Just after some feedback as to what you people think .
As far as winch challenge comps go is it really necessary?.I only ask as i was talking to my broker the other day and he doubts that they would pay out anyway.he said that to be covered the trucks had to be up to wof standard and after one stage most wont be so its a perfect out for them if faceing a large claim".is this right?.if its true then i dont see the need for it and its another cost that could be deleted from the ledger.
While Challenge class are road legal and most if not all would be carrying a full comprehensive policy Club class and the new Modified class dont require wof/reg so why do we make them carry 3rd party ins when it sounds like its of no use to them?..
Steve
3RD Party Insurance
Re: 3RD Party Insurance
Usually the event carries the insurance (fire etc), which is part of the entry fee etc ...., you would want to think about comprehensive cover as it covers fire/theft etc
May be worth having a chat to www.barley.co.nz to see what they can offer/customise for you...
May be worth having a chat to www.barley.co.nz to see what they can offer/customise for you...
70 series prado (KZJ78) and 90 Series Prado (KZJ95)
Re: 3RD Party Insurance
Hi Maybe i didnt make myself clear.Its not for me,i already have full cover from Barley ins (truck is road legal) I have been asked by a few club class competitors why they need 3rd party insurance ? i asked my broker and his answer has led me to ask if its necessary for non road going trucks during a winch comp..Steve
-
PeterVahry
- Hard Yaka
- Posts: 688
- Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 12:00 pm
- Location: Auckland
Re: 3RD Party Insurance
Hi Steve, the 3rd Party cover that the Auck 4WD club operate does not require WoF standards and in fact insurance payment is rarely refused on the basis that a WoF was expired (although if it can be shown that the incident was a result of a basic safety item on a vehicle like brakes or steering etc then the insurance companies have a big out option)
The benefit of 3rd Party cover is that you are protecting yourself from your own errors and a small one can easily cost more than the price of the cover! If a competitor was in camp or the base area and somehow bumped into someones nice tow vehicle, the bill could ruin a good friendship. The Auck policy is only $50 a year.
www.auckland4wd.org.nz/visitors/article ... stnews.asp
An event organiser requiring 3rd Party cover is also looking after their own responsibilities since if an incident did occur they can stay at arms length and let the parties sort it out. Without individual cover, it is likely that the aggrieved party would come looking for the organiser to apply the event cover. It's nice to walk away after an event without the thought of having to file claims etc.
The benefit of 3rd Party cover is that you are protecting yourself from your own errors and a small one can easily cost more than the price of the cover! If a competitor was in camp or the base area and somehow bumped into someones nice tow vehicle, the bill could ruin a good friendship. The Auck policy is only $50 a year.
www.auckland4wd.org.nz/visitors/article ... stnews.asp
An event organiser requiring 3rd Party cover is also looking after their own responsibilities since if an incident did occur they can stay at arms length and let the parties sort it out. Without individual cover, it is likely that the aggrieved party would come looking for the organiser to apply the event cover. It's nice to walk away after an event without the thought of having to file claims etc.
Re: 3RD Party Insurance
Steve, your broker has simplified it quite a bit.
The insurance company must proove that the fault etc is the cause and then can refuse to payout. If you have a normal car policy then it quite clearly states that the vehicle must be up to WOF standard. So a bald tyre etc means they COULD refuse to payout but the key is they must proove that the bald tyre was the cause of the claim. Now if the person slipped off a wet road well you're pretty stuffed. But if you just backed into someone in a carpark then you'd still most likely be covered.
From an insirance advisers point of view, you would be a complete idiot not to have an insurance company on your side in case of a big claim. You have to remember what the intention of this is and it isn't about fixing your truck or someone elses. It is about that forest that caught fire etc. Average forest fires starts at $250,000 per day. $50 per year is a small price to pay to have someone else on your side if something happens because remember one small thing. Under the Rural Fires Act if you get blamed you are GUILTY under proven inocent! Seriously this is one piece of legislation that you absolutely need to cover your arse against.
The other side of it is many many vehicle without WOF's are fully insured and have no issues. Tractors, quad bikes, farm trucks (small Suzuki trucks) etc. Many of these are worth $10,000's.
While i understand the question, it comes up every year or so and it is one where people should accept that the reasons are very sound and there are people with the knowledge supporting this. Yes it is right to question as that is how we make progress but any move to remove the requirement for individual insurance will see our membership cost increase dramatically. Currently it is $20, remove the need for 3rd party insurance and it will most likely increase to $70 to cover the $50 fee charged from the cover that Peter has talked about. In this modern world of no personal responsibility you absolutely must have insurance to cover your arse. Every motorsport has a liability insurance that is paid for by the competitors somewhere in the requirements. Ours happens to be individual where as most are built into entry or membership fees.
From a professional point of view my advice to 4x4 Challenges would be to remove the requirement for individual insurance and have a blanket cover for all competitors and then required all people involved to be members. The problem with this is anybody with a truck that has full insurance will then end up paying twice as the membership would be increased to cover the insurance cost.
