Chassis stiffening: Insurance implications

Ernie Ball

I'm thinking about adding some braces to the chassis of my MR2, specifically a front strut brace and an antiflex plate underneath.

Anyone ever do this kind of mod? What were the insurance implications? I know that when I got my policy, the asked whether the car had been modified (and it hadn't). I know I could ask my insurer, but I'd rather not even let them know that I'm contemplating such things if it turns out it's a problem for them.

prospect

Too late,

Now i know, ha ha h ah ah ah ah ah ah

You are so screwed for your next renewal....

ambro25

Be interested to find out as well. Logic dictates that if it's not 'under the bonnet' (as in Turbo/Induction/more BHP etc.) or 'in-cockpit' (to make it more flash/scumb*g-magnet), but road-manner centric (braces/struts/discs/suspensiob/etc.), you should actually get a premium reduction as you're making your car more roadworthy than standard...

...unless they just shove us all in the same bag as 'boy racers' and why-on-erath-should-you-want-to-improve-your-car's-road-manners-but-because-you're-always-speeding, eh?

Seth Brundle

The insurance companys usually ask "has the car been modified in any way?".
You must answer yes to this or your policy could be rendered void in the event of a claim.

Adding additional features like these changes the risk factor. Some mods make the car more sporty, others make it more likely to be nicked. Stiffening a car makes it handle better and threfore more likely to be driven quicker (around a bend for example) or whatever. Therefore the insurance risk changes and they bend you over a barrell because of this!

Ratchet

kbannon wrote:

Stiffening a car makes it handle better and threfore more likely to be driven quicker (around a bend for example) or whatever. Therefore the insurance risk changes and they bend you over a barrell because of this!

well then, so is putting low profile tyres

anyway, old mk2 mr2 came with strut braces so don't think insurance would care much if you put them on new model. i would just say that they were on the car when you got it

Ernie Ball

Ratchet wrote:

anyway, old mk2 mr2 came with strut braces so don't think insurance would care much if you put them on new model. i would just say that they were on the car when you got it

But I signed a form saying the car hadn't been modified (which was true) when I took out the policy...

I could plead ignorance ("what?! you mean that large metal bar marked 'TRD' under the bonnet isn't standard equipment?!"), but you don't want to be doing that when you're depending on your insurance company to pay a claim.

Has anyone done this sort of thing and how much did your insurance company charge you?

Seth Brundle

Ratchet wrote:

well then, so is putting low profile tyres

anyway, old mk2 mr2 came with strut braces so don't think insurance would care much if you put them on new model. i would just say that they were on the car when you got it

yes, low profile tyres, K&N air filter, chip, spoiler, whatever makes the car different from normal!

Anyhow the fact that one model had them as standard means nothing when we are discussing another model.

Ernie Ball

Do bolt-on components with no moving parts even count as modifications? Does, say, a luggage rack?

I mean, surely there's a difference between an antiflex plate (where you're really only replacing the bog standard stock antiflex plate) that bolts in place and an ECU chip or turbocharger.

BrianD3

I would ask the ins company first. You don't want to **** around when it comes to insurance, better to be safe etc. Ring them up, describe the mods you're planning and ask how much extra they'll charge. I have a hunch that they won't charge you a penny extra. They may not even know what you're talking about when you tell them you want to add a "strut brace". If you don't like the service you're getting from them threaten to take your custom elsewhere.

Ernie Ball

BrianD3 wrote:

I would ask the ins company first. You don't want to **** around when it comes to insurance, better to be safe etc. Ring them up, describe the mods you're planning and ask how much extra they'll charge. I have a hunch that they won't charge you a penny extra. They may not even know what you're talking about when you tell them you want to add a "strut brace". If you don't like the service you're getting from them threaten to take your custom elsewhere.

That is sensible. Unfortunately, I'm not in a position to 'take my custom elsewhere' because there is only one insurance company in the state that I was able to find that would insure me on that car.

I think I will ring them anyway and see what they say.

BrianD3

Ernie Ball wrote:

That is sensible. Unfortunately, I'm not in a position to 'take my custom elsewhere' because there is only one insurance company in the state that I was able to find that would insure me on that car.

If they mess you around tell them that you're going to sell the car, replace it with a 1.0 micra and take your custom elsewhere If they call your bluff and are still giving you poor service then I guess they have you over a barrell and you may have to forget about the mods.

Ratchet

kbannon wrote:

Anyhow the fact that one model had them as standard means nothing when we are discussing another model.

i know that but what are the chances that insurance guy will know that they are not fitted on new models. also they can't check engine mods. Also for any engine mods, insurance company would have to Dyno the car, which in most cases would be impossible

Anyway, i didn't come across anybody that was refused payout because car modification. It will have to be really noticeable mod like supercharger sticking through the bonnet.

John R

Ratchet wrote:

Anyway, i didn't come across anybody that was refused payout because car modification. It will have to be really noticeable mod like supercharger sticking through the bonnet.

How many people do you know with modded cars that have put in an insurance claim or had one claimed against them serious enough for an engineer to have inspected the car?

AMurphy

ambro25 wrote:

.....

...unless they just shove us all in the same bag as 'boy racers' and why-on-erath-should-you-want-to-improve-your-car's-road-manners-but-because-you're-always-speeding, eh?

The same argument could be used against ABS, Airbags, Low Profile tyres, "Aquathread" and radial tyres, safety belts, good lights, etc.....

Ratchet

John R wrote:

How many people do you know with modded cars that have put in an insurance claim or had one claimed against them serious enough for an engineer to have inspected the car?

engineer is there to asset the damage and pre accident condition including roadworthiness prior to accident not mentioning any visible physical faults which could contribute to the accident . He also checks engine type and documented number/model just in case you had transplant and he is not able to tell if you had:

new ecu
cam shaft changed
forged pistons fitted
cylinder head modified
upgraded turbo
modified dump valve
light fly wheel fitted
close ratio gearbox fitted
or other engine mods

without putting the car on DYNO or taking car to specialist(which he suppose to be) it is impossible in many cases as car is damaged beyond repair.

just going back a little , I say I know at least 15 cars written off (inspected) and even bigger number of damaged cars that I worked on.

if they are that strict and there is no payouts , then maybe insurance should be cheaper

ambro25

AMurphy wrote:

The same argument could be used against ABS, Airbags, Low Profile tyres, "Aquathread" and radial tyres, safety belts, good lights, etc.....

My point exactly. If I'm going to make my car more roadworthy (irrespective of whether I could corner faster or take those at the same speed) with upgrading the driving train parts only (shockers/braces/increased wheel size for larger road contact area), I'd want a rebate on my premium since my car would now be safer to drive...in a logical world...but what's logical about car insurance, eh? :rolleyes:

Ernie my man, I feel your pain with insurers over here... (I take it you're same as mine - Hibs?) >absolutely incredible that there is only ONE insurer in the Republic that will take on convertibles!

Ernie Ball

ambro25 wrote:

Ernie my man, I feel your pain with insurers over here... (I take it you're same as mine - Hibs?) >absolutely incredible that there is only ONE insurer in the Republic that will take on convertibles!

I'm with St. Paul Travelers. Hibs wouldn't insure me.:mad:

ambro25

Odd... I went through Tesco (Hibs underwrite their policies) and they told me Hibs was the only insurer to take on converts in ireland. I was disposed to believe them, after trying another 12 or so insurers before them, none of whom would cover me (am 32, 16 years EU license, 14 years full EU license, on full NCB). Didn't try yours, tho'

Borzoi

ambro25 wrote:

Odd... I went through Tesco (Hibs underwrite their policies) and they told me Hibs was the only insurer to take on converts in ireland. I was disposed to believe them, after trying another 12 or so insurers before them, none of whom would cover me (am 32, 16 years EU license, 14 years full EU license, on full NCB). Didn't try yours, tho'

They'd be lying - was with AXA, now with AIG. Offered St Pauls but the other cover was better. All on my 900 Convertible - with a beefy 2'0l Turbo

Seth Brundle

ambro25 wrote:

My point exactly. If I'm going to make my car more roadworthy (irrespective of whether I could corner faster or take those at the same speed) with upgrading the driving train parts only (shockers/braces/increased wheel size for larger road contact area), I'd want a rebate on my premium since my car would now be safer to drive...in a logical world...but what's logical about car insurance, eh? :rolleyes:

Its irrelevant what mods are done to the car as once they are done then the car is different from the one they have on thier books as the driving characteristice are different or the theft factor is different. The car may well be safer (are you an expert able to prove this?) but they still require (and insist on the policy literature) that you notify them.

