Bennetts..one of the major motorcycle insurers in the UK has just bought out new rules regarding 'modification' to motorcycles.
Any machine that has more than three modifications from a list of 60 or so won't get a quote at renewal time.
The list is quite bizarre, completely arbritary and illogical.
For example..If your ride to work CG 125 Honda has a screen, top box, non original tyres and a seat cover...NO Quote. If your Suzuki Hyabusa has a Turbo Kit, after market exhaust and a carbon fibre hugger you do get a quote.
Many of the items on the list have no real effect on performance or safety..for instance additional stickers on your bike...it is just about numbers and only three so called 'modificatios' are allowed.
I should mention this is not a proposal..it is already up and running and if other insurers follow suit what the EEC does will become academic...Modifications will be limited by unelected, unaccountable insurance companies who are able to make up thier own rules without having to justify them...Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

This is getting ridiculous..!
I can't see how they can enforce this on vintage bike, no one is going to know what is correct or not and you can't get factory parts to replace worn out items. It looks like the insurance companies are bringing out type approval even if the government don't.

email (option): horror@blueyonder.co.uk

Hi Horror..As yet I have no information on how this will be applied to older machines..or if it will be. However, it is not being applied to new machines only...examples in the article I read were bikes that were already registered, on the road and had been previously insured. If this were to become standard industry practice and was applied retrospectively to my 2000 Harley for instance...basically it would be uninsurable in its current form..as would a huge number of more modern machines....Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

What has a seat cover got to do with anything? i just need that turbo kit for my busa then. before anyone changes their mind.

email (option): v8zspeed@yahoo.com

Hi Jesse..They aren't saying you can't modify a bike...only that you can 'pick and mix' just 3 items from their list of 60 potential mods....The real problem is what constitutes a modification?...The list includes such things as stickers, bar end weights,tank protector pads, top boxes etc. etc. as well as things like turbos.
Some things, like tank protector pads have absolutely no effect on safety, performance or anything related to insurance risk...and when is something an accessory and not a modification?..Never according to Bennetts...they are all modifications.
To my mind this sort of action is alarming..all the more so as it is being carried out by an Insurance company who hold all the information regarding what constitutes a modification that may affect their liability...yet they have still come up with a scheme that patently makes no sense but, crucially, cannot be argued with...Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

The tip of the iceberg Ian

If you only knew what is being proposed and not only with motorsickles

Doomed I tell thee doooomed

:-D

Job

email (option): Jonnyob1@googlemail.com

The answer is simple. Everybody should insure elsewhere and refuse their quote, however much lower it may be. When they lose business and their cash flow starts to dry up, other companies may not be so keen to follow suit.
Do they not realize that refusing to insure vehicles does not mean they will not be ridden/driven on the road. If you can't ride them, they will be sold on and if cheap enough they will be ridden illegally, thus putting up policies to cover for uninsured drivers/riders.
It is also a brilliant opportunity for a new company to insure all the bikes with stickers and seat covers etc.

It reminds me of Norwich Union, who refused to renew any motorcycle policies because they no longer wanted the business. I would, on this account, never buy an Aviva product (formerly Norwich Union)however good they may be.

email (option): stinkypete80@hotmail.com

I've had a feeling that there are more manoeuvres under way for some time, I notice everyone on here was going yippee when they thought that they didn't need an MOT or the possiblity that their newer bike would only need a bi-annual MOT, but if you read between the lines that means that there are changes coming, in that NO old bike/car would pass a newer type of MOT so I guess the proposals are that, by exempting them there is a new stiffer MOT is on it's way in and that they cannot force older vehicles off the road immediately, which would lose them votes, so by exempting them it is a kind of compromise, no doubt there will be even more draconian measures to then slowly force older vehicles off the road. I'm sure John knows more of this as working for a manufacturer any changes would be notified to the manufacturers before we even had any inkling of what was coming, come on John, spill the beans!!!

email (option): davmax@ntlworld.com

There is no doubt that 'Anti Tampering' is the flavour of the month at the moment, both with Politicians and now, it seems, Insurance companies.
Manufacturers on the whole don't seem to comment on what happens to their vehicles once they get into the public domain and the warranty has expired...and why would that concern them?
From the Politicians perspective they only consider how the general population views them and whether they will get their votes come election time...and everything they do is distorted by that attitude.
The majority of the population tend to view motorcycles as dangerous and the people who ride them as anti social..they never did get past the 'Rocker' or 'Hells Angel' image and don't seem to have realised that things have changed..
As a result the politicians take a negative stance on the subject themselves.
Home maintenance (or tampering as they prefer to call it) is not an issue that appears on the scale in relation to accident statistics and as such should not be a factor in anyones thinking.
Insurance companies are in the business of calculating and insuring risk..and there is a fair argument that if you modify your bike to considerably increase its performance you alter that calculation.
However, modifications that don't alter 'risk' should be completely ignored...so alternative, but compatible tyres for instance..or the fact you have fitted a top box should also not be an issue.
But Hey...Life gets complicated if you try to work through these things...it is far easier to lump them all together as 'Modifications that increase risk'...even though that is obviously a nonsense.
I agree that you have the option of moving to another insurance company...but what happens if the others go down the same route?
I'm pretty certain anti tampering legislation is on its way and will happen...Type Approval is a form of that we already have in some countries...
I think badly thought out 'Insurance Company Legislation' is potentially far more serious though...Firstly it could make a modified bike uninsurable and effectively unsaleable, it is imposed without any debate or compromise and without that bit of paper you don't get on the road...
Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

some year ago they were going to base the timing of the MOT on the milage you did i cant remember what the mileage was and i thought mimi cabs had to have 2 MOTs per year because of the mileage they did

email (option): roger.back@node6.com