|
Forums69
Topics113,623
Posts1,341,327
Members1,807
| |
Most Online731
Jan 14th, 2020
|
|
|
Re: Not declaring mods
#159437
14/08/2006 23:21
14/08/2006 23:21
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
When I called the company to point out that I had mods, I went through the whole list with the broker, and she sounded a bit dubious, which I wasn't to chuffed about as they had a 25% cancellation charge. She said she'd call me back the next day after speaking with the underwriters.
When she came back it was just a 10% loading, which was fine with me! I think you're right, the older you are, the more modifications are considered a risk.
|
|
|
Re: Not declaring mods
#159438
15/08/2006 20:53
15/08/2006 20:53
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Just talked to my broker about some potential mods. She spoke to the underwriter and just called me back. According to her the underwriter doesn't care once I have an engineers report from the mechanic saying the car is OK as a result of the mods. They're only interested if the value of the car goes up!! Sounds too good to be true?
|
|
|
Re: Not declaring mods *DELETED*
#159440
17/08/2006 23:09
17/08/2006 23:09
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Post deleted by Skodaman
Last edited by Skodaman; 17/08/2006 23:18.
|
|
|
Re: Not declaring mods
#159441
17/08/2006 23:31
17/08/2006 23:31
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 6,731
Surrey
Emjay
Forum is my life
|
Forum is my life
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 6,731
Surrey
|
Ah go on then, sounds interesting You can't be convicted of stealing your own property - at least not in this country. The statutory definition of theft means that it must be "property belonging to another", but you may be convicted of obtaining the money from the insurer by deception. A finding of fact in one court can bind another court. For example, if I was convicted in a criminal court of a theft that I did not commit, I would not be able to argue in a civil court that I did not commit the theft. 
Does our law condemn a man without first hearing him to find out what he has been doing? (John 7:51)
|
|
|
Re: Not declaring mods
#159442
18/08/2006 01:36
18/08/2006 01:36
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,546
Northumberland
AndrewR
I AM a Coop
|
I AM a Coop
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,546
Northumberland
|
Quote:
A finding of fact in one court can bind another court. For example, if I was convicted in a criminal court of a theft that I did not commit, I would not be able to argue in a civil court that I did not commit the theft.
IIRC in America they have a plea of "no contest" for this reason, so that somebody can chose not to contest a criminal charge (say dangerous driving), but could then still claim in a related civil case (i.e. a claim for compensation brought by the person they'd knocked over) that their driving wasn't dangerous. Do we have anything similar?
Although, thinking about it, the Americans must have a slightly different system, because I recall a case in the 60s were a number of members of the KKK were found not guilty of murdering 4 black men in a car that they'd stopped, but, in a civil case, were found guilty of violating the civil rights of the 4 men by unlawfully killing them.
On topic: I don't know where the 4 black men got their car insurance or if they liked Coupes.
Dear monos, a secret truth.
|
|
|
Re: Not declaring mods *DELETED*
#159443
18/08/2006 02:01
18/08/2006 02:01
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Post deleted by Skodaman
Last edited by Skodaman; 18/08/2006 02:27.
|
|
|
Re: Not declaring mods
#159444
19/08/2006 00:00
19/08/2006 00:00
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 6,731
Surrey
Emjay
Forum is my life
|
Forum is my life
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 6,731
Surrey
|
@ Andrew - no such option in England and Wales. In Scotland whilst it canot be pleaded, there is the available finding of "not proven" which may have the same effect. @ Skodaman - I think we are getting bogged down in semantics. The case you are trying to recall involved "property belonging to another", it has to in order to be theft. In that case, if we are thinking about the same one, IIRC it was a lien the garage had over the vehicle. That meant although it was someone else's car the property belonged to the garage at the time it was taken. Perhaps I should have put in lengthy caveats, definitions of and distinctions between ownership, control, possession, belonging to etc. but the law is doing well enough to be dull without my further assistance  ! Oh, okay then - "You can't steal your own property... if it still belongs to you and not to another (legal) person at the time you appropriate it." - that'll do  I am still very interested in that case if you could PM it BTW I am not sure I could do my day job without giving legal advice 
Does our law condemn a man without first hearing him to find out what he has been doing? (John 7:51)
|
|
|
Re: Not declaring mods
#159445
15/09/2006 21:52
15/09/2006 21:52
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 6,568
Northampton England
Sedicivalvole
Club member 2092
|
Club member 2092
Forum is my life
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 6,568
Northampton England
|
Well nice topic but lets face it to some people insurance is a legalised method of theft...
Vinci Grey LE
Alfa 147 GTA 3.2 V6
BMW E92 M3 4.0 V8
Fiat Tipo Sedicivalvole 2.0 16v ABS
|
|
|
Re: Not declaring mods
#159446
16/09/2006 01:22
16/09/2006 01:22
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
The legal principle is that ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it.
To knowingly withold information (i.e. your mods) from your insurance company is a criminal offence. You can be arrested, photographed, fingerprinted, DNA taken and all this information will be on your criminal record for the rest of your life.
Section 16 Theft Act 1968. Obtaining pecuniary advantage by deception:-
(1) A person who by any deception dishonestly obtains for himself or another any
pecuniary advantage shall on conviction on indictment be liable to imprisonment for a term
not exceeding five years.
(2) All cases in which a pecuniary advantage within the meaning of this section is to
be regarded as obtained for a person are cases where-
(a) [repealed];
(b) he is allowed to borrow by way of overdraft, or to take out any policy of
insurance or annuity contract, or obtains an improvement of the terms on which he
is allowed to do so; or
(c) he is given the opportunity to earn remuneration or greater remuneration
in an office or employment, or to win money by betting.
(3) For purposes of this section ‘deception’ has the same meaning as in section 15 of
this Act.
Hope this info helps.
Hamster
|
|
|
Re: Not declaring mods
#159447
16/09/2006 16:22
16/09/2006 16:22
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,033
I WANT F40
S1MMA
Competition Level
|
Competition Level
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,033
I WANT F40
|
interesting info there hampster, thanks for that.
Sideways a LOT
|
|
|
Re: Not declaring mods
#159448
18/09/2006 23:22
18/09/2006 23:22
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
(Rusper picks up phone and dials 0800 number...) Quote:
"Ah hello... Is that X-brand Insurance? Great. I'd like to declare some modifications to my car please - I'm sorry? No, I've just had them done...")
|
|
|
|
