Login | Register
SearchMy Stuff
My ProfileMy PreferencesMy Mates RSS Feed
1 2
4
Reply to Topic
Author Discussion

LoonR1

12,754 posts

47 months

[news] 
Saturday 30th June 2012 quote quote all
CarsOrBikes said:
Try getting them to quote fully comp, they can offer greater discounts on that cover level then tpft, so you may at least get for for the same, or better value for money

Try and get comp anyway, tpft is just about covering a bike, and in you case one that isn't worth much, so my own opinion would be comp which protects you more, who is worth more than that bike right?
That is completely wrong.

TPF&T covers the legal minimum of Thrid PArty cover and the loss of your bike due to Theft or Fire.

Fully Comp covers the above and any accident / malicious damage to your bike.

It does NOT cover you in anyway whatsoever.


CarsOrBikes said:
Get them to strip out the legal cover fees and bike recovery fees as the recovery you can get elsewhere for less if not free with a bank account etc and legal cover often is sold but can be a scam and not a proper policy
Sort of OK. The last sentece is the killer, legal cover is not a scam, it might not be for everyone, but you're going to struggle to know how to revoer your excess in a non-fault if you're not njured, as no solicitor will bother with you otherwise.

CarsOrBikes said:
Investigate excess insurances too, see how they work, it may facilitate you having a voluntary excess in addition to the compulsory one (watch this as many people don't realise they are diferent amounts to pay) and covering it in the event of...and can be less than the excess itself
What's the poitn of upping an excess to save money and then spending more money insuring it? Why not just select a lower excess anyway?


CarsOrBikes said:
Dont get into a 12 months for ten policy as a new rider, it is a trap into the second year, or worse a pay for 12 and get 10 on the promise of an early 1st year no claims, thats just ste
Why is it a "trap"? How can anyone "trap" you into a renewal?

I can confidently say that no broker is selling policies that cost a years premium, but only offer 10 months cover.


In all honesty posts like this worry me hugely as someone could read this and believe it. How can anyone who buys something be so lacking in knowledge yet claim to be so knowledgeable?






Biker's Nemesis

22,805 posts

78 months

[news] 
Saturday 30th June 2012 quote quote all
My 2005 R1 costs £76 TPFT.

Just thought I'd say.

LoonR1

12,754 posts

47 months

[news] 
Saturday 30th June 2012 quote quote all
Biker's Nemesis said:
My 2005 R1 costs £76 TPFT.

Just thought I'd say.
Mine doesn't, it costs £28 for fire & theft only (no road risk)

Biker's Nemesis

22,805 posts

78 months

[news] 
Saturday 30th June 2012 quote quote all
LoonR1 said:
Mine doesn't, it costs £28 for fire & theft only (no road risk)
Old fart.

cheadle hulme

1,710 posts

52 months

[news] 
Saturday 30th June 2012 quote quote all
Bike insurance seems to be massively under priced. I'm sure they know what they're doing though. (I am contracting for a big insurers Solvency II programme).

My K1200s with 170hp costs less than a days pay to insure and I've had my licence for a year. Admittedly, I am 40 and an accountant, but I could still do some damage on it.



Hasn't gone over 8000rpm yet

Advertisement

LoonR1

12,754 posts

47 months

[news] 
Saturday 30th June 2012 quote quote all
cheadle hulme said:
Bike insurance seems to be massively under priced. I'm sure they know what they're doing though. (I am contracting for a big insurers Solvency II programme).
They don't, but it's such a niche market that it won't impact on S2 at all. The whole markt is c£300m a year, whcih is peanuts in the bigger scheme of things.

The insurer you're referring to withdrew from the bike market last year.

