic fine and points for being a few mph over the limit in the middle of nowhere but the scumbags that fly through the village where I live with no licence, no tax, no MOT, no insurance and riding/driving a stolen vehicle are protected by an invisible shield known as POLICE SCOTLAND.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

arry
Super Spammer



Joined: 03 Jan 2009
Karma :

PostPosted: 22:08 - 05 Jan 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wonko The Sane wrote:
Robby wrote:

The legislation will change and affect the wording of the policy to class the forklift trucks as vehicles carrying motor insurance, but the overall risk hasn't changed.


The first two, fork lifts on site and the farm example should both be covered by employer's / public liability insurance, so why has the guy who was injured while working on a farm not claiming on the EU mandated employer's liability insurance?


With motorsport, the teams in the higher levels of motorsport probably have liability insurance in place, it's the lower levels, grass roots and things like goodwood that may suffer as people can't / are unwilling to participate


Not quite. EU Mandated covers there aren't.

Employers Liability is a legal requirement for any business with employees (simplified for ease) but that's under UK Law and a UK certificate gets issued. Specifically it covers UK Domiciled employees only - albeit it does cover them whilst working temporarily abroad, under some policies.

Public Liability policies aren't a legal requirement. They get bought as not many insurers will write EL in isolation so as a direct result, if you need EL then you'll be buying PL too.

However, this is the rub of the Vnuk issue; currently under PL commercial policies exclude specifically any liability in connection with a motor vehicle in situations where compulsory insurance is required. The wording is usually:
but this indemnity shall not apply if, in respect of such liability, compulsory insurance or security is required under any legislation governing the use of the vehicle.

So, if Vnuk case means compulsory insurance is required, then the existing policy wording automatically excludes it.

Now it becomes more complicated, because in order to write motor security, the limits of indemnity need to be much higher than a standard liability policy - ie over ten times higher. The cost of reinsurance for motor liability is therefore, as a result, higher too. The cost of achieving capital and solvency requirements under Solvency II become higher, too. So in effect everything becomes more expensive as a direct result, despite the risk being the same - as the theoretical exposure is higher, because the limit of indemnity is higher, and you need to hold a balance of both capital and appropriate reinsurance to issue the security.

It's not a major world falling in on us moment, but it does require some hefty thought as to a way of finding a workable solution.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

rhys99
Scooby Slapper



Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 22:18 - 05 Jan 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

How would you go about insuring say a 5 year old to ride a little PW50 around a field? madness.
____________________
21:16:02 Fin: I got a girl to believe I have a huge dick today, she's going to be so disappointed
K̶5̶ ̶S̶V̶6̶5̶0̶S̶ K3 SV650N
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

arry
Super Spammer



Joined: 03 Jan 2009
Karma :

PostPosted: 22:19 - 05 Jan 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

rhys99 wrote:
How would you go about insuring say a 5 year old to ride a little PW50 around a field? madness.


You'd have the same issue now; technically it's still illegal if the public have access to the field that you're in; which by virtue of the fact you're there says that they do.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 22:37 - 05 Jan 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree, access is the issue, but in most cases if you have genuinely private land to ride on, it should be moot if you make a token attempt to enclose it or put up "Get orf moi laaarnd" signs. Less so in Scotchland, with our communist right-to-roam.

I do wonder exactly at what point in their life vehicles will be required to be covered. If it's from first registration with the DVLA, easy peasy, but that lets all the never-registered offroaders - exactly the vehicles that they need to catch - off the hook.

If it's from the moment that they're extant in the UK, that could stitch up manufacturers, importers and dealers.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike


Last edited by Rogerborg on 08:39 - 06 Jan 2017; edited 1 time in total
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

rhys99
Scooby Slapper



Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 23:01 - 05 Jan 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

arry wrote:
rhys99 wrote:
How would you go about insuring say a 5 year old to ride a little PW50 around a field? madness.


You'd have the same issue now; technically it's still illegal if the public have access to the field that you're in; which by virtue of the fact you're there says that they do.
I was thinking more on private land
____________________
21:16:02 Fin: I got a girl to believe I have a huge dick today, she's going to be so disappointed
K̶5̶ ̶S̶V̶6̶5̶0̶S̶ K3 SV650N
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 08:46 - 06 Jan 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

rhys99 wrote:
I was thinking more on private land

Your driveway is private land, but your postman and neighbours coming to borrow a cup of ketamine do enjoy a general right of access to it.

It is very much an "it depends" issue, and it's not even clear at the moment whether a bike sitting in your driveway should really be insured in case it falls over on Postman Prat.

That said, insurance indemnifies liability. If you're genuinely not using a vehicle at all, it's hard to see where any liability would arise. So if Vnuk forces insurance for all vehicles at all times, regardless of use / not use, it would be overkill.

But if there are exceptions, you can bet every quadboi and pitbiker will tick the "yeah, yeah, mate, not actually being used anywhere, innit" box.