You mention some items that can be uprated to make the car safer:-
shocks:- new ones will alter the cars handling from factory condition. They can also have a negative effect on drivability. Most cars have softer shocks but if these are replaced with stiffer ones then they can affect driving (e.g. when you go over a pothole!)

braces:- some of these stiffen the cars chassis (some are just plain useless!). Having a stiffer car can make a driver the car will handle better and subsequently the driver may try and take a corner faster or whatever.

wheel size:- being a visible modification thsi can affect the theft risk of the car. Indeed alloy theft is increasing. Also having different wheels from factory doesn't necessarily mean better drivability. Wider wheels can lead to tramlining and also to increased aquaplaning.

Who knows, if you can prove the car is safer then they may reduce your premium. However, IMO, every positive mod action by a car owner leads to an opposite reaction the eyes of insurance companys!

ambro25

kbannon wrote:

Its irrelevant what mods are done to the car as once they are done then the car is different from the one they have on thier books as the driving characteristice are different or the theft factor is different. The car may well be safer (are you an expert able to prove this?) but they still require (and insist on the policy literature) that you notify them.

Nope, no expert here. Just 16 years of driving under the belt, ranging from knackered-out Trannie vans to Delta HF Integrales and pretty much every imaginable type of 4-wheel 'class of car' in-between, in FWD, 4WD, RWD, and from grossly-underpowered to stupidly-overpowered... So here, just going on my driving 'feel' for what a factory-specc'd car can & can't do (after putting it through its paces in a safe environment).

kbannon wrote:

You mention some items that can be uprated to make the car safer (etc.)

Agree with most of your points in the cases of owners 'modding' with no 'real' (read: extensive) driving experience to speak of... It follows the syndrom of the Fastest Car in the World™ (= 2 young blokes in an XR2i) kinda thing.
But disagree in terms of you intimating that -say- I'd drive faster once the mods are in place:
(i) that is not a safe assumption to make and
(ii) since the (example) mods are to the road-holding components and not to the BHP in any way, it follows that better road-holding for same BHP = safer car in any pre-mod driving situation.

(As for potholes, I usually weave - since I drive at sensible speeds, I have time to see them beforehand and go around)

kbannon wrote:

Who knows, if you can prove the car is safer then they may reduce your premium. However, IMO, every positive mod action by a car owner leads to an opposite reaction the eyes of insurance companys!

Agree whole-heartedly with that, about as much chance of reduction (or no change) to the premium after-mods as an ice cube enjoying a break in Hell

Ernie Ball

kbannon wrote:

braces:- some of these stiffen the cars chassis (some are just plain useless!). Having a stiffer car can make a driver the car will handle better and subsequently the driver may try and take a corner faster or whatever.

By this logic, anything that makes the car more driveable also makes the car more unsafe. And the most driveable car is the least safe. That's absurd. Apply it to an airbag: now you have an extra degree of protection so you're more likely to drive in such a way as to have an accident. Therefore, in the name of safety, airbags should be removed. Same for seat belts, padded dashboards, etc.

For what it's worth, Toyota itself added substantial chassis stiffening to my car in the 2003 model year and more again in 2004. Otherwise the cars are the same. Mine's a 2001 and I'd hope to be able to put the same sort of things on the car that Toyota did 2 years later.

We'll see...

Ernie Ball

Spoke to my insurance broker about the proposed mods. They said I had to put the proposal in writing. So I did, stressing that these were purely for the purpose of increasing the roadworthiness and safety of the car.;)

I'll let you know when I get an answer. I have no idea what their response will be.

Ernie Ball

Finally heard back from my insurance broker. They'll let me do the chassis mods (front and rear strut braces, breastplate, member braces, better anti-roll bars) and won't charge me more but I'll have to get an assessor to issue a report.

That means that it's in my interest to do them all at once, which is not what I had planned... :rolleyes:

Anyone know what an assessor charges for this kind of thing?