Biker's Nemesis said:
Old fart.
It's on my home insurance, so not really tongue out

CarsOrBikes

88 posts

54 months

[news] 
Sunday 1st July 2012 quote quote all
I'm posting for the benefit of the op here primarily, and if it helps others, not to get into some other off topic knowledge contest

There are differences in the cover 'personally' in the event of accidents between types of cover beit the insured or third parties, also other items such as gear not always excluded on comp policies from particular insurers, but not likely included with tpft.

Regarding the greater discount on comp enquiries, I got this with MCE, and learnt after this: that I had comp cover when I had bought tpft, when I called them.

I personally would avoid saying posted advice is "completely wrong" and maybe leave it for the op or readers to make relevant enquiries, just read any policy shedule for diffences in cover

The next point about legal cover not being a scam, Please read my post, I said it can be, and this is true. The insurer will sometimes sell you a legal expenses cover, and cover is implying a policy, yet you will likely as not, never receive relevant seperate legal cover policy documentation. This is recorded on the internet for all readers to investgate, so please, before you shout up again saying i'm completely wrong, check it out, or check your own insurance docs or insurer when you're ready. The insurer 'may' just refer your case to a non fault handler/claims service, which you can source directly, free, rather than pay the insurer for.

The excess response on the back of my mere suggestion of investigating it, is that a voluntary excess 'can' make a considerable difference to certain policies, but to insure an excess is often a small premium, if 'investigated' as I said, the op who it was in reply to, may find there is an overall saving.

Your certainty that no insurer sells 10 month policies and charges 12 is a little irrelevant, as it is fact. Unless you have experienced it you won't know I guess? My step daughter had a first car bought for her by her dad, he insured it for a provisional driver, she passed her test and when it was time to re insure she insured with just exactly such a company, selling her the attributes of a 10 month policy allowing her to claim her 1st years no claims discount early, which was going to be worth more than the extra 2 months premium she would have to pay. The company if I recall was Diamond (part of Admiral). The 'trap' is very real, and that is the no claims discount may not be accepted by a different insurer had she decided to shop around at the next renewal. Low or advantageous new business quotes that are taken up, are often renewed at hugely inflated premiums, people get caught up in this net.

This is also a trap for any of you readers that protect your no claims discount, as it is commonly only protected if you reinsure with the company that charged you to protect it in the first place, yet their renewal premium could be more than anyone elses and possibly would be. Rather than wait for some know better type to respond and worry that people might beleive my post, ask an insurer if they will accept your protected no claims if you have had an accident last year for instance....they won't I suspect

This last line of the response means what exactly?
Quote: "In all honesty posts like this worry me hugely as someone could read this and believe it. How can anyone who buys something be so lacking in knowledge yet claim to be so knowledgeable?"

Just who is claiming to be knowledgeable or lacking in knowledge? Anyone reading, please check this guys response regarding comprehensive insurance ...
QUOTE: It does NOT cover you in anyway whatsoever. (he means the 'you' bit)

Don't be so quick to flame peoples contributions on forums, you may not be such a smartarse in reality, we are all here to help hopefully, and I hate to see people get ripped off, or get led into a wrong decision, even you whoever you are.

The op here is a new rider, going of topic arguing for the sake of your own belief you know more just makes people like me who are trying to help, justify every comment like you have to approve the contribution WTF?

It's late, maybe i'm tired, and uncomfortable, so irritable, my comments are all based on experiences of thirty years in the motor trade and insuring close to a hundred vehicles, and making claims either through my own insurer (rarely) a third party insurer directly, or solicitors including claims handling firms.

Here is the latest and the reason for some discomfort:


My contributions are just, as always, my2p

If i'm incorrect, no offence intended, and better to make your own investigations into the facts if in any doubt, rather than indulge in opinion alone, beit mine or that of another.

therealsnazbaz

307 posts

65 months

[news] 
Sunday 1st July 2012 quote quote all
That is a very telling picture.

Did that horrible looking woman try to turn right into that driveway in front of you? She looks almost proud, as if she thinks you deserve it. Probably thinks you were a hooligan on a motorcycle going too fast (even if you weren't) and therefore it's not her fault... How close am I?

