Insurance companies now refusing to quote for East London

[Gavia]

Cbull said:

Another potential way around it would be to give a friend/family member address who lives just outside London area and claim to be living there? Not the best or most honest solution but nevertheless it's a potential way around it.

That’s fraud. Simple as. It’s also very easy to discover, are you on the electoral register at the address you’re claiming? Which address is your driving licence at? Do you use it for commuting? If so how many miles to office from the dodgy address? Do you insure the bike for enough miles? Does the mileage on the bike stack up to the distance between dodgy address and office?

Also, if we all did that, then were all going to be paying more. For example, if the lad with the bike in London, who claims he lives in Dorset has it nicked then those in Dorset (probably a bit more defined) will pay more the following year as the risk has increased.

It’s really not a good idea to do it. Just as claiming you’re older / faking NCD / lying about points, accidents amd so on aren’t that clever either.

Edited by Gavia on Wednesday 17th January 10:53

[2Btoo]

sjtscott said:

2Btoo said:

Ouch. Which London postcode are you? (Only give the first part, natch.) They can differ quite a lot.

Its near Canary Wharf.. E14

Ouch - that's close to me (I'm up in E3).

[Kickstart]

Are Bennetts okay ?

I have used Principal for years but this year my bike policy has gone up from £48 - £224 which I know is a bargain to many but in rural Cheshire it seems a v big increase especially since I put a tracker on the bike since last renewal

[Cbull]

Gavia said:

That’s fraud. Simple as. It’s also very easy to discover, are you on the electoral register at the address you’re claiming? Which address is your driving licence at? Do you use it for commuting? If so how many miles to office from the dodgy address? Do you insure the bike for enough miles? Does the mileage on the bike stack up to the distance between dodgy address and office?

Also, if we all did that, then were all going to be paying more. For example, if the lad with the bike in London, who claims he lives in Dorset has it nicked then those in Dorset (probably a bit more defined) will pay more the following year as the risk hasn’t increased.

It’s really not a good idea to do it. Just as claiming you’re older / faking NCD / lying about points, accidents amd so on aren’t that clever either.

Yeah I know. I was just putting it out there, food for thought really and was a better option than not bothering to insure at all.

[Dog Star]

Kickstart said:

Are Bennetts okay ?

I have used Principal for years but this year my bike policy has gone up from £48 - £224 which I know is a bargain to many but in rural Cheshire it seems a v big increase especially since I put a tracker on the bike since last renewal

Pah! I was paying £260 fully comp on an MV Agusta F4, 5k miles inc commuting. Value approx 15k.
Changed for a new R1 last year. 5k miles *excluding* commuting, value approx 15k. Best premium I could get £880.

Seriously - wtf!!! They're not dissimilar bikes, the R1 has also got ABS and other safety aids.

Hopefully I can manage something more reasonable this year, and hopefully I will be able to reasonably afford commuting cover - I very rarely commute on the bike (couple of times a month over summer) so felt that £200 extra was a bit steep.

TBH if I'd known the premiums were going to be so massive (most I've ever paid) then I'd have simply kept the F4 - it was hardly slumming it.

[Gavia]

Cbull said:

Gavia said:

That’s fraud. Simple as. It’s also very easy to discover, are you on the electoral register at the address you’re claiming? Which address is your driving licence at? Do you use it for commuting? If so how many miles to office from the dodgy address? Do you insure the bike for enough miles? Does the mileage on the bike stack up to the distance between dodgy address and office?

Also, if we all did that, then were all going to be paying more. For example, if the lad with the bike in London, who claims he lives in Dorset has it nicked then those in Dorset (probably a bit more defined) will pay more the following year as the risk has increased.

It’s really not a good idea to do it. Just as claiming you’re older / faking NCD / lying about points, accidents amd so on aren’t that clever either.

Yeah I know. I was just putting it out there, food for thought really and was a better option than not bothering to insure at all.

To all intents and purposes, it’s uninsured. It just won’t ping the ANPR or the DVLA checks.

I’ve edited my post, as my iPad has suddenly decided to put “n’t” where it’s definitely not wanted.

[ujio]

sjtscott said:

Its near Canary Wharf.. E14

You have my sympathies. I live in Limehouse and it's nigh on impossible to get a quote on anything decent.
I have witnessed a Fireblade being stolen and gave chase and called it in to the police in the area.

Underground carparks do not even mitigate the risk!

[black-k1]

Gavia said:

Cbull said:

Gavia said:

That’s fraud. Simple as. It’s also very easy to discover, are you on the electoral register at the address you’re claiming? Which address is your driving licence at? Do you use it for commuting? If so how many miles to office from the dodgy address? Do you insure the bike for enough miles? Does the mileage on the bike stack up to the distance between dodgy address and office?

Also, if we all did that, then were all going to be paying more. For example, if the lad with the bike in London, who claims he lives in Dorset has it nicked then those in Dorset (probably a bit more defined) will pay more the following year as the risk has increased.

It’s really not a good idea to do it. Just as claiming you’re older / faking NCD / lying about points, accidents amd so on aren’t that clever either.

Yeah I know. I was just putting it out there, food for thought really and was a better option than not bothering to insure at all.

To all intents and purposes, it’s uninsured. It just won’t ping the ANPR or the DVLA checks.

I’ve edited my post, as my iPad has suddenly decided to put “n’t” where it’s definitely not wanted.

To all intents and purposes it's insured!!!!


Should a situation arise where a payout was required then the insurance company would pay for all 3rd party costs. They can refuse to pay for the insureds costs if they can show the "fraud" took place and they can also choose to "go after" the insured in person in an attempt to recoup any costs subsequent to a payout. They can also choose to cancel the policy at virtually no notice should they discover the "fraud" prior to any payout (or any claim).

[TwigtheWonderkid]

RacerMDR said:

as per other thread - I got knocked off last week, totally other parties fault and they're paying - but it was 3k ish worth of damage and i'm sure they checked I was insured before agreeing to pay.

They would still have to pay even if you were uninsured, drunk, and on the run from prison. None of those things has a bearing on their negligence.

[RacerMDR]

Gavia said:

Cbull said:

Gavia said:

That’s fraud. Simple as. It’s also very easy to discover, are you on the electoral register at the address you’re claiming? Which address is your driving licence at? Do you use it for commuting? If so how many miles to office from the dodgy address? Do you insure the bike for enough miles? Does the mileage on the bike stack up to the distance between dodgy address and office?

Also, if we all did that, then were all going to be paying more. For example, if the lad with the bike in London, who claims he lives in Dorset has it nicked then those in Dorset (probably a bit more defined) will pay more the following year as the risk has increased.

It’s really not a good idea to do it. Just as claiming you’re older / faking NCD / lying about points, accidents amd so on aren’t that clever either.

Yeah I know. I was just putting it out there, food for thought really and was a better option than not bothering to insure at all.

To all intents and purposes, it’s uninsured. It just won’t ping the ANPR or the DVLA checks.

I’ve edited my post, as my iPad has suddenly decided to put “n’t” where it’s definitely not wanted.

agree with you Gavia - but frankly if insurance companies are just refusing to insure - I can see why a person would be tempted. I think it's well out of order they won't even give you an option. Even if they say it isn't insured for Theft or something like that.

[RacerMDR]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

They would still have to pay even if you were uninsured, drunk, and on the run from prison. None of those things has a bearing on their negligence.

I didn't know that.........I kind of thought if I wasn't squeaky clean they could try and say no. Good to know next time i'm drunk, unsured and escaping from prison when I get knocked off

[sjtscott]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Will do.. I've requested a call back for later today when I'm free of meetings to get the quote sorted. Cheers

[Gavia]

black-k1 said:

To all intents and purposes it's insured!!!!


Should a situation arise where a payout was required then the insurance company would pay for all 3rd party costs. They can refuse to pay for the insureds costs if they can show the "fraud" took place and they can also choose to "go after" the insured in person in an attempt to recoup any costs subsequent to a payout. They can also choose to cancel the policy at virtually no notice should they discover the "fraud" prior to any payout (or any claim).

Nope. The insurer can cancel ab initio, this means the policy will be cancelled back to the date that it was taken out and therefore it never existed. This is where a policy was only underwritten by an insurer because key facts were excluded, or altered by the proposer and the insurer would not have taken the risk on if the truth had been told.

https://www.axa.co.uk/existing-customers/jargon-ex...

[TwigtheWonderkid]

RacerMDR said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

They would still have to pay even if you were uninsured, drunk, and on the run from prison. None of those things has a bearing on their negligence.

I didn't know that.........I kind of thought if I wasn't squeaky clean they could try and say no. Good to know next time i'm drunk, unsured and escaping from prison when I get knocked off

The USA has a "clean hands" principle within their negligence laws. If you were acting illegally, it can affect your ability to sue someone else for damages due to their negligence. But not in the UK. Here, is you are in a non fault accident, the other party are liable. The only thing we have is an element of contributory negligence, if your injuries were more severe because you weren't wearing a helmet or similar.

[The Mad Monk]

Prof Prolapse said:

Come up North, there's fk all work, but we've got loads of decent roads.

That's interesting.

How do you think that the UK has an employment rate of 95%, if no one is working up North?

[sjtscott]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Interesting.. thats a new line of questioning over what I'm used to. I know some ask where its parked during the day. For me its a secure underground work car park... infinitely more secure than at home. But currently my bike spends a large part of the working week during the working day under my building.

[RacerMDR]

not trying to incite Fraud in anyway - but how do they prove commuting if you are parking on a public street? and not say in work carpark?

You could have been going for a coffee and not at work that day it was nicked........

just testing the scenarios rather than breaking law etc.......

[Gavia]

RacerMDR said:

not trying to incite Fraud in anyway - but how do they prove commuting if you are parking on a public street? and not say in work carpark?

You could have been going for a coffee and not at work that day it was nicked........

just testing the scenarios rather than breaking law etc.......

Because the day you get it nicked, you’ll say you were at work when it happened.

[RacerMDR]

Gavia said:

Because the day you get it nicked, you’ll say you were at work when it happened.

or you won't?

Or you'll leave it until 7pm and say you went home and then came back and parked it?

[sjtscott]

sjtscott said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Interesting.. thats a new line of questioning over what I'm used to. I know some ask where its parked during the day. For me its a secure underground work car park... infinitely more secure than at home. But currently my bike spends a large part of the working week during the working day under my building.

With the Principle guy on the phone none of their insurers will quote as I have no garage basically at home. I suspected as much. He was going to refer to underwriters to see what they can do and call back if possible. I'm not expecting a call personally.