Author Topic: Reporting of claims under another policy to your primary vehicle insurer  (Read 202 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

typefish

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Does anyone know if a claim that is made to a insurer that provides secondary insurance such as cosmetic or tyre cover needs to be reported to the primary vehicle insurer? I've been asked this question as someone is contemplating purchasing a product like that and I'm struggling to come up with answers that I can back up.

Some specific scenarios that I can think of off the top of my head include:

  • A claim for alloy wheel refurbishment due to a manufacturing defect causing excessive corrosion of an alloy
  • A claim for cosmetic paint touch up due to multiple stone chips, ostensibly wear and tear with the aim of preventing paint damage or corrosion or rust of the metalwork
  • A claim for tyre repair or replacement due to piercing by a sharp object, that was not encountered during an accident

My personal feeling is that it isn't, as the insurance product that is being offered for the secondary insurance is not related to the product offered by the vehicle insurer, and the reason behind any potential claims in any of the scenarios above are not due to incidents that would be classified as accidents. But, insurance is a funny world and you never know what funniness exists.

Heck, even if that were the case, where do you stop? Do you inform the insurer of new OEM-specification shocks and other driveline parts fitted to a vehicle, to replace parts worn out through wear and tear? What about a claim on your house insurance for water damage to a ceiling after a leak in a bathroom?

What are the thoughts of the community on this confusing matter? :)
« Last Edit: June 30, 2024, 06:00:28 pm by typefish »

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4894
  • Karma: +113/-4
    • View Profile
Why don't you just ask the primary insurer? It's impossible to give a general answer because each insurer can have whatever it wants in the terms and conditions as long as they don't fall foul of any relevant legislation, and I'm not aware of any restrictions on this sort of thing.
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor nor a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order

slapdash

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 349
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
Do you inform the insurer of new OEM-specification shocks and other driveline parts fitted to a vehicle, to replace parts worn out through wear and tear?

Admiral, for example, regard anything other than the manufacturers standard spec as a modification, that means optional extras need to be declared and rated. Most insurers do not regard manufacturer options as declarable.

Where indeed do you stop? The automotive supply chain is riddled with questionable supplies. Loads of Brembo stuff is fake, loads is genuine but made to different specs.

What about those tyres, they may be right size and load but not the actual * marked OE.

It's a subject that crops up regularly on modding forums. Insurers have differing views.

mickR

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 105
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
hmmm I would suggest insurance Companies insisting on OEM parts might fall foul of Block Exemption rules regarding the use of aftermarket parts on vehicles which were amended and confirmed in 2023 until at least 2028.
I would also suggest it may not be possible to state for certainty that a used car you just bought has not been modified in some way or that all the "extras" were factory fitted.

slapdash

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 349
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
I would also suggest it may not be possible to state for certainty that a used car you just bought has not been modified in some way or that all the "extras" were factory fitted.

I entirely agree. Though in that circumstance the proposer wouldn't be reckless (probably) in answering no.