Tango13

2,653 posts

46 months

[news] 
Sunday 1st July 2012 quote quote all
LoonR1 said:
You really don't understand hat insurance is do you.

Car and bike insurance automatically include cover for passegers / pillions. However, for some reason bike insurers will allow you to opt out of cover for pillions. If you do opt out(which is what you're doing, not opting in), then you are saying:

"I will not be taking any person as pillion on this bike."

It becomes a warranty on your policy as you have explicitly stated it, just as if you say your bike is garaged, or it has an alarm. If you don't have a garage then your bike's not covered, ditto for the alarm.

If you do then claim and are carrying a pillion, you have voided your policy, which means you have no insurance.

You cna argue with me all you like, however, you are wrong. I kno what I'm talking about, you seem to be struggling with the most basic concept of insurance, that of Utmost Good Faith.

As for the rest of the "bogus" ste, get your head out of the tinfoil.
I'd imagine this is due to the likes of the RC30, OW01 and all the other single seaters out there. After all if the Insurance companies charged for pillion cover when they knew that the bike wasn't capable of carrying a pillion they could be in all sorts of trouble for miss selling policies?

daimatt

507 posts

105 months

[news] 
Sunday 1st July 2012 quote quote all
Tango13 said:
I'd imagine this is due to the likes of the RC30, OW01 and all the other single seaters out there. After all if the Insurance companies charged for pillion cover when they knew that the bike wasn't capable of carrying a pillion they could be in all sorts of trouble for miss selling policies?
And I would hazard a guess that when you tell an insurer how many seats you have in your car you are answering the same question. 'How many passengers/pillions will you we taking?'
If you tell your insurer that you have 4 seats in your car then stick 5 people in it then I think you would be in trouble. Same as the pillion thing, just a different way of asking.

I know most places don't ask you as an outright question, but if you look at your car policy then it will state an amount of seats.

LoonR1

12,754 posts

47 months

[news] 
Sunday 1st July 2012 quote quote all
CarsOrBikes said:
I'm posting for the benefit of the op here primarily, and if it helps others, not to get into some other off topic knowledge contest
It's not a contest, I'm correcting your incorrect "advice".

CarsOrBikes said:
There are differences in the cover 'personally' in the event of accidents between types of cover beit the insured or third parties, also other items such as gear not always excluded on comp policies from particular insurers, but not likely included with tpft.
There is NO difference to cover for Third Parties between any policy at all. gear is NEVER included in a motor policy. It may be sold as as a bolted on (or embedded) product, but never as part of the actual policy.

CarsOrBikes said:
Regarding the greater discount on comp enquiries, I got this with MCE, and learnt after this: that I had comp cover when I had bought tpft, when I called them.
How can you not know what product you bought? That should set alarm bells ringing for anyone follwoing your advice. Ironically, you got better cover than you thought you had.

CarsOrBikes said:
I personally would avoid saying posted advice is "completely wrong" and maybe leave it for the op or readers to make relevant enquiries, just read any policy shedule for diffences in cover
I won't avoid saying it's wrong though, when it is clearly wrong.

CarsOrBikes said:
The next point about legal cover not being a scam, Please read my post, I said it can be, and this is true. The insurer will sometimes sell you a legal expenses cover, and cover is implying a policy, yet you will likely as not, never receive relevant seperate legal cover policy documentation. This is recorded on the internet for all readers to investgate, so please, before you shout up again saying i'm completely wrong, check it out, or check your own insurance docs or insurer when you're ready. The insurer 'may' just refer your case to a non fault handler/claims service, which you can source directly, free, rather than pay the insurer for.
You might be able to source it for free, equally you might not. If you're injured then it won't be a problem as solicitors will be falling over themselves to sign you up for free. if you just need your excess (or part of it in split fault accident) then there's little chance of you sourcing this support for free.