It'll be very interesting to see exactly what sort of a mess we make of it.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

stinkwheel
Bovine Proctologist



Joined: 12 Jul 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 16:59 - 22 Mar 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just got an email through saying they cocked up the consultation website which didn't give me all the questions and could I answer another 13.

Might be worth checking your junkmail if you only answered 14 questions.
____________________
“Rule one: Always stick around for one more drink. That's when things happen. That's when you find out everything you want to know.
I did the 2010 Round Britain Rally on my 350 Bullet. 89 landmarks, 3 months, 9,500 miles.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

stinkwheel
Bovine Proctologist



Joined: 12 Jul 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 23:59 - 27 Jul 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

Consultation results published.

Only 552 people responded. Fucking poor show peoples!

The 87 responses fro organisations, mostly insurance companies, have WAY too much weight in these figures and they (unsurprisingly) are much more supportive of increased levels of insurance and regulation than the private respondees.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/630069/summary-of-vnuk-public-consultation-responses.pdf
____________________
“Rule one: Always stick around for one more drink. That's when things happen. That's when you find out everything you want to know.
I did the 2010 Round Britain Rally on my 350 Bullet. 89 landmarks, 3 months, 9,500 miles.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 06:41 - 28 Jul 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

No Bike Chat Forums or Nobcat IT Ltd (struck off) responses? Tut Tut
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

MCN
Super Spammer



Joined: 22 Jul 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 05:40 - 29 Jul 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

My last year's car ins premium, fully comp, NCD protected, insured only. £302 (Fiddler' s Fees included)

This year the same bastirts want £495.27 😲
So they 'Go Skippy' can 'Go get Vnuked' too.
I have 14 years NCD.
So in 'fairness' I'm not the cnut pushing up insurance costs. 😠

Both arms are twisted up my back by current road use laws so I need to buy cover from one of these shower of arseholes.
RIAS were 'cheapest' at £442.00.

It's not the fact that they increase costs that irks me.
It is the way the have a very protected market. More cars in the road every year and 100% cover required for all registered vehicles unless SORNed.
And we let the Trade Unions fall into the abyss of mediocrity all those years before. 😔
We NEED revolution. 😊
____________________
Disclaimer: The comments above may be predicted text and not necessarily the opinion of MCN.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

arry
Super Spammer



Joined: 03 Jan 2009
Karma :

PostPosted: 10:47 - 29 Jul 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

MCN wrote:

It's not the fact that they increase costs that irks me.
It is the way the have a very protected market. More cars in the road every year and 100% cover required for all registered vehicles unless SORNed.
And we let the Trade Unions fall into the abyss of mediocrity all those years before. 😔
We NEED revolution. 😊


Protected how? From what?

Does more cars = more or less risk?

Rate increase on motor won't be related to Vnuk at the moment; it's Ogden related and believe me, that wasn't at the behest of the insurance industry.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

MCN
Super Spammer



Joined: 22 Jul 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 11:44 - 29 Jul 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

Protected by act of parliament. Where there must be insurance to use any vehicle on the road.
There is no way around it one must pay for insurance.
The hikes are not based on merit. They claw back profit lost from referrals and other no-win-no-fee stuff by passing to the low risk punter.

____________________
Disclaimer: The comments above may be predicted text and not necessarily the opinion of MCN.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

arry
Super Spammer



Joined: 03 Jan 2009
Karma :

PostPosted: 12:09 - 29 Jul 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

MCN wrote:
Protected by act of parliament. Where there must be insurance to use any vehicle on the road.
There is no way around it one must pay for insurance.


So what's the protection you claim? Does that mean anyone can make money issuing motor insurance policies? Why haven't you done it, then, if it's so guaranteed and protected?

MCN wrote:
The hikes are not based on merit. They claw back profit lost from referrals and other no-win-no-fee stuff by passing to the low risk punter.


The 'hikes' are based on the claims inflation factor of the Ogden reform of discount rate, which has been widely contested and lobbied against by the insurance industry because of the adverse affect on premiums paid by customers:
https://pwc.blogs.com/press_room/2017/02/ogden-rate-change-pwc-comments-on-impacts-for-motor-insurance-pricing.html

It was set (badly) by the MoJ in absolute contradiction to the wishes of insurers.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts
Old Thread Alert!

The last post was made 6 years, 234 days ago. Instead of replying here, would creating a new thread be more useful?
  Display posts from previous:   
This page may contain affiliate links, which means we may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. By clicking on an affiliate link, you accept that third-party cookies will be set.

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Bike Chat Forums Index -> Biking News & Rumours All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

Read the Terms of Use! - Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
 

Debug Mode: ON - Server: birks (www) - Page Generation Time: 0.12 Sec - Server Load: 0.28 - MySQL Queries: 17 - Page Size: 148.45 Kb