Insurance row over vicar's Jesus Christ car stickers

[robinessex]

Another insurance company trying it on :-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-west-wale...

[Slidingpillar]

Must be a slow news day as at the end of the article, is written this:

Ageas the insurer said:

"They have concluded that our request to declare all modifications was not made clear enough to Rev Parry and therefore she did not know which vehicle enhancements should have been declared.

"They say they will review the wording on their policy applications."

Teacup, a, in, storm if you ask me

[Codswallop]

On the one hand, I can see how some car graphics or stickers may lead to a car being targeted or vandalised. On the other hand, the insurance industry needs to get a grip. No wonder they have a poor reputation.

Do I need to declare my PH smiley sticker?

[Kev T360]

Codswallop said:

On the one hand, I can see how some car graphics or stickers may lead to a car being targeted or vandalised. On the other hand, the insurance industry needs to get a grip. No wonder they have a poor reputation.

Do I need to declare my PH smiley sticker?

Definitely, along with any air fresheners that you might have added.

[TooMany2cvs]

Bearing in mind these are related to her employment, at what point do "stickers" become "commercial signwriting"?

[paintman]

Codswallop said:

I can see how some car graphics or stickers may lead to a car being targeted or vandalised.

Nail, head. Which would lead to a claim they would have to pay. Which IMO is the real reason - which they lack the balls to admit.

[dudleybloke]

Oh lordy lord.

[The Nur]

Thought I'd seen her before...

[CYMR0]

Slidingpillar said:

Teacup, a, in, storm if you ask me

Kind of. I think she went to a consumer programme who kicked up a fuss and the insurer realised that they were being rather silly.

Of course, had the car been vandalised rather than just had a part stolen, they might have had a point about materiality, but then they would also have had to make it clear at the proposal stage.

[kuro]

Kev T360 said:

Definitely, along with any air fresheners that you might have added.

Seems to be the way its going with insurance these days.

[CYMR0]

The Nur said:

Thought I'd seen her before...

I bet she was gorgeous 50 years ago though, seriously.

[The Nur]

CYMR0 said:

I bet she was gorgeous 50 years ago though, seriously.

Could well have been. I didn't mean the above in an insulting way, it is just a really crap pic in the article.

[Funk]

The stickers don't even make any sense. At least you can identify a car that will be badly driven very easily from a distance though, so there's that.

[budfox]

Religion disgusts me.

[budfox]

... having said that, I think you do need some kind of divine belief to get behind the wheel of a Vauxhall.

[aka_kerrly]

I'd load the premium for the increased chance of vandalism with those god awful stickers on.

[McSam]

The bit that speaks volumes about her is the immediate jump to concluding that because the insurance company have a concern, there must be anti-Christian motives.

It's not because the overwhelming majority of private cars do without huge signwriting drawing attention to them and putting them at greater risk of vandalism. Oh no. That would be reasonable.

[xRIEx]

paintman said:

Codswallop said:

I can see how some car graphics or stickers may lead to a car being targeted or vandalised.

Nail, head. Which would lead to a claim they would have to pay. Which IMO is the real reason - which they lack the balls to admit.

Lack what balls? Why would it be an issue for an insurer to say that a modification would increase the risk of a claim?

[threespires]

My car has Yokohama tyres fitted. When new it had Bridgestone. Do I have to tell my insurers?

[xRIEx]

threespires said:

My car has Yokohama tyres fitted. When new it had Bridgestone. Do I have to tell my insurers?

Are they within manufacturer specifications?