Has anyone else read about this loophole.
http://britishbikersassociation.org/...n-his-old-bike
Printable View
Has anyone else read about this loophole.
http://britishbikersassociation.org/...n-his-old-bike
Never heard that one before. Jeeesus!
Crikey...
I've heard of that before. This James Bryson that was killed sounds like he did the world a favour by removing himself from it
Thats exactly the same with a car and its pretty well known.
Say if your car was stolen and that person smashed into someone then it would be your insurance that would pay for it. The insurer (you) takes full responsibility for that vehicle and any damage that it may cause regardless of the circumstances that the damage happened.
Perhaps if insurance companies weren't such robbing bastards and wanting to fleece you every time you change something, then perhaps more people would cancel straight away.
I had an instance on an old bike i sold where i was paying monthly installments of around £18, i sold my bike with 2 months left on the insurance and they wanted £45 for "administrative fees"
Cobbing Runts!!!!
Another fine example of the law being an arse.:mad:
My old one wanted hundreds to change my bike and the £60 when I cancelled it, glad I cancelled right away although this left the old bike uninsured for a few days until it was sold.
I bet they hide this little fact in the million word small print that nobody has ever had time to read.
I wouldn't read to much in to this article from the Daily Hate. It will never happen and is a scare story. If you have sold the bike and can prove it, it would never hold in court. Good story though.
I agree with Shiftyblake. If you sell your bike you may well be in breach of your insurance contract if you don't inform them. You are not responsible for someone else's conduct if you sell your bike to them, and this matter has nothing to do with your insurance contract, surely. The V5C docket will be sufficient proof, with the sale receipt. Which bit of the law says this is not so? :confused:..... Richard
Unfortunately, I believe that what has been reported is common practice that has been going on for some years. In normal circumstances if an accident involved an uninsured driver/rider the innocent party claims from the Motor Insurers Bureau, I'm guessing that if the MIB find an in force policy on the vehicle the claim will be made from that policy.Quote:
Originally Posted by shiftyblake
I think it operates basically the same way as if you have your vehicle stolen and any claims for damage could be made against your insurance.
Even if the new owner had taken out insurance it would not technically be valid as there was already a policy in force and you cannot have two policies on one vehicle.
I read about it some time ago and it certainly seems to be something we all need to be really careful with.
White Dalton often mention it in blogs etc (they are specialist bike solicitors for anyone who hasn't come across them so should know their stuff)
http://www.whitedalton.co.uk/motorbi...-my-insurance/
Um, I think you'll find it was reported by a local rag:Quote:
Originally Posted by shiftyblake
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/loc...ident-1.554725
I don't think the DailyMail can take a hit for this one, but i'm sure some will try...