Jump to content

Insurance value?


Cheese

Featured Posts

18 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

You don't actually need to insure your vehicle for use on the roads if ....................

 

Source :

Road Traffic Act 1988

Section 144

Exceptions from requirement of third-party insurance or security

(1)Section 143 of this Act does not apply to a vehicle owned by a person who has deposited and keeps deposited with the Accountant General of the Supreme Court the sum of £15,000, at a time when the vehicle is being driven under the owner’s control.

 

 

Fascinating, thanks!

 

I'm sorely tempted to do that given what my insurance costs each year for effectively nothing.

 

Can yo imagine trying to explain that following an automated camera NIP for 'no insurance' though?

 

More pertinently, is there something equivalent for boat insurance and getting a license?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Fascinating, thanks!

 

I'm sorely tempted to do that given what my insurance costs each year for effectively nothing.

 

Can yo imagine trying to explain that following an automated camera NIP for 'no insurance' though?

 

More pertinently, is there something equivalent for boat insurance and getting a license?

 

 

 

I'm not quite sure how you could present your 'insurance' certificate when you go to the post office to tax your car.

 

There is also another level of insurance below TPO (Third Party Only) called (from memory) "RTA Insurance", an absolute minimum insurance level that complies with the Road Traffic Act but doesn't have any other 'bells and whisltes'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

You don't actually need to insure your vehicle for use on the roads if ....................

 

Source :

Road Traffic Act 1988

Section 144

Exceptions from requirement of third-party insurance or security

(1)Section 143 of this Act does not apply to a vehicle owned by a person who has deposited and keeps deposited with the Accountant General of the Supreme Court the sum of £15,000, at a time when the vehicle is being driven under the owner’s control.

 

And a bit like our Coastguard vehicles - no insurance as such as we have "Crown Indemnity" - effectively as the vehicle is operated by an agency of the government, the DfT, it's underwritten by the state so we don't have insurance. If we ding it, the tax payer pays !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, gatekrash said:

And a bit like our Coastguard vehicles - no insurance as such as we have "Crown Indemnity" - effectively as the vehicle is operated by an agency of the government, the DfT, it's underwritten by the state so we don't have insurance. If we ding it, the tax payer pays !

 

 

The same as all council owned vehicles, Police and military vehicles.

Used to have great fun driving a yellow 'crash landrover' between airfields knowing I had no tax, no MOT and no insurance - how naughty was that ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

You don't actually need to insure your vehicle for use on the roads if ....................

 

Source :

Road Traffic Act 1988

Section 144

Exceptions from requirement of third-party insurance or security

(1)Section 143 of this Act does not apply to a vehicle owned by a person who has deposited and keeps deposited with the Accountant General of the Supreme Court the sum of £15,000, at a time when the vehicle is being driven under the owner’s control.

 

I think that has been repealed by the The Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2019.

 

But there are some exceptions to compulsory insurance - such as if you are the County Council....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Tacet said:

I think that has been repealed by the The Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2019.

 

But there are some exceptions to compulsory insurance - such as if you are the County Council....

 

Ah dammit, it seemed too good to be true. 

 

The £15k deposit set in 1988 must be equivalent to about £50k today. And then the average insurance payout involving personal injury has probably inflated at about ten times the rate of general inflation over the same period.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Tacet said:

I think that has been repealed by the The Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2019.

 

But there are some exceptions to compulsory insurance - such as if you are the County Council....

 

 

Thank you.

I was not aware of that, and it certainly reads as if it is applicable :

 

 

Transitional and saving provision

5.—(1) This regulation applies to—

(a)a deposit made before 1st November 2019 with the Accountant General of the Senior Courts in accordance with section 144(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988(13);

(b)a security given before 1st November 2019 in accordance with section 146 of the Road Traffic Act 1988(14); and

(c)a security which is renewed on or after 1st November 2019 in accordance with section 146 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 having been originally given before that date in accordance with that section.

 

Section 144 (of the 1998 At) was amended by the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (c.4), paragraph 4 of Schedule 11 and the Road Traffic Act 1991, section 20. Further amendments made by the Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018, paragraph 18 of the Schedule have yet to be brought into force. There are other amendments not relevant to this instrument.