And the last point is not all insurance companies are created equal! All you people that go for the absolute cheapest possible cover, good luck when it comes to claim time! Like any product you buy, you get what you pay for so don't expect service when you don't pay for it.
The insurance company must proove that the fault etc is the cause and then can refuse to payout. If you have a normal car policy then it quite clearly states that the vehicle must be up to WOF standard. So a bald tyre etc means they COULD refuse to payout but the key is they must proove that the bald tyre was the cause of the claim. Now if the person slipped off a wet road well you're pretty stuffed. But if you just backed into someone in a carpark then you'd still most likely be covered.
From an insirance advisers point of view, you would be a complete idiot not to have an insurance company on your side in case of a big claim. You have to remember what the intention of this is and it isn't about fixing your truck or someone elses. It is about that forest that caught fire etc. Average forest fires starts at $250,000 per day. $50 per year is a small price to pay to have someone else on your side if something happens because remember one small thing. Under the Rural Fires Act if you get blamed you are GUILTY under proven inocent! Seriously this is one piece of legislation that you absolutely need to cover your arse against.
The other side of it is many many vehicle without WOF's are fully insured and have no issues. Tractors, quad bikes, farm trucks (small Suzuki trucks) etc. Many of these are worth $10,000's.
While i understand the question, it comes up every year or so and it is one where people should accept that the reasons are very sound and there are people with the knowledge supporting this. Yes it is right to question as that is how we make progress but any move to remove the requirement for individual insurance will see our membership cost increase dramatically. Currently it is $20, remove the need for 3rd party insurance and it will most likely increase to $70 to cover the $50 fee charged from the cover that Peter has talked about. In this modern world of no personal responsibility you absolutely must have insurance to cover your arse. Every motorsport has a liability insurance that is paid for by the competitors somewhere in the requirements. Ours happens to be individual where as most are built into entry or membership fees.
From a professional point of view my advice to 4x4 Challenges would be to remove the requirement for individual insurance and have a blanket cover for all competitors and then required all people involved to be members. The problem with this is anybody with a truck that has full insurance will then end up paying twice as the membership would be increased to cover the insurance cost.
And the last point is not all insurance companies are created equal! All you people that go for the absolute cheapest possible cover, good luck when it comes to claim time! Like any product you buy, you get what you pay for so don't expect service when you don't pay for it.
Nissan Terrano coilovers, turboed VH45, Safari axles, and some other stuff.
Re: 3RD Party Insurance
i thought most private insurance wouldnt pay if your vehicle was being used in any sort of time trial, competition, or race.
-
PeterVahry
- Hard Yaka
- Posts: 688
- Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 12:00 pm
- Location: Auckland
Re: 3RD Party Insurance
That's correct, but... that's when competing. Moving around a competition location can be risky too and you usually spend more time not actually under starters orders, than you do competing.
Damage caused by a competing vehicle, such as one that leaves a course and damages other people's property or causes a fire, is usually covered by the organiser's insurance (such as the NZFWDA policy). The rest of the time you are responsible for your own protection.
That's why event organisers should insist on vehicle owners having at least 3rd Party cover. It's cheap in the context of competing, or generally taking part in club organised events or safaris.
Damage caused by a competing vehicle, such as one that leaves a course and damages other people's property or causes a fire, is usually covered by the organiser's insurance (such as the NZFWDA policy). The rest of the time you are responsible for your own protection.
That's why event organisers should insist on vehicle owners having at least 3rd Party cover. It's cheap in the context of competing, or generally taking part in club organised events or safaris.
-
MNC
- Hard Yaka
- Posts: 2100
- Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 12:00 pm
- Location: Close to (wishing I was closer to) the Puhoi Pub!
Re: 3RD Party Insurance
PeterVahry wrote:...Damage caused by a competing vehicle, such as one that leaves a course and damages other people's property or causes a fire, is usually covered by the organiser's insurance (such as the NZFWDA policy). The rest of the time you are responsible for your own protection.
Sorry a little off-topic but as a member of a club I am often told that my NZFWDA membership includes an insurance cover for when on club runs. Is that correct and if so what does it cover?
I only ask as if I'm not covered I would definitely look at joining the Auckland Club 3rd Party cover policy for 2011.
Cheers,
-
PeterVahry
- Hard Yaka
- Posts: 688
- Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 12:00 pm
- Location: Auckland
Re: 3RD Party Insurance
Essentially the NZFWDA cover is your basic protection as it does include Rural and Forest Fire cover and general liability. The NZFWDA also have cover for members to cover breaches of the RMA such as a prosecution for putting oil in a waterway etc.
When there are groups of vehicles, there is always a risk of incidents between a couple and the NZFWDA policy was never intended to address that type of damage. It's aim is to protect against claims by landowners etc for fires, fences, stock losses etc, etc.
www.nzfwda.org.nz/membership/insurance/
When there are groups of vehicles, there is always a risk of incidents between a couple and the NZFWDA policy was never intended to address that type of damage. It's aim is to protect against claims by landowners etc for fires, fences, stock losses etc, etc.
www.nzfwda.org.nz/membership/insurance/