darkside vs. insurance

[OnPapasWing]

Here's a question that I wonder whether it ever came up. It kind of crossed my mind as I was reading all the darkside posts.

If someone riding with a C/T has an accident and the insurance company comes out to inspect the bike then notices the C/T would that void the insurance? Would the insurance company question the practice and opt not to insure the rider? Just wondering.


Steve

[Mh434]

I'm sure that would depend on where you are, but in my area (compulsory Government insurance), while your insurance wouldn't be cancelled, the use of a C/T would be considered a "contributing factor", and would very likely reduce any claim amount considerably.

Private insurance companies, as we all know, are always happy to find a reason to void our insurance (after we've bought it, of course!), and I wouldn't be surprised to find that the use of a C/T would be a neon sign to an adjuster, saying "Void me!". With my homeowner's policy, even something as small as having screws shorter than required in the hinges on my garage door (not the big roll-up one) will void the entire policy.

Certainly food for thought.

[robb]

I ask my agent first and he wanted to see it and try it. Week later he had one on his GL1800. Only requirement for a rear tire on a motorcycle is that it be DOT certified. Nowhere does it say it must be a motorcycle tire.

[OnPapasWing]

Interesting comment, point well taken. I'll bet had they thought when they were writing their policies, that someone would be trying to put something besides a MC tire on a bike they would have written things a little differently. LOL

[robb]

About as vague as a DOT approved helmet.

[SteveB123]

I'm sure that would depend on where you are, but in my area (compulsory Government insurance), while your insurance wouldn't be cancelled, the use of a C/T would be considered a "contributing factor", and would very likely reduce any claim amount considerably.

Is that the policy of ICBC, or your opinion...or a guess?

[Mh434]

No, not a guess. That would be in accordance withe the Regulations Pursuant to the Motor Vehicle Act of British Columbia, RSBC, (including mandatory standards for motorcycles), adherence to which is required under the ICBC Act for coverage.

I have personally seen cases where contributory factors have reduced ICBC payouts in the event of a collision. As you may have guessed, I did collision investigations, for the better part of 30 years, involving BC MVAct & ICBC.

Of course, it all depends on how observant the ICBC adjuster is...not all of them would notice. I would, though...