Insurance Claim Affected By Car Colour Change?
Discussion
Hi all, hopefully this is a quick one to put a friend's mind at ease.
Someone ran into the back of him (which also punted him into the car in front) - as it stands, it appears to be a fairly clear-cut situation, the bloke behind has admitted liability, and insurance should sort it all out.
However, while he was talking to his insurers, a comment was made about his car being the "wrong" colour. Fair enough, yes, it certainly is, courtesy of him repainting it, but he did put the change down on the V5, and the only wrinkle is the insurers say they weren't told. Now, my friend says he did do so, at the same time as he was calling to tell them he was moving house, so it's possible something got lost in translation there, but if the insurers remain adamant about not being informed... Does it actually matter?
I can't see how the car being a different colour makes the slightest difference to anything, other than maybe causing someone to double check it's definitely the same car, which is five minutes to eyeball the chassis number. He's just mildly worried about them using it as an excuse to be difficult, though seeing as he's not at fault, I don't see why they'd have any impetus to look for trouble.
Yes, it is a friend, and not me!
Someone ran into the back of him (which also punted him into the car in front) - as it stands, it appears to be a fairly clear-cut situation, the bloke behind has admitted liability, and insurance should sort it all out.
However, while he was talking to his insurers, a comment was made about his car being the "wrong" colour. Fair enough, yes, it certainly is, courtesy of him repainting it, but he did put the change down on the V5, and the only wrinkle is the insurers say they weren't told. Now, my friend says he did do so, at the same time as he was calling to tell them he was moving house, so it's possible something got lost in translation there, but if the insurers remain adamant about not being informed... Does it actually matter?
I can't see how the car being a different colour makes the slightest difference to anything, other than maybe causing someone to double check it's definitely the same car, which is five minutes to eyeball the chassis number. He's just mildly worried about them using it as an excuse to be difficult, though seeing as he's not at fault, I don't see why they'd have any impetus to look for trouble.
Yes, it is a friend, and not me!
InitialDave said:
Hi all, hopefully this is a quick one to put a friend's mind at ease.
Someone ran into the back of him (which also punted him into the car in front) - as it stands, it appears to be a fairly clear-cut situation, the bloke behind has admitted liability, and insurance should sort it all out.
However, while he was talking to his insurers, a comment was made about his car being the "wrong" colour. Fair enough, yes, it certainly is, courtesy of him repainting it, but he did put the change down on the V5, and the only wrinkle is the insurers say they weren't told. Now, my friend says he did do so, at the same time as he was calling to tell them he was moving house, so it's possible something got lost in translation there, but if the insurers remain adamant about not being informed... Does it actually matter?
I can't see how the car being a different colour makes the slightest difference to anything, other than maybe causing someone to double check it's definitely the same car, which is five minutes to eyeball the chassis number. He's just mildly worried about them using it as an excuse to be difficult, though seeing as he's not at fault, I don't see why they'd have any impetus to look for trouble.
Yes, it is a friend, and not me!
Not going to be an issue.Someone ran into the back of him (which also punted him into the car in front) - as it stands, it appears to be a fairly clear-cut situation, the bloke behind has admitted liability, and insurance should sort it all out.
However, while he was talking to his insurers, a comment was made about his car being the "wrong" colour. Fair enough, yes, it certainly is, courtesy of him repainting it, but he did put the change down on the V5, and the only wrinkle is the insurers say they weren't told. Now, my friend says he did do so, at the same time as he was calling to tell them he was moving house, so it's possible something got lost in translation there, but if the insurers remain adamant about not being informed... Does it actually matter?
I can't see how the car being a different colour makes the slightest difference to anything, other than maybe causing someone to double check it's definitely the same car, which is five minutes to eyeball the chassis number. He's just mildly worried about them using it as an excuse to be difficult, though seeing as he's not at fault, I don't see why they'd have any impetus to look for trouble.
Yes, it is a friend, and not me!
As long as it's factory spec, I would struggle to see the insurers issue.
But if it were a solid colour, and he's changed to some custom pearlescent, meaning that if the event of repair the whole car needed paint, that might have been a relevant, disclosable mod.
I worked for an insurer who had a little squit with some awful car with custom paint that just couldn't ever be matched properly, (I'm not clear why, but this was 15y ago, paint tech might have changed) and he had 3 minor fault prangs in a year, and each time was horrifically expensive to fix.
But if it were a solid colour, and he's changed to some custom pearlescent, meaning that if the event of repair the whole car needed paint, that might have been a relevant, disclosable mod.
I worked for an insurer who had a little squit with some awful car with custom paint that just couldn't ever be matched properly, (I'm not clear why, but this was 15y ago, paint tech might have changed) and he had 3 minor fault prangs in a year, and each time was horrifically expensive to fix.
ZOLLAR said:
Not going to be an issue.
Thanks, that's what I expected, and was hoping for comfirmation.steve-5snwi said:
Do insurance companies ever ask for the colour when quoting ? I thought it was taken direct from the dvla.
Cold said:
Which colour was declared on the proposal form?
(Rhetorical question)
Yes, I think they just take it from the DVLA, and thus would have the details as were at the time of taking out the policy. The question was whether a change in the meantime was an issue.(Rhetorical question)
I appreciate that there is some logic to an angle of "if they didn't ask when insuring you, they can't care all that much"
KungFuPanda said:
Doesn't matter. He'll be claiming from the third parties insurance.
Even if he was driving uninsured and a third party hit his car and they were at fault, it wouldn't matter.
Yeeeees... Though as part of the accident, he hit the car in front due to being shoved forward, so has made the sensible decision to get his own insurance involved in case there's some wrangling over that.Even if he was driving uninsured and a third party hit his car and they were at fault, it wouldn't matter.
Jujuuk68 said:
As long as it's factory spec, I would struggle to see the insurers issue.
But if it were a solid colour, and he's changed to some custom pearlescent, meaning that if the event of repair the whole car needed paint, that might have been a relevant, disclosable mod.
I worked for an insurer who had a little squit with some awful car with custom paint that just couldn't ever be matched properly, (I'm not clear why, but this was 15y ago, paint tech might have changed) and he had 3 minor fault prangs in a year, and each time was horrifically expensive to fix.
It's not a standard factory colour, but the above scenario is unlikely to be a factor, as it is not a high-value car, and I am absolutely certain it will be written off as uneconomical to repair regardless of the paint.But if it were a solid colour, and he's changed to some custom pearlescent, meaning that if the event of repair the whole car needed paint, that might have been a relevant, disclosable mod.
I worked for an insurer who had a little squit with some awful car with custom paint that just couldn't ever be matched properly, (I'm not clear why, but this was 15y ago, paint tech might have changed) and he had 3 minor fault prangs in a year, and each time was horrifically expensive to fix.
Thank you to everyone who has given input. He will be having a more detailed discussion with his insurance shortly, so one way or another I should be able to give some update.
Jujuuk68 said:
As long as it's factory spec, I would struggle to see the insurers issue.
But if it were a solid colour, and he's changed to some custom pearlescent, meaning that if the event of repair the whole car needed paint, that might have been a relevant, disclosable mod.
I worked for an insurer who had a little squit with some awful car with custom paint that just couldn't ever be matched properly, (I'm not clear why, but this was 15y ago, paint tech might have changed) and he had 3 minor fault prangs in a year, and each time was horrifically expensive to fix.
That's about the only issue I could see as the cost of some of the special paints is eyewatering: http://www.specialistpaints.com/products/chromacoa... £239.99 a litreBut if it were a solid colour, and he's changed to some custom pearlescent, meaning that if the event of repair the whole car needed paint, that might have been a relevant, disclosable mod.
I worked for an insurer who had a little squit with some awful car with custom paint that just couldn't ever be matched properly, (I'm not clear why, but this was 15y ago, paint tech might have changed) and he had 3 minor fault prangs in a year, and each time was horrifically expensive to fix.
and the work involved due to the prep & basecoats is going to take a lot of time & so more £££££££.
I looked at two 406 coupes last year - one red, one blue - same age, spec, mileage.
Ran several insurance quotes and on both occasions the red one was approximately £100 dearer which as I'm 47 was substantial.
Are insurance costs really affected that much by the colour or am I missing something here ?
I bought the blue one.
Ran several insurance quotes and on both occasions the red one was approximately £100 dearer which as I'm 47 was substantial.
Are insurance costs really affected that much by the colour or am I missing something here ?
I bought the blue one.
A few years ago my son had his Boxster stole from his driveway when he was in the States on holiday. It was never recovered and he duly claimed for a total loss. It was a one owner car with only 24K on the clock and full Porsche service history.
They said they would only pay half the value because his wife, who was a named driver, had an expired SP30 and hadn't declared it when he put her on the policy.
Let's just stop for a moment and try and grasp the mentality of the individual who made that decision and actually considered it acceptable and legal. What possible bearing could his wife's driving convictions have on the car being stolen when they were abroad? It is to me absolutely staggering that insurance companies actually insult your intelligence by trying on something like this.
He didn't even respond to them but got his solicitor to write to them in a pleasantly threatening manner and they paid up within 48 hours.
A sign of the times I suppose.
J
They said they would only pay half the value because his wife, who was a named driver, had an expired SP30 and hadn't declared it when he put her on the policy.
Let's just stop for a moment and try and grasp the mentality of the individual who made that decision and actually considered it acceptable and legal. What possible bearing could his wife's driving convictions have on the car being stolen when they were abroad? It is to me absolutely staggering that insurance companies actually insult your intelligence by trying on something like this.
He didn't even respond to them but got his solicitor to write to them in a pleasantly threatening manner and they paid up within 48 hours.
A sign of the times I suppose.
J
jith said:
A few years ago my son had his Boxster stole from his driveway when he was in the States on holiday. It was never recovered and he duly claimed for a total loss. It was a one owner car with only 24K on the clock and full Porsche service history.
They said they would only pay half the value because his wife, who was a named driver, had an expired SP30 and hadn't declared it when he put her on the policy.
Let's just stop for a moment and try and grasp the mentality of the individual who made that decision and actually considered it acceptable and legal. What possible bearing could his wife's driving convictions have on the car being stolen when they were abroad? It is to me absolutely staggering that insurance companies actually insult your intelligence by trying on something like this.
He didn't even respond to them but got his solicitor to write to them in a pleasantly threatening manner and they paid up within 48 hours.
A sign of the times I suppose.
J
But it was OK for your son to pay a reduced premium for his insurance by not declaring that his other half had a driving conviction they decided not to mention at inception of policy?They said they would only pay half the value because his wife, who was a named driver, had an expired SP30 and hadn't declared it when he put her on the policy.
Let's just stop for a moment and try and grasp the mentality of the individual who made that decision and actually considered it acceptable and legal. What possible bearing could his wife's driving convictions have on the car being stolen when they were abroad? It is to me absolutely staggering that insurance companies actually insult your intelligence by trying on something like this.
He didn't even respond to them but got his solicitor to write to them in a pleasantly threatening manner and they paid up within 48 hours.
A sign of the times I suppose.
J
Sign of the times I suppose.
Stoofa said:
jith said:
A few years ago my son had his Boxster stole from his driveway when he was in the States on holiday. It was never recovered and he duly claimed for a total loss. It was a one owner car with only 24K on the clock and full Porsche service history.
They said they would only pay half the value because his wife, who was a named driver, had an expired SP30 and hadn't declared it when he put her on the policy.
Let's just stop for a moment and try and grasp the mentality of the individual who made that decision and actually considered it acceptable and legal. What possible bearing could his wife's driving convictions have on the car being stolen when they were abroad? It is to me absolutely staggering that insurance companies actually insult your intelligence by trying on something like this.
He didn't even respond to them but got his solicitor to write to them in a pleasantly threatening manner and they paid up within 48 hours.
A sign of the times I suppose.
J
But it was OK for your son to pay a reduced premium for his insurance by not declaring that his other half had a driving conviction they decided not to mention at inception of policy?They said they would only pay half the value because his wife, who was a named driver, had an expired SP30 and hadn't declared it when he put her on the policy.
Let's just stop for a moment and try and grasp the mentality of the individual who made that decision and actually considered it acceptable and legal. What possible bearing could his wife's driving convictions have on the car being stolen when they were abroad? It is to me absolutely staggering that insurance companies actually insult your intelligence by trying on something like this.
He didn't even respond to them but got his solicitor to write to them in a pleasantly threatening manner and they paid up within 48 hours.
A sign of the times I suppose.
J
Sign of the times I suppose.
The solicitors letter is a laugh too, Solicitors and FOS are so often trotted out by people that insurers barely batter an eye lid
I doubt it made one iota bit of difference in their decision to deal.
jith said:
What possible bearing could his wife's driving convictions have on the car being stolen when they were abroad?
J
None, but he had underpaid for his insurance for some years. J
Using your logic, I could take out £1m life insurance and lie about my terminal illness. Then, get struck by lightning. And you think my wife should get paid out just because the terminal illness I didn't declare had no bearing on my death??
cologne2792 said:
I looked at two 406 coupes last year - one red, one blue - same age, spec, mileage.
Ran several insurance quotes and on both occasions the red one was approximately £100 dearer which as I'm 47 was substantial.
Are insurance costs really affected that much by the colour or am I missing something here ?
I bought the blue one.
Presumably statistics can show that red 406 coupes have more and/or expensive claims than blue 406 coupes.Ran several insurance quotes and on both occasions the red one was approximately £100 dearer which as I'm 47 was substantial.
Are insurance costs really affected that much by the colour or am I missing something here ?
I bought the blue one.
In the OP's case, statistics might show that the type of driver who has a colour modified car is a greater risk than one who drives a non-modified car.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff