I was involved in a minor bump in my car. I hit the rear of another car at a roundabout when the driver should have gone.
He started moving but then hit the brakes, so I have lost my car no claims bonus. My bike renewal policy has come up, and I have been asked the question ‘have you had any accidents, losses or claims, regardless of blame in the last three years?’ I do not want to declare the bump.
I figure that as it is a different policy, a difference licence class and a different vehicle it cannot make any difference, so I would like to keep my bike no claims bonus. I put a question up on one of the bike forums, and it seems a lot of bikers agree with me that I do not have to declare it for these reasons.
The way I see it, it’s no different to me having a claim on my household insurance policy so I do not see why I should declare it.
You are completely wrong here. You have been specifically asked a question by your insurer, which you must answer honestly. The rules on insurance policy documents changed quite radically a few years ago.
The old law was that you had to declare everything whether you were asked the question or not. Now you are under an obligation to answer the question honestly, and if you answer it either dishonestly or negligently your insurer can, and will, void the policy.
what this all means if you don’t declare the bump is that you will still be covered for third party risks but your insurance company can come after you for any money that they outlay – and if your bike is stolen, or damaged and you try and claim under a comprehensive policy you will get nowhere with it. Your proposal not to declare the crash is only marginally better than running around without any insurance at all.
Taking legal advice from internet forums is a very dangerous pastime. I have seen the forum material, and about half the riders tell you not to be so daft, and the other half back you up. what is quite disturbing is some of the people on the forum make a persuasive logical case for not declaring your accident and whilst it is logical and persuasive, it is utterly wrong in law.
Fast Bikes June 2016