Edited by Alan de Enfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, MartynG said:

That principle is correct

In an ideal world you should be returned to the position you were in prior to the loss .

 

When someone hit C's TT the insurance offered a pittance. I pointed out that if they wanted to write it off we would need to find a similar low milage, immaculate, FSH, all extra service items completed vehicle to replace it and if they could supply one we would be happy. They ended up repairing it at a cost of £6k when the book price was only £5k 😎

It did take a bit of effort and I rejected it twice as there were still faults when it was delivered back to us.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the replies. So it probably has to be 'market value', in order to put you back in a similar position. Initially that would be purchase price but subsequently needs adjusting to current value. New build would clearly be putting you in a better position, and it is not really feasible to build a worn / pitted shell! With any sort of unique / historic boat you could argue for a full re-fitout back to the previous condition, so understand that an 'agreed value' above market value might be necessary in those cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boat Insurance instructions from Lloyds of London :

 

I have mentioned this a time or two in the last few months, the marine insurance industry is going thru turmoil at present, with the instruction from Lloyds of London that the industry is unsustainable at present levels and following some huge claims Lloyds are changing the requirements from brokers offering marine insurance.

 

They have told each 'provider' that they must produce a business plan showing that their business is sustainable and profitable, the Business plan must be approved by Lloyds before they are allowed to trade.

 

Several providers have already had their licence to trade rescinded.

 

As one example It now seems that all business will be only accepted on a 'market value' instead of 'agreed value'.

I have had agreed value insurance for many years and this all came to light when I noticed that my renewal said 'market value' only, on the instruction of Lloyds.

 

I have previously posted extracts from the letters explaining all the wherefores.

 

"For the first time in over 200 years in the history of Lloyds, special measure have been imposed demanding that all Syndicates writing Yacht insurance submit a sustainable business plan, in the absence of which they would be precluded from writing this class of business. This is because the market has spiralled down to a fundamentally unsustainable level of rates resulting in consistent attritional underwriting losses compounded by catastrophic (storm) claims. ........................................

............................. we continue to write yacht business but we are now instructed to increase rates. All insurers are following suit except those who are now precluded from writing yacht insurance ...............................

 

It goes on.

 

The cover on your policy remains unchanged except for the change that the 'Agreed Value' option is no longer available and the following is substituted :

 

If your craft is a total loss the MOST your insurers will now pay is the MARKET VALUE of this item up to the SUM INSURED in YOUR SCHEDULE  (their bold)

 

 

 

 

Edited by Alan de Enfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Boat Insurance instructions from Lloyds of London :

 

I have mentioned this a time or two in the last few months, the marine insurance industry is going thru turmoil at present, with the instruction from Lloyds of London that the industry is unsustainable at present levels and following some huge claims Lloyds are changing the requirements from brokers offering marine insurance.

 

They have told each 'provider' that they must produce a business plan showing that their business is sustainable and profitable, the Business plan must be approved by Lloyds before they are allowed to trade.

 

Several providers have already had their licence to trade rescinded.

 

As one example It now seems that all business will be only accepted on a 'market value' instead of 'agreed value'.

I have had agreed value insurance for many years and this all came to light when I noticed that my renewal said 'market value' only, on the instruction of Lloyds.

 

I have previously posted extracts from the letters explaining all the wherefores.

 

"For the first time in over 200 years in the history of Lloyds, special measure have been imposed demanding that all Syndicates writing Yacht insurance submit a sustainable business plan, in the absence of which they would be precluded from writing this class of business. This is because the market has spiralled down to a fundamentally unsustainable level of rates resulting in consistent attritional underwriting losses compounded by catastrophic (storm) claims. ........................................

............................. we continue to write yacht business but we are now instructed to increase rates. All insurers are following suit except those who are now precluded from writing yacht insurance ...............................

 

It goes on.

 

The cover on your policy remains unchanged except for the change that the 'Agreed Value' option is no longer available and the following is substituted :

 

If your craft is a total loss the MOST your insurers will now pay is the MARKET VALUE of this item up to the SUM INSURED in YOUR SCHEDULE  (their bold)

 

 

 

 

 

Your last paragraph sums up what I said following a conversation with my insurance company at the beginning of this thread 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, cuthound said:

 

Your last paragraph sums up what I said following a conversation with my insurance company at the beginning of this thread 

 

Indeed your conversation and my letter say the same thing - it just appears that others maybe getting a different message.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, MtB said:

 

Ah dammit, it seemed too good to be true. 

 

The £15k deposit set in 1988 must be equivalent to about £50k today. And then the average insurance payout involving personal injury has probably inflated at about ten times the rate of general inflation over the same period.

 

The deposit does look to have been surprisingly modest.  I think you're too late anyway - but don't overlook that you would remain liable for any damages, not merely up to the limit of the security.

 

My employer, in the 1980s, chose to deposit the security and self-insure.

 

8 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

Thank you.

I was not aware of that, and it certainly reads as if it is applicable :

 

 

Transitional and saving provision

5.—(1) This regulation applies to—

(a)a deposit made before 1st November 2019 with the Accountant General of the Senior Courts in accordance with section 144(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988(13);

(b)a security given before 1st November 2019 in accordance with section 146 of the Road Traffic Act 1988(14); and

(c)a security which is renewed on or after 1st November 2019 in accordance with section 146 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 having been originally given before that date in accordance with that section.

 

Section 144 (of the 1998 At) was amended by the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (c.4), paragraph 4 of Schedule 11 and the Road Traffic Act 1991, section 20. Further amendments made by the Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018, paragraph 18 of the Schedule have yet to be brought into force. There are other amendments not relevant to this instrument.

 

That doesn't read to me as though it continues - just as though there is/was transitional provisions, which (I am not really sure at all) I think expired in 2021.

 

According to this https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/144, the option for all-and-sundry to place the deposit and avoid compulsory insurance has been removed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tacet said:

That doesn't read to me as though it continues - just as though there is/was transitional provisions, which (I am not really sure at all) I think expired in 2021.

 

I think you are maybe misreading my reply, or me yours .............

 

 

9 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

Thank you.

I was not aware of that, and it certainly reads as if it is applicable :

 

 

Transitional and saving provision

5.—(1) This regulation applies to—

(a)a deposit made before 1st November 2019 with the Accountant General of the Senior Courts in accordance with section 144(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988(13);

(b)a security given before 1st November 2019 in accordance with section 146 of the Road Traffic Act 1988(14); and

(c)a security which is renewed on or after 1st November 2019 in accordance with section 146 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 having been originally given before that date in accordance with that section.

 

Section 144 (of the 1998 At) was amended by the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (c.4), paragraph 4 of Schedule 11 and the Road Traffic Act 1991, section 20. Further amendments made by the Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018, paragraph 18 of the Schedule have yet to be brought into force. There are other amendments not relevant to this instrument.

 

 

I am agreeing with you that the new legislation is applicable and the option to pay the £15k 'security' is now not available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/06/2022 at 12:57, MtB said:

 

 

I too have been told the same. They will pay out the lowest of these three figures:

 

What you paid for it

Market value

Insured value

 

I've also had it explained to me that one of the principles of insurance is that the insured must never be permitted to make a profit out of an insurance claim, or something along those lines. If I understood correctly that is. 

 

I think it is considered too tempting for the insured to net benefit from an insured event.

 

Suspicious people, the insurance industry. As far back as 1774 The Fires Prevention (Metropolis) Act 1774 made (still extant), provisions to “to deter and hinder ill-minded persons from wilfully setting their house or houses or other buildings on fire with a view of gaining to themselves the insurance money” by requiring the proceeds of insurance to be laid out on rebuilding.  So no option to torch, take the cash and run.

 

Doesn’t apply to boats, though.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

I think you are maybe misreading my reply, or me yours .............

 

 

 

 

I am agreeing with you that the new legislation is applicable and the option to pay the £15k 'security' is now not available.

Sorry - I had indeed misunderstood your earlier reply

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/06/2022 at 09:38, Cheese said:

What should a boat be insured for?

 

With a house, the buildings insurance should for the rebuilding cost (including demolition / site clearance after say a fire). This can be much lower than the market value, because the latter will include the land value.

 

With a boat, should it be for a new build cost, including fit-out, or for the current market value? The former might be rather greater than the latter.

It can also be very much higher?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.