Crash - Insurance Unaware Of Engine Swap - Consequences
Discussion
silentbrown said:
OP, really sorry to hear about your mate.
They can obviously cancel the policy due to failure to disclose, and thus avoid paying for damage to the modified car.
They're still on the hook for any third-party claims, but I guess they could potentially sue the driver's estate. Obviously depends on the size of the third-party's claim, but I'd be pretty surprised if they went down that route given the circumstances.
If I recall correctly, Graham Hill's estate was bankrupted by claims for uninsured losses by the estates of the passengers in his aircraftIJB1959 said:
They can legally claim on the estate if they wish too, but hopefully in this case they wont.
Not sure what you mean by "legally claim"?They can obviously cancel the policy due to failure to disclose, and thus avoid paying for damage to the modified car.
They're still on the hook for any third-party claims, but I guess they could potentially sue the driver's estate. Obviously depends on the size of the third-party's claim, but I'd be pretty surprised if they went down that route given the circumstances.
ClaphamGT3 said:
If I recall correctly, Graham Hill's estate was bankrupted by claims for uninsured losses by the estates of the passengers in his aircraft
I don't think it bankrupted the estate but it effectvely left his family with enormous financial problems.https://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/relationships/form...
The uninsured aspect was due to issues with the plane’s registration (which meant the AWC was invalid) and Hill's PPL.
These irregularities are highlighted in the Conclusions section of the AIB report.
Duncan Lang said:
I'm at page 5 of this thread and this argument is annoying me so I'll try and settle it. You're both wrong. The formula you want to use is the impulse-momentum change but to make it easier use Newtons second law to account for the acceleration difference between the two engines (3l will accelerate the vehicle quicker). This gives you the force you have to oppose (with the brakes) in a realistic situation.
30mph-0 will be about the same with either engine (more variable based on condition of the brake system that weight) but when braking for a corner at the end of a 500m straight, the car with the bigger engine will most likely arrive at a higher velocity (why bother swapping the engine) meaning the brakes will have to work harder to stop the greater momentum (or in the real world, take longer to slow the car).
However, I suspect that the moron in question here suffered from a lack of driving ability that even better brakes couldn't have saved him from.
Apologies if this has been covered in subsequent replies.
Typical conclusion jumping righteous pistonheader.30mph-0 will be about the same with either engine (more variable based on condition of the brake system that weight) but when braking for a corner at the end of a 500m straight, the car with the bigger engine will most likely arrive at a higher velocity (why bother swapping the engine) meaning the brakes will have to work harder to stop the greater momentum (or in the real world, take longer to slow the car).
However, I suspect that the moron in question here suffered from a lack of driving ability that even better brakes couldn't have saved him from.
Apologies if this has been covered in subsequent replies.
ClaphamGT3 said:
If I recall correctly, Graham Hill's estate was bankrupted by claims for uninsured losses by the estates of the passengers in his aircraft
This is correct. Graham & Bette Hill were friends of my parents. Legal stuff went on for ages, and a settlement was eventually made against the estate, not sure how much exactly, but quite a lot according to Damon.IJB1959 said:
ClaphamGT3 said:
If I recall correctly, Graham Hill's estate was bankrupted by claims for uninsured losses by the estates of the passengers in his aircraft
This is correct. Graham & Bette Hill were friends of my parents. Legal stuff went on for ages, and a settlement was eventually made against the estate, not sure how much exactly, but quite a lot according to Damon.info re graham hill:
[url]https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5422f6a040f0b61342000593/14-1976_N6645Y.pdf[\url]
southendpier said:
IJB1959 said:
ClaphamGT3 said:
If I recall correctly, Graham Hill's estate was bankrupted by claims for uninsured losses by the estates of the passengers in his aircraft
This is correct. Graham & Bette Hill were friends of my parents. Legal stuff went on for ages, and a settlement was eventually made against the estate, not sure how much exactly, but quite a lot according to Damon.info re graham hill:
[url]https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5422f6a040f0b61342000593/14-1976_N6645Y.pdf[\url]
Ekona said:
It worries me that people this stupid genuinely still exist in the world. I just can't fathom why you'd go to all that cost of carrying out the swap and then not bother insuring your investment, ignoring the legal aspect of it for a second.
Because the insurance is stupid. I changed my wheels, headlights and exhaust and my insurance went from £900 a year to £3,000. We're not stupid, we're just sick of insurance being ridiculous. DomesticM said:
Ekona said:
It worries me that people this stupid genuinely still exist in the world. I just can't fathom why you'd go to all that cost of carrying out the swap and then not bother insuring your investment, ignoring the legal aspect of it for a second.
Because the insurance is stupid. I changed my wheels, headlights and exhaust and my insurance went from £900 a year to £3,000. We're not stupid, we're just sick of insurance being ridiculous. TooMany2cvs said:
The non-stupid move would be to check that out before modifying the car to something that isn't insurable at a price you want to pay. Not to modify anyway, then waste £900 on a useless-when-needed insurance policy simply to get the MID tag against the plate.
Insurance isn’t really stupid, they’re a bunch of smart scums. Obviously a roof box is a modification worth an extra £1000 and there is nothing wrong with that. The computer says so. But then....all this high pricing yet they apparently they don’t even make profit. Clearly their business model is s
te therefore they’re quite stupid too. So basically stupid scums...Edited by captainaverage on Thursday 28th June 14:06
captainaverage said:
TooMany2cvs said:
The non-stupid move would be to check that out before modifying the car to something that isn't insurable at a price you want to pay. Not to modify anyway, then waste £900 on a useless-when-needed insurance policy simply to get the MID tag against the plate.
Insurance isn’t really stupid, they’re a bunch of smart scums. Obviously a roof box is a modification worth an extra £1000 and there is nothing wrong with that. The computer says so. But then....all this high pricing yet they apparently they don’t even make profit. Clearly their business model is s
te therefore they’re quite stupid too. So basically stupid scums...This time next year, Rodney...
TooMany2cvs said:
The non-stupid move would be to check that out before modifying the car to something that isn't insurable at a price you want to pay. Not to modify anyway, then waste £900 on a useless-when-needed insurance policy simply to get the MID tag against the plate.
It's the same with every other car. I can't modify any without paying an obscene amount of money that nobody in their right mind would pay. I've got some nice new brakes ready to go on but it will increase my insurance by £450 a year - why? No idea. DomesticM said:
TooMany2cvs said:
The non-stupid move would be to check that out before modifying the car to something that isn't insurable at a price you want to pay. Not to modify anyway, then waste £900 on a useless-when-needed insurance policy simply to get the MID tag against the plate.
It's the same with every other car. I can't modify any without paying an obscene amount of money that nobody in their right mind would pay. I've got some nice new brakes ready to go on but it will increase my insurance by £450 a year - why? No idea. Here's a clue: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actuary
otolith said:
Depends on your circumstances too. I've never been charged much for making modifications, but then I didn't do it when I was young.
Indeed, about a 15% increase in power on my Golf cost me about £50 per year more to insure and reduced the number of willing insurers but it wasn't spankey at all.When ever we insure one of the TVRs we always disclose the known modifications and add that there may be others that we have no idea of as they were bought second hand and let's face it no two ever left the factory the same in the first place!
DomesticM said:
I've got some nice new brakes ready to go on but it will increase my insurance by £450 a year - why? No idea.
Given the number of big brake "upgrades" that are actually downgrades such is the resultant front to rear mismatch, I can't blame insurance companies for increasing premiums for such a modification. That aside, can you not see the connection between the type of person wanting larger brakes and the increased likelihood of them driving rather more enthusiastically than the average driver?
IJB1959 said:
southendpier said:
IJB1959 said:
ClaphamGT3 said:
If I recall correctly, Graham Hill's estate was bankrupted by claims for uninsured losses by the estates of the passengers in his aircraft
This is correct. Graham & Bette Hill were friends of my parents. Legal stuff went on for ages, and a settlement was eventually made against the estate, not sure how much exactly, but quite a lot according to Damon.info re graham hill:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/542...
Damon was the first person in the family to know what had just happened. Not an easy thing to deal with when you're only 15.
He devotes an entire chapter (#7, pp 75-90) in 'Watching The Wheels' to the accident (it's on my desk as I'm typing this).
See also 'I'll Be Back Saturday Night' in Jan Bartelksi's 'Disasters in the Air: Mysterious Air Disasters Explained'.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff