We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
insurance companies don’t ask if you have Immobiliser or Dashcams
Options
Comments
-
Swiftcover offers (or did offer) new customers a discount for a dashcam, something like 10 to 12%.
It used to be any cam but I think they specified a Nextbase one after a while.
I remember being able to select a dashcam and it's make on the proposal at the time.
Plus my recent renewal proposal does state "Dashcam - other" (I never told them what make mine was).
I'm no longer a new customer so it probably makes no difference to them anymore.0 -
UncleZen said:As mentioned, some insurers class a hardwired daschcam as a modification and could refuse to insure you in an accident.
The RAC (as a broker) don't care if it is hard wired or not and do not require you to declare it either. Checked recently when doing quotes for DD's insurance. In fact none cared about whether it was hard wired or not and none counted it as a modification.0 -
400ixl said:UncleZen said:As mentioned, some insurers class a hardwired daschcam as a modification and could refuse to insure you in an accident.
The RAC (as a broker) don't care if it is hard wired or not and do not require you to declare it either. Checked recently when doing quotes for DD's insurance. In fact none cared about whether it was hard wired or not and none counted it as a modification.
If they accept it was careless then it comes down to if they would have insured you had you declared it0 -
DullGreyGuy said:facade said:Herzlos said:facade said:Be careful what you wish for with dashcams. They are highly stealable, so the risk of your car being broken into increases, and if you said you have a dashcam the insurer will get all huffy & puffy should you not have footage of your accident available.Given how cheap most of them are now, and how they may be recording all the the time it's a bit risky looking to check, are they really that stealable?I understand that the high end ones will presumably fetch a good price in the pub, but it's a lot of hassle/risk for a £10 from ebay unit.You won't believe how hard a thief (usually an addict of some sort tbh) will work for pennies. Anyone less desperate would just get a paper round for less work, no risk and more money!Hoenir said:Dashcam installation isn't going to stop you having an accident or making a claim for damage to your vehicle or somebody elses property. .
I had one years ago as a witness, chap on a bicycle passed me on my bike and clipped a car turning, it wasn't really clear from the footage if he meant to turn or was swerving due to a car turning across the lane (driver stopped for a second then drove off as soon as the rider got up to go to their car, plate wasn't clear on the helmet footage). One thing I noticed which I mentioned to the insurer which most would not know, was that he was on an illegal fixie with no front brake - fact caught on camera when I was talking to him after to exchange details and I didn't notice until after!Sam Vimes' Boots Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness:
People are rich because they spend less money. A poor man buys $10 boots that last a season or two before he's walking in wet shoes and has to buy another pair. A rich man buys $50 boots that are made better and give him 10 years of dry feet. The poor man has spent $100 over those 10 years and still has wet feet.
0 -
DullGreyGuy said:400ixl said:UncleZen said:As mentioned, some insurers class a hardwired daschcam as a modification and could refuse to insure you in an accident.
The RAC (as a broker) don't care if it is hard wired or not and do not require you to declare it either. Checked recently when doing quotes for DD's insurance. In fact none cared about whether it was hard wired or not and none counted it as a modification.
If they accept it was careless then it comes down to if they would have insured you had you declared it
If they haven't asked the question then it can't be deliberate and if they are trying to go down the modification route they would have a pretty hard time convincing the regulators it was deliberate or reckless.
Lets have some reality and common sense applied.0 -
Nasqueron said:DullGreyGuy said:facade said:Herzlos said:facade said:Be careful what you wish for with dashcams. They are highly stealable, so the risk of your car being broken into increases, and if you said you have a dashcam the insurer will get all huffy & puffy should you not have footage of your accident available.Given how cheap most of them are now, and how they may be recording all the the time it's a bit risky looking to check, are they really that stealable?I understand that the high end ones will presumably fetch a good price in the pub, but it's a lot of hassle/risk for a £10 from ebay unit.You won't believe how hard a thief (usually an addict of some sort tbh) will work for pennies. Anyone less desperate would just get a paper round for less work, no risk and more money!Hoenir said:Dashcam installation isn't going to stop you having an accident or making a claim for damage to your vehicle or somebody elses property. .
I had one years ago as a witness, chap on a bicycle passed me on my bike and clipped a car turning, it wasn't really clear from the footage if he meant to turn or was swerving due to a car turning across the lane (driver stopped for a second then drove off as soon as the rider got up to go to their car, plate wasn't clear on the helmet footage). One thing I noticed which I mentioned to the insurer which most would not know, was that he was on an illegal fixie with no front brake - fact caught on camera when I was talking to him after to exchange details and I didn't notice until after!
In some cases its clearly that people simply dont know the case law on which claims are settled so they know what the video shows (eg them going round a blind bend and hitting a parked car) but they believe it shows the third party is liable when its not the case.400ixl said:DullGreyGuy said:400ixl said:UncleZen said:As mentioned, some insurers class a hardwired daschcam as a modification and could refuse to insure you in an accident.
The RAC (as a broker) don't care if it is hard wired or not and do not require you to declare it either. Checked recently when doing quotes for DD's insurance. In fact none cared about whether it was hard wired or not and none counted it as a modification.
