Insurance: I just don't understand it

I realise I'm not supposed to understand it, I'm just supposed to pay
the money, but can someone please attempt to explain a couple of
aspects of insurance pricing to me as I'm obviously too thick to
comprehend it.

1) If I improve the suspension and brakes on a bike which, to my mind,
makes it a safer vehicle, my premium goes up. I'm not talking about
some hypersports rocket ship. This is an FJ1200 to which I've fitted
an Ohlins rear shock, R1 front calipers and ZZR11 master
cylinders/levers, all of which have improved the handling and
stopping.

2) Even though it is me who has the NCB, not one of the bikes, I can
only use my NCB on one policy. OTOH if I have an accident I have to
declare it on all policies and it pushes the premiums up. I can
understand the latter, it's the former I'm struggling with.

I know it's just a case of "Tough" but it's galling nonetheless.

I'm not expecting a sensible answer (although that would be nice!) I'm
just venting. I currently have all 6 bikes with BikeTeam who
apparently lost my list of modifications during a computer system
changeover and now I've pointed them out to them they want to hike all
the prices. I'd probably grumble and just pay up but they won't insure
the Hayabusa at all if I implement a planned increase in capacity.

I did ask BikeTeam why the price goes up if I change suspension and
brakes and the explanation started with the modifications increasing
the value of the bike and petering out at about the time they were
explaining "although of course these items would only be replaced with
the OEM equivalents...".

I'm currently trying to insure six bikes, all with modifications, and
most companies won't allow that many bikes on one policy. It looks
like I may need to take out a separate policy for the Bus which means
I'm in new-policy-no-NCB-territory.

(Oh, referencing a previous thread in case anyone is interested, I
noticed one of the FJR fork legs was soaked with oil from a blown seal
when we got to Newnham last Friday which is probably what made the
handling feel strange. It's a better explanation than the dented wheel
anyway!)

Kevin

 

You rather answer your own question there.

The Ins Co finds it harder to estimate repair costs and the Actuaries don't
like you.

 

Given they say they will replace 3rd-party parts with OEM I don't see
why that is so (see further down my, admittedly long, post).

Kevin

 

I think it's probably based on actuarial calculations that identify
modified vehicles as being more likely to be involved in accidents.
Basically this is because many of the people who modify their bikes/cars
do so because they want them to perform better i.e. they like driving
quickly and taking their cars/bikes to the limits. When I changed from
my 185bhp bog-standard BMW 330D to my current 175bhp SAAB 95 1.9TiD my
premium went up by about £250 despite the fact that it is a slightly less
powerful car. The reason for this is that I have the SAAB approved
"Hirsch" remap of the ECU that gives and extra 25bhp over the standard
150bhp factory version. (Of course I could have kept schtum about the
remap but if I were to be involved in any kind of serious/expensive
accident then I wouldn't want to risk my insurance being invalidated).

 

IWT they wonder why somebody goes to the trouble, not to mention mixing
in parts from other manufacturers - or why anybody would declare it in
the first place, thus popping their head above the parapet and asking
to be used as target practice.

Long? Long? You don't know the meaning of the word, man!

 

This much is true!

 

I declared uprated brakes and suspension rather than who made them but
Tony has already answered your point:

Even if I wanted to keep quiet about the modifications, and I didn't,
they are instantly visible to anyone who has seen an FJ before.

I don't mess around with insurance on the grounds they will come up
with as many ways as they can to limit/deny a payout on their own
without me giving them additional ammunition.

Kevin

 

If aftermarket parts make the bike more desireable to theives, it means
the chance of the insco having to pay out for a stolen bike is higher,
even if they don't cover the parts themselves. HTH

 

That's a good point I hadn't considered. Thanks.

Kevin

 

Hah, I'll raise you 21 caving trips per annum. Apparently if I go
caving and do more than 20 trips per year my critical illness (not
injury mind ewe) premiums double. This is despite stats showing that
your average weekend caver is likely to be involved in a cave rescue
callout once in every 140 years and in a serious incident (one
inviolving death or serious injury) once in every 1000 years. Yet when
you challenge them and ask why they don't take commuting 15k miles on
a motorbike into account they have no answer. Plus of course, keeping
active should make me less likely to suffer a serious illness.

 

Ergo it now has more performance. Prices up.