There are plenty of policies out there where you don;t get hard copies of documentation in the post anymore.

CarsOrBikes said:
The excess response on the back of my mere suggestion of investigating it, is that a voluntary excess 'can' make a considerable difference to certain policies, but to insure an excess is often a small premium, if 'investigated' as I said, the op who it was in reply to, may find there is an overall saving.
It can make a difference on premium but a separte standalone policy to cover this extra excess is usually more expensive than the saving made.

CarsOrBikes said:
Your certainty that no insurer sells 10 month policies and charges 12 is a little irrelevant, as it is fact. Unless you have experienced it you won't know I guess? My step daughter had a first car bought for her by her dad, he insured it for a provisional driver, she passed her test and when it was time to re insure she insured with just exactly such a company, selling her the attributes of a 10 month policy allowing her to claim her 1st years no claims discount early, which was going to be worth more than the extra 2 months premium she would have to pay. The company if I recall was Diamond (part of Admiral). The 'trap' is very real, and that is the no claims discount may not be accepted by a different insurer had she decided to shop around at the next renewal. Low or advantageous new business quotes that are taken up, are often renewed at hugely inflated premiums, people get caught up in this net.
I'm 100% positive on bikes and 99.99% sure on cars too. The FSA would have a major issue with this type of policy. Admiral certainly have never doen this. They do sell 10 month policies for 10 month's premium wit accelerated NCD, but few other insurers arehappy to accpet the proff of NCD for obvious reasons.

CarsOrBikes said:
This is also a trap for any of you readers that protect your no claims discount, as it is commonly only protected if you reinsure with the company that charged you to protect it in the first place, yet their renewal premium could be more than anyone elses and possibly would be. Rather than wait for some know better type to respond and worry that people might beleive my post, ask an insurer if they will accept your protected no claims if you have had an accident last year for instance....they won't I suspect
Not true. If you have a letter stating you have 5 years NCD then it will be honoured by all companies, you will have to declare the accident still though.

I don't need to ask an insurer, I run the Claims Division for one, so know what I'm talking about.

CarsOrBikes said:
This last line of the response means what exactly?
Quote: "In all honesty posts like this worry me hugely as someone could read this and believe it. How can anyone who buys something be so lacking in knowledge yet claim to be so knowledgeable?"

Just who is claiming to be knowledgeable or lacking in knowledge? Anyone reading, please check this guys response regarding comprehensive insurance ...
QUOTE: It does NOT cover you in anyway whatsoever. (he means the 'you' bit)
Me. I'm claiming to be knowledgeable. I have a shedload of qualifications and a couple of thousand claims people working for me.

Your Fully Comp policy does not cover YOU at all, it covers your bike repairs only. If you kill / injure yourself then your policy will repair / write off the bike, but it won't pay out any money to you for the injury / death, other than if there is a bolted on (or embedded) policy which is often free.

CarsOrBikes said:
Don't be so quick to flame peoples contributions on forums, you may not be such a smartarse in reality, we are all here to help hopefully, and I hate to see people get ripped off, or get led into a wrong decision, even you whoever you are.
Then stop giving them duff advice.

CarsOrBikes said:
The op here is a new rider, going of topic arguing for the sake of your own belief you know more just makes people like me who are trying to help, justify every comment like you have to approve the contribution WTF?

It's late, maybe i'm tired, and uncomfortable, so irritable, my comments are all based on experiences of thirty years in the motor trade and insuring close to a hundred vehicles, and making claims either through my own insurer (rarely) a third party insurer directly, or solicitors including claims handling firms.

My contributions are just, as always, my2p

If i'm incorrect, no offence intended, and better to make your own investigations into the facts if in any doubt, rather than indulge in opinion alone, beit mine or that of another.
I don't post on car sales threads, desite having bought a lot of cars & bikes in the last 25 years. I don't profess to have any expertise in this area.

I don't know how to build a house, depsite having bought quite a few in the last 20 years and lived in one for a lot longer.

If you are injured, my sympathies, but that doesn't alter the fact that you're dishing out incorrect advice and random conspiracy theories.



fwaggie

1,317 posts

70 months

[news] 
Sunday 1st July 2012 quote quote all
I don't bother taking out any legal cover option, small accidents aren't worth claiming for and if your bike has a big accident and is written off you can recover the excess by negotiating the offer from the insurance.
(this does depend if you have the money to fix any scratched panels / broken levers, etc, from minor drops, etc)

Also I wouldn't bother using any solicitor appointed by any insurer in the event of an accident. In my big accident I moved from the insurance appointed solicitor to an independant lot (who were absolutely excellent) and I got 20 x the amount I was offered by *my* ins co solicitor who either just didn't give a damn or didn't have the slightest clue.


Oh, and Loon, if the ins industry could see they were going to lose £2Bpa when that lot started to grow, why didn't they buy the small upstarts up and incorporate them into the companies product portfolio?

It's what all other successful companies do when somone comes up with an idea to directly market a desirable product associated with your own which eats into your profits.

What prevents ins co's from offering Credit Hire, decent solicitors? And they put enough business the way of repairers to be able to tell them to lower their prices or else.

LoonR1

12,754 posts

47 months

[news] 
Sunday 1st July 2012 quote quote all
fwaggie said:
Oh, and Loon, if the ins industry could see they were going to lose £2Bpa when that lot started to grow, why didn't they buy the small upstarts up and incorporate them into the companies product portfolio?

It's what all other successful companies do when somone comes up with an idea to directly market a desirable product associated with your own which eats into your profits.

What prevents ins co's from offering Credit Hire, decent solicitors? And they put enough business the way of repairers to be able to tell them to lower their prices or else.
Because it's not as simple as that. The £2billion is a combination of Credit Hire and injury claims. You can't buy a law firm (until the "Tesco Law" passes later this year), as legal firms are not allowed to have any ownership by non-legally qualified people.

The initial Credit Hire offering was challenged very heavily through the Courts, as it was viewed as not legal. There is still an argument over the legality of it and the OFT are not happy about them either, see their threats a few months back.

Insurers now do offer Credit Hire to their not at fault policyholders, but it's more as cost mitigation than profit.

Nobody foresaw the injury changes being as abused as they are.

CarsOrBikes

88 posts

54 months

[news] 
Sunday 1st July 2012 quote quote all
Fortunately people can check out for themselves whatever they wish, and don't have to take notice of your irrelevant opinion regarding my post.

Your qualifications have little bearing on an opinion or advice based on real experiences.

Like I said, the OP is why I contributed, not to get into some useless pissing contest.

facts though, include that I did know what I bought, and I paid approx £320 for tpft insurance from MCE on a replacement bike. The comp quote was circa £800. 6 days after purchase I was hit. I had legal cover then, (before I learned that it does not always mean a seperate cover exists) I called MCE to get the details of the legal cover as I felt I could avoid a claim directly through my own insurer.

They were confirming my details over the phone, and said they could see my comp policy on the system. I was alarmed as my card in that case was about to get whacked for an unauthorised value, so I made more enquiries. At that time, they explained I did buy and pay for tpft, but as my business was repeat, and they were trying to offer the policy at a competetive price, the system would not let them discount a tpft policy by enough, yet oddly it would let them give more off a comp one. So I had comp cover. They obviously were happy to conceal that information at the time. I was assured my card was debited correctly. An insurance certificate does not state tpft or comp.

So, Just for you Loon, you have an explanation of fact. nothing incorrect.

Perhaps you are a contributor biased towards protecting the integrity of insurers. I am not and couldn't give a hoot. They often rip us off. They use any excuse to hike up our premiums, and to exclude more and more, charging for add ons wherever possible. Also the exclusions lists are getting longer.

Unrelated to this thread really, but insurance companies make promises of loan cars during repairs as if they provide them, but don't tell anybody that you only get them if you take your vehicle to their cost saving approved repairer. As soon as anyone demands their vehicle is repaired by an official agent, the replacement vehicle disappears, because it wasn't actually being provided by the insurer at all, it was the repairer supplying it. Something else to consider before accepting a quote appearing to be for what it isn't

Insurance companies tell you you have to use their approved repairers, but you don't

Insurance companies demand you must get two estimates or more, but you don't

Insurance companies tell you that repairs are guaranteed for so many years as if they provide the guarantees, but they don't, the repairer does.

Carry on saying peoples posts are wrong then, but you are not qualified to challenge those based on anyones actual experiences. Were you involved in my own experiences? Probably not, so you are not qualified to say I am wrong when I am discussing factual experiences of mine, with others here, so carry on being a superior twit all day. People may make their own enquiries, and share them if they choose.

I'm sure you would make excuses all day long for the provision of some sort of 'cover' for which no documentation gets issued, by your company perhaps? All I am talking about is the supposed legal assistance or cover, that doesn't always exist, that insurers charge for. Some may do some don't. You probably know this very well. Who would knowingly buy a policy with no paperwork? The subject is not just about excess recovery.

Protected no claims discount is being restricted also, as it allows fewer claims before still hitting your no claims, if you have had a claim in the last year for instance, you then go to a different insurance company because say, you don't like your renewal premium, you have to disclose it, or 'them' if more, the new insurance company will knock your no claims. You are saying that another company will still afford people the same no claims discount when it was protected for a fee with a different insurer? I think you need to be on the end of a phone more as a customer.

We all know what no claims confirmation is, but again, different insurance companies allow differing numbers of years. If you leave a company that gave you 7, to a company that only allows up to 4, then go back to a company that allows 6, you will have a letter that says you are allowed 4, it's all a farce, and you have to ask so many questions to see what youre getting.

Wait, i'm going to be told i'm completely wrong again

I'm glad it is you claiming to be knowledgeable, fantastic. Super. I am making no such claim, but posting a constructive reply on the back of experience. Your qualifications are as irrelevant in this thread as your house building skills.

There is no mention of conspiracy theory anywhere, yet I am free to be a cynic, it is my right and everyone elses.

Unfortunately you work for the insurance industry, I wonder which one? The requirement for legal assistance from 'somewhere' becomes more apparent with such public responses from a Manager? within the insurance industry stating 'you' are not insured. Just look around before paying an insurance company 30 quid or whatever, when you may have it already with a bank account or union cover or some other facility, if not just cheaper. Also read the full schedule before you buy it from anyone, in case you are dealing with this persons firm lol.

A consideration 'if' you are in an accident, and you are in any doubt or suspect another is to blame, please seriously consider 'not' actually 'claiming' from your insurer directly. Notify them 'only' at first, and go straight to a specialist solicitor, after an initial discussion, they may agree to take care of all disbursements, they will write to your insurer, instructing them that they will be taking on the claim on your behalf, you are less likely or will not lose any no claims which can affect you for years in some injury or damage claims, as you haven't claimed through your insurer, and you are less likely or will not have the hideous interim premium hikes they will apply to you. And ultimately, the person who'll be telling you all i'm wrong again, warning you of my terrible advice haha, could be er managing?... all the paperwork for the claim against a company such as theirs.

Quote: It may be sold as as a bolted on (or embedded) product, but never as part of the actual policy.
Is not an 'embedded' benefit actually part of the actual policy? Bolt on doesn't suprise me though, strip it all out, call it the same, then sell it back as a bolt on...ha

Quote: I'm 100% positive on bikes and 99.99% sure on cars too. The FSA would have a major issue with this type of policy. Admiral certainly have never doen this. They do sell 10 month policies for 10 month's premium wit accelerated NCD, but few other insurers arehappy to accpet the proff of NCD for obvious reasons
But Diamond did, and they are part of Admiral.

Customers are sitting ducks sometimes for poor sales techniques, and misinformation. More could be done about it. Call centre sales environments are always inconsistent, you can call back an insurer three times and get three prices, all down to the individuals attitude or training maybe.

Still, the OP wanted help with first time bike insurance, sure he can check out some of the reply content, and hopefully secure a deal with the right company.

Just remember this quote from a Loon: Your Fully Comp policy does not cover YOU at all, it covers your bike repairs only. If you kill / injure yourself then your policy will repair / write off the bike, but it won't pay out any money to you for the injury / death, other than if there is a bolted on (or embedded) policy which is often free.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?

I'm leaving the thread to the factually superior haha, I have statements to complete for a claim against ******** insurance

Enjoy your bike, and ride safe, take time to get used to it ;-)

Oh.....I think pillion cover is opt in not out, see gocompare, and the check box required if you DO, if it's unchanged

Good luck.

snowdude2910

591 posts

34 months

[news] 
Sunday 1st July 2012 quote quote all
out of intrest who is the £400 quote with? I'm 24 and looking to get a first bike when I pass mod 2 and can't get close to that, Just to give you some perspective my best quotes so far have been from ebike and are as follows;
-GSXR600/CBR600F (MY1999) £653
-R6 1999 £741
-ZX6 2001 £670
-Ducati hypermotard 796 £575
-Ducati monster 620 £497
-Ducati monster 750 £541
-Daytona 600 £760 (same for 650 and 675)
-Bandit 600 £414
-SV650 £360
-KTM 640 £529
-'99 R1 (never a serious option for a first bike) £887
-GS500 £258
All quotes are TPFT with £500 excess kept in a garage (although it would really be a conservatory but that isn't an option) and I'd guess average postcode not a sthole but hardly a drunk free gated community.
If I haven't listed years for bikes they're mostly the earliest/cheapest models out there

LoonR1

12,754 posts

47 months

[news] 
Sunday 1st July 2012 quote quote all
CarsOrBikes said:
A load of drivel topped off by this classic:

Just remember this quote from a Loon: Your Fully Comp policy does not cover YOU at all, it covers your bike repairs only. If you kill / injure yourself then your policy will repair / write off the bike, but it won't pay out any money to you for the injury / death, other than if there is a bolted on (or embedded) policy which is often free.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?

I'm leaving the thread to the factually superior haha, I have statements to complete for a claim against ******** insurance

Does anybody think that if they fall off their bike and it's insured Fully Comp that it will do anything other than fix their bike?

I really hope not.



bimsb6

4,279 posts

91 months

[news] 
Sunday 1st July 2012 quote quote all
LoonR1 said:
Does anybody think that if they fall off their bike and it's insured Fully Comp that it will do anything other than fix their bike?

I really hope not.
It will pay for the ambulance though , smile

Vulgar LS2

1,561 posts

53 months

[news] 
Sunday 1st July 2012 quote quote all
OP, just out of interest (if you are still reading this) how much did you think it would cost to insure a sports bike?

garyhun

14,113 posts

98 months

[news] 
Sunday 1st July 2012 quote quote all
LoonR1 said:
Does anybody think that if they fall off their bike and it's insured Fully Comp that it will do anything other than fix their bike?

I really hope not.
What, no coke and hookers included?


Hooli

21,480 posts

70 months

[news] 
Sunday 1st July 2012 quote quote all
LoonR1 said:
Mine doesn't, it costs £28 for fire & theft only (no road risk)
House insurance you say? reckon they'd cover a lockup garage that's four houses down the road from us? same postcode etc that we rent off a neighbour. I'm asking because Mrs Hooli is unlikely to have bikes on the road next year due to a knee op.
1 2
4
Reply to Topic