If they accept it was careless then it comes down to if they would have insured you had you declared it
If they haven't asked the question then it can't be deliberate and if they are trying to go down the modification route they would have a pretty hard time convincing the regulators it was deliberate or reckless.
Lets have some reality and common sense applied.
https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN-4823460.pdf
Have a look at the above case, policy was void because the customer had wrapped their vehicle, customer tried to argue it wasnt a modification because its temporary and can be removed but the complaint wasn't upheld (there are a lot of not upheld complaints about wraps)
Similar with https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN-4849722.pdf where the customer had painted half his motor home a different colour, DVLA said they didnt needed to know, it was deemed reckless
There is a case where a dashcam was one of the post market modifications that hadn't been declared but it had been done by a prior owner and given the insurers own engineer didnt pick it up it was felt unfair to consider the customer should have realised it want standard fit - the engineer had picked up another mod of stickers/decals which had led to the further investigation and the voiding. The FOS in that case said it wasnt reasonable and so upheld the case. Obviously we can all speculate what may have happened if the engineer had identified the other matters as mods.0 -
DullGreyGuy said:400ixl said:DullGreyGuy said:400ixl said:UncleZen said:As mentioned, some insurers class a hardwired daschcam as a modification and could refuse to insure you in an accident.
The RAC (as a broker) don't care if it is hard wired or not and do not require you to declare it either. Checked recently when doing quotes for DD's insurance. In fact none cared about whether it was hard wired or not and none counted it as a modification.
If they accept it was careless then it comes down to if they would have insured you had you declared it
If they haven't asked the question then it can't be deliberate and if they are trying to go down the modification route they would have a pretty hard time convincing the regulators it was deliberate or reckless.
Lets have some reality and common sense applied.
https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN-4823460.pdf
Have a look at the above case, policy was void because the customer had wrapped their vehicle, customer tried to argue it wasnt a modification because its temporary and can be removed but the complaint wasn't upheld (there are a lot of not upheld complaints about wraps)
Similar with https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN-4849722.pdf where the customer had painted half his motor home a different colour, DVLA said they didnt needed to know, it was deemed reckless
There is a case where a dashcam was one of the post market modifications that hadn't been declared but it had been done by a prior owner and given the insurers own engineer didnt pick it up it was felt unfair to consider the customer should have realised it want standard fit - the engineer had picked up another mod of stickers/decals which had led to the further investigation and the voiding. The FOS in that case said it wasnt reasonable and so upheld the case. Obviously we can all speculate what may have happened if the engineer had identified the other matters as mods.
Granted some things like a wrap are pretty damned obvious modifications, and those that would have resulted in the insurer not covering the vehicle then yes i can see that being the case.1 -
400ixl said:DullGreyGuy said:400ixl said:DullGreyGuy said:400ixl said:UncleZen said:As mentioned, some insurers class a hardwired daschcam as a modification and could refuse to insure you in an accident.
The RAC (as a broker) don't care if it is hard wired or not and do not require you to declare it either. Checked recently when doing quotes for DD's insurance. In fact none cared about whether it was hard wired or not and none counted it as a modification.
If they accept it was careless then it comes down to if they would have insured you had you declared it
If they haven't asked the question then it can't be deliberate and if they are trying to go down the modification route they would have a pretty hard time convincing the regulators it was deliberate or reckless.
Lets have some reality and common sense applied.
https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN-4823460.pdf
Have a look at the above case, policy was void because the customer had wrapped their vehicle, customer tried to argue it wasnt a modification because its temporary and can be removed but the complaint wasn't upheld (there are a lot of not upheld complaints about wraps)
Similar with https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN-4849722.pdf where the customer had painted half his motor home a different colour, DVLA said they didnt needed to know, it was deemed reckless
There is a case where a dashcam was one of the post market modifications that hadn't been declared but it had been done by a prior owner and given the insurers own engineer didnt pick it up it was felt unfair to consider the customer should have realised it want standard fit - the engineer had picked up another mod of stickers/decals which had led to the further investigation and the voiding. The FOS in that case said it wasnt reasonable and so upheld the case. Obviously we can all speculate what may have happened if the engineer had identified the other matters as mods.
Granted some things like a wrap are pretty damned obvious modifications, and those that would have resulted in the insurer not covering the vehicle then yes i can see that being the case.Except they can't refuse to cover your claim. A dash cam cannot be a contributory factor to an accident so they can't use it as an excuse to deny a claimI never said a dashcam itself would be cause for a voided policy however arguably a hardwire dash cam is a more permanent change than a wrap is. Both could increase the risk of thieves etc taking a liking to a car. What I said was that there doesn't have to be a contributory factor to the accident for the insurer to be able to deny the claim. Not only that but they can void the policy for the same. There are multiple recent threads with this urban myth stated and it is no longer true since CIDRA
Many of the cases are deemed careless rather than reckless because the vehicle was supplied with the modification already made. It's much more commonly deemed reckless when it's the policyholder themselves that made the modification. At the end of the day if the insurer wouldn't insure the vehicle had it been declared then there is no difference between careless and reckless so the insurer will go with the lower/easier to convince someone rating.
0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 350.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 253K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.4K Spending & Discounts
- 243.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.8K Life & Family
- 256.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards