Brunters lost to the nimby W£$%^&*S

Brunters lost to the nimby W£$%^&*S

Author
Discussion

sdd

347 posts

283 months

Wednesday 14th February 2007
quotequote all

Had the same argument Jonny.........got nowhere........the VAT is about as much as we're going to get!

Stephen

www.track-club.com

jleroux

1,511 posts

261 months

Wednesday 14th February 2007
quotequote all
a bit like me having to pay for an unlimited mileage road policy for my elise, when it only covers <1500 miles per year on the road and > 6000 miles per year on track. the reason being i can't 'prove' to the insurers how much of the mileage is done on track.

utterly criminal in my opinion. they should either insure me on track for the 6000 miles or not charge me for them. how many businesses/products can get away with charging for something they aren't providing?

Jonny

flemke

22,865 posts

238 months

Wednesday 14th February 2007
quotequote all
jleroux said:
a bit like me having to pay for an unlimited mileage road policy for my elise, when it only covers <1500 miles per year on the road and > 6000 miles per year on track. the reason being i can't 'prove' to the insurers how much of the mileage is done on track.

utterly criminal in my opinion. they should either insure me on track for the 6000 miles or not charge me for them. how many businesses/products can get away with charging for something they aren't providing?

Jonny

Why would you be required to prove your mileage?
IINM, in a policy you might undertake not to do more than x miles a year on public roads. Normally the underwriter has the option of taking a look at your car to check out the odometer, which option is rarely exercised. Surely the point of such an inspection is to enable the underwriter to "prove" that the insured has exceeded the agreed limit. Therefore it would be down to the underwriter to prove that the terms and conditions had been violated. Otherwise they could ask you to "prove", for example, that you had never put them at greater risk by exceeding the speed limit, and of course one cannot prove the negative.
This sounds like typical insurers' bullyboy tactics rather than a position based in law.

jleroux

1,511 posts

261 months

Wednesday 14th February 2007
quotequote all
in my (albeit limited) experience of limited mileage policies - the insurers have asked for a declaration of current mileage. I assume if you lie and have a crash and your mileage is UNDER that figure they would invalidate the cover.

Like you say - bully boy techniques. Sadly I can't see any way of getting round it.

Jonny
BaT

Neill_Watson

22 posts

227 months

Thursday 15th February 2007
quotequote all
Contrast this with where we are in Sweden right now. Our BMW M3 Compact was built by Irish Tarmac Championship boys and is barely silenced. In the UK we didn't dare take it to Elvington.

Here in Sweden, barking across a frozen lake, exhaust echoing back off the trees, it attracts attention all right. But not to shut us down! The locals love it and crowds gather to cheer on the fast Englishmen. They actually asked why our other cars were so quiet!

www.icedriver.co.uk

The only complaint we've had was from a guy who lives by the side of the lake. He wanted us to move the track closer to his house so he could sit on the decking and drink beer and watch....:-)

Neill Watson
Ice Driver Sweden

flemke

22,865 posts

238 months

Thursday 15th February 2007
quotequote all
jleroux said:
in my (albeit limited) experience of limited mileage policies - the insurers have asked for a declaration of current mileage. I assume if you lie and have a crash and your mileage is UNDER that figure they would invalidate the cover.

Like you say - bully boy techniques. Sadly I can't see any way of getting round it.

Jonny
BaT

I know even less about insurance than I do about other things, if that is possible.
What I would look to do in your situation is to declare the previous year's mileage as two numbers - public road (covered) and private circuit (not covered). If they have a problem with that, then it would be up to them to say so, and why.

The reason that they ask for an annual mileage limit is because that limits their exposure. This will have been carefully calculated by their actuaries - it won't be a number pulled out of the air.
On that basis, they cannot have it both ways - to say that you're not covered for circuit driving, but that the same circuit driving for which they won't cover you must be included in your annual mileage total.

I presume that most of the circuit driving that you do (or the car does) will have been recorded in the course of running your business. If so, a court ought to be able to look at the records to check whether your claim of non-road mileage stacks up.