# Downpipes insurance info



## Glgtr (May 21, 2012)

I have stage 4 and having seen the litchfield 4.5 conversion I now really want to make that next step.

The only concern I have is around the downpipes.

We can all agree that the car will pass its mot, somehow.
However most insurance policies say the car must be roadworthy, surely if you would not pass an on the spot test the car is not roadworthy thus your insurance would not be valid.

As some context my insurer is aware of all other mods and I am with Adrian flux.

Does anyone have any experience with insurers and a decatted car?

Thanks


----------



## Adrian Flux Insurance Services (Nov 1, 2010)

Hi

If you would like to PM me your reference number I can look into this for you.

Thanks

Dan


----------



## goldgtr35 (Aug 15, 2012)

If your car is de Catted it is illegal to use on a public road so hence insurance will be VOID.


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

insurance against theft would be void if it was stolen from your driveway???


----------



## ChuckUK (Jan 1, 2009)

I wonder how many people on here have no insurance.


----------



## Anders_R35 (Jul 20, 2011)

Why would an insurance company accept a decat as a listed mod on a car that is also listed for up to 6k road miles if it voids the insurance?

Perhaps Adrian Flux can confirm the situation?


----------



## Glgtr (May 21, 2012)

They are yet to come back to me over pm

In researching this generally it seems that some people have declared this to their insurers and it has been accepted as a mod.
Whereas others have been declined for this very reason.

There was mention of Litchfields looking into a sports cat on here a while ago, does anyone know if that was taken any further?
Although also looking into that, any new cat you install has to be "type approved" apparently which is meant to be quite expensive and relatively hard to come by?

Does anyone have any knowledge on this too?


----------



## Litchfield (Feb 26, 2008)

We will have our Sport CAT Y-pipe on display at the Autosport show 

Regards

Iain


----------



## Glgtr (May 21, 2012)

Litchfield said:


> We will have our Sport CAT Y-pipe on display at the Autosport show
> 
> Regards
> 
> Iain


Brilliant, so this all becomes somewhat academic, stage 4.5 including downpipes and litchfield sport cat y pipe.

Iain, have you been able to do much testing with it, if a complete de cat gives about 20bhp over stock does the sport cat sit nicely in the middle?

The other big upside of de cat is the noise, do you know how that will compare as well?

Thanks


----------



## Anders_R35 (Jul 20, 2011)

Would still like to hear from an insurer


----------



## Karls (Jul 12, 2010)

Anders_R35 said:


> Would still like to hear from an insurer


+1...or is the only time we will hear is when we need to make a claim....?


----------



## sumo69 (Mar 31, 2008)

My daily drive is a Megane R26 - a number of owners de-catted these and all was good till one wasinvolved in a nasty accident.

The insurers took the approach that the car wasn't legally able to be on the road - I followed a thread for about a year and he hadn't been paid out for his car though the insurer did pay the 3rd party damage.

I don't recollect whether he declared the CAT delete to the insurer, but for 5 bhp approx (and perhaps 10 -15 on the R35) I don't think I would chance it - spend the money on driver training and you won't be worrying about the loss of a few ponies.

David


----------



## pokerpro (Dec 24, 2012)

Long time looker, I dont have a gtr came very close to buying one but spent the cash on a second house as i have an unreliabe income. Will get one though hopefully soon.

The law regarding cats, it is illegal to remove a cat other than to replace the cat for a original or a eu approved replacement on a car that is used on the road.

Just because it gets through a mot does not mean it is legal

I have never seen the law enforced and you would have to be very very unlucky for a insurance company not to pay out because of a decat.

So all those out there who have an aftermarket y pipe. You are breaking the law and technically may be invalidating your insurance as your car is not road worthy.

As for sports cat if they are not EU approved they are also illegal. Will the lichfield one be EU approved?


----------



## Anders_R35 (Jul 20, 2011)

pokerpro said:


> Long time looker, I dont have a gtr came very close to buying one but spent the cash on a second house as i have an unreliabe income. Will get one though hopefully soon.
> 
> The law regarding cats, it is illegal to remove a cat other than to replace the cat for a original or a eu approved replacement on a car that is used on the road.
> 
> ...


Where does it state it's illegal to remove a Cat? I've searched the governments website before and it's like trying to find a needle in a haystack.

Anders


----------



## alex_123_fra (Mar 26, 2008)

pokerpro said:


> Long time looker, I dont have a gtr came very close to buying one but spent the cash on a second house as i have an unreliabe income. Will get one though hopefully soon.
> 
> The law regarding cats, it is illegal to remove a cat other than to replace the cat for a original or a eu approved replacement on a car that is used on the road.
> 
> ...


I doubt this argument will fly. Replacing a Y-pipe does not de-cat the GT-R as the downpipe cats are still in place and it still passes emmissions testing. I would imagine a court would be very interested in the latter fact if a claim was rejected, otherwise we then run into the argument of what a cat is actually there to do (and in stock form it isn't just to be heavy and look shit).


----------



## pokerpro (Dec 24, 2012)

Anders_R35 said:


> Where does it state it's illegal to remove a Cat? I've searched the governments website before and it's like trying to find a needle in a haystack.
> 
> Anders


I will have to find it, I have read it before. It is harder than trying to find a needle in a haystack. 

Anyway I wouldnt worry the law is never going to be enforced. Insurance wise its a million to one shot they would throw a claim out because of a decat (presuming you told them you have a modified exhaust system.)


----------



## pokerpro (Dec 24, 2012)

The latest regulation is:

The motor Vehicles (Replacement of Catalytic Converters and Pollution Control devices)Regulations 2009.

I have been reading about it on legislation.gov.uk

Although the easiest think to read regarding the legislation is replacement-cat-regulations.pdf from vca.gov.uk

Its a leaflet designed to clearly explain things as the original form from legislation.gov.uk is as clear as mud.

The leaflet is basically saying that a cat can only be replaced with a type approved cat or original.


----------



## Anders_R35 (Jul 20, 2011)

There's a lot of info that Cats have to be type approved, but where's the line that states it's illegal to remove them? As you say probably a small chance that a claim will be thrown out, if the insurance company have accepted the mod on the policy.


----------



## goldgtr35 (Aug 15, 2012)

pokerpro said:


> I will have to find it, I have read it before. It is harder than trying to find a needle in a haystack.
> 
> Anyway I wouldnt worry the law is never going to be enforced. Insurance wise its a million to one shot they would throw a claim out because of a decat (presuming you told them you have a modified exhaust system.)


Don't know we're your getting your info from, 
I've worked in the car trade all my working life, I've seen insurance claims thrown out for, front tinted window, wrong size tyre, tinted lights, and decatted pipes, 
Not here to argue just point out facts of everyday claims I come across,
Some one on here said why would a insurance company take my money,
If you insured a 2009 gtr for 75k they will take your premium ,
But when you come to claim you will get book price , with adjustment for mileage and condition,
If your car was built after 1992 old j reg you car needs a approved Catt fitted


----------



## pokerpro (Dec 24, 2012)

goldgtr35 said:


> Don't know we're your getting your info from,
> I've worked in the car trade all my working life, I've seen insurance claims thrown out for, front tinted window, wrong size tyre, tinted lights, and decatted pipes,
> Not here to argue just point out facts of everyday claims I come across,
> Some one on here said why would a insurance company take my money,
> ...


Agree with everything you put. I have worked in motor trader previously and my wife works for an insurance company. The point I was trying to make was that a car with a decat can be refused a claim and there will be many cases that have been thrown out for a decat. However, imo for every car that has a decat and the claim is thrown out there will be way more that are not. I said a million to one, that is probably a exageration but I am sure you can appreciate the point I was trying to make.

As for insurance in general, if you went through the terms and conditions and investigated every claim to a forensic level. Majority of claims could be thrown out.
eg In my previous employment I talked to a guy who had just submitted a claim. They rang him to say there was a problem (he had lexus style lights and not declared). He gave them some excuse and they still paid him out. They didnt have to as it was a undeclared mod. However, they do as would give them a bad rep even tho they were in the right.


----------



## pokerpro (Dec 24, 2012)

Anders_R35 said:


> There's a lot of info that Cats have to be type approved, but where's the line that states it's illegal to remove them? As you say probably a small chance that a claim will be thrown out, if the insurance company have accepted the mod on the policy.


I agree it does not show a specific line that its illegal to remove a cat totally. But if its against regulation to replace a cat with a non approved cat it is pretty safe to say that it is against regulations to replace a cat with a decat pipe.


----------



## Glgtr (May 21, 2012)

I still haven't heard back from Adrian flux, would be interested to understand their position.

Or any other insurers on here.


----------



## vxrcymru (Sep 29, 2009)

pokerpro said:


> I agree it does not show a specific line that its illegal to remove a cat totally. But if its against regulation to replace a cat with a non approved cat it is pretty safe to say that it is against regulations to replace a cat with a decat pipe.


Even if you have declared the de-cat pipe and they are happy to re-new or maintain your current policy?


----------



## Adrian Flux Insurance Services (Nov 1, 2010)

Hi all

After referring this matter to our most senior Underwriter, I can confirm that if the policyholder declares that their vehicle has had the catalytic converter removed an applicable claim will not be refused for that reason.

We do obviously only speak on behalf of the Insurance Companies we deal with.

Regards

Dan


----------



## vxrcymru (Sep 29, 2009)

Thanks for going to the trouble to confirm and that common sense rules


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

Adrian Flux Insurance Services said:


> Hi all
> 
> After referring this matter to our most senior Underwriter, I can confirm that if the policyholder declares that their vehicle has had the catalytic converter removed an applicable claim will not be refused for that reason.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the info and good to know Adrian Flux have a sensible stance. 

Do you cover high hp GT-Rs? Some members have reported that you don't.


----------



## ROG350Z (Jun 15, 2008)

Seems sensible that if you haven't declared it you run the risk and if you do, and the insurer accepts the 'risk' and your premium they can't then back out. I declared everything (despite the £250 price hike for it) and have emailed list of mods to insurers (Admiral) - who were very good. I am on the upper edge of what they will accept however so hope CCI come down again next year.


----------



## Jimbles (Jul 4, 2012)

Also, seeing as how there's no regulation stipulating that a new car has to have a cat, removal being illegal is hardly justifiable. I had an X reg landrover, no cat from the factory simply because the engine was clean enough at the time.


----------



## Adrian Flux Insurance Services (Nov 1, 2010)

Hi

May be able to. It depends on the whole quote criteria.

Thanks

Dan



David.Yu said:


> Thanks for the info and good to know Adrian Flux have a sensible stance.
> 
> Do you cover high hp GT-Rs? Some members have reported that you don't.


----------



## pokerpro (Dec 24, 2012)

I got in contact with Vosa today. There response was that removing a cat that was originally there is illegal.

Also there should be a visual inspection to check that original cats are there on the MOT as well as emmision checks. If they are not it is a MOT failure. 

CONT071791.pdf from vosa

Above Mot document states "Catalyst missing where one was fitted as standard"


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

pokerpro said:


> I got in contact with Vosa today. There response was that removing a cat that was originally there is illegal.
> 
> Also there should be a visual inspection to check that original cats are there on the MOT as well as emmision checks. If they are not it is a MOT failure.
> 
> ...


That point is moot, now we've heard from an insurance company that they will honour their cover if full disclosure is made.

We probably all have several technically "illegal" mods on our cars. And even if we didn't who here can honestly claim their driving isn't "illegal" every single time they take their GT-R out?


----------



## Nedzilla (Feb 10, 2012)

I recently fitted a Y pipe to my GTR and had it fitted by a good mate who is also an MOT tester.He also told me that it is ilegal to remove a cat from a car whether it still has cats to get it through an MOT or not and if a cat is seen to be missing via a visual inspection during an MOT then it will be a fail.
I suppose this depends on whether the MOT tester knew there was a cat there on a GTR in the first place.

From an insurance point of view I told mine of the mod and explained exactly what it is and they didn't say anything.

It doesn't really make the car 'unfit for the road' does it or make it more likely to be involved in an accident.You could say that it becomes 'unfit for the environment' which is a different can of worms altogether.

As far as I am concerned I declared the Y pipe to my insurer,they provided me cover so I'm insured.If I get pulled by VOSA and they tell me that my cats are missing then that will be another story.


----------



## Anders_R35 (Jul 20, 2011)

I wonder who pokerpro is, probably one of the insurers as you've only posted on this thread?


----------



## pokerpro (Dec 24, 2012)

Anders_R35 said:


> I wonder who pokerpro is, probably one of the insurers as you've only posted on this thread?


lol not an insurer, but my wife works in insurance so I know a bit more than average person.

I have a quick look at these forums every so oftern. Only posted as I felt I had something worthwhile to add. I thought people should be aware of the legality of removing a cat from their car. As the impression you get from this site and tuners websites is that it is perfectly legal to remove a cat when it is not.


----------



## Glgtr (May 21, 2012)

pokerpro said:


> lol not an insurer, but my wife works in insurance so I know a bit more than average person.
> 
> I have a quick look at these forums every so oftern. Only posted as I felt I had something worthwhile to add. I thought people should be aware of the legality of removing a cat from their car. As the impression you get from this site and tuners websites is that it is perfectly legal to remove a cat when it is not.


Poker pro, to your understanding what is the consequence of this illegality?
Just that you are told to put it back in place?


----------



## pokerpro (Dec 24, 2012)

Glgtr said:


> Poker pro, to your understanding what is the consequence of this illegality?
> Just that you are told to put it back in place?


Realistically nothing

However, as another poster stated. Your insurer could deem your car not road worthy as you have removed an original cat, some insurers may not pay out if your car is not road worthy. You would have to be sooooo unlucky for this to happen. Even if it is a million to 1 shot of this happening. I think people should be made aware of this.

Remember all insurers are different, some are great and there are some who will try and wriggle out of claims.


----------



## Glgtr (May 21, 2012)

pokerpro said:


> Realistically nothing
> 
> However, as another poster stated. Your insurer could deem your car not road worthy as you have removed an original cat, some insurers may not pay out if your car is not road worthy. You would have to be sooooo unlucky for this to happen. Even if it is a million to 1 shot of this happening. I think people should be made aware of this.
> 
> Remember all insurers are different, some are great and there are some who will try and wriggle out of claims.


But by the sound of it as long as we check with insurer then we are ok.


----------



## pokerpro (Dec 24, 2012)

Glgtr said:


> But by the sound of it as long as we check with insurer then we are ok.


Just tell them exactly what it is eg a decat y pipe, not just an exhaust modification.

A lot of insurers will pay out if your car is not road worthy anyway, just depends on your small print.

My advice is to get insured with a specialist who know what they are on about. Most of the big insurers just employ monkeys at call centres who know next to nothing about insurance who are just reading off a screen.


----------



## G2GUV (Dec 16, 2012)

One thing is for sure...NEVER buy a policy that is underwritten by TRADEWISE!!! Absolute crooks...


----------



## charles charlie (May 3, 2008)

What is the insurance industry's definition of roadworthiness given the following:

1. MOT test is not a certificate of roadworthiness, and the DOT expressly states an MOT is done to "ensure that it meets at least the minimum road safety and environmental standards. The test relates only to the condition of the testable items at the time of the test. It should not be regarded as evidence of the condition of the items tested at any other time nor should it be taken as evidence of the general mechanical condition of the vehicle"

2. The Road Traffic Act 1988 also does not define "roadworthiness" but does however state that an "unroadworthy vehicle is in such a condition that its use on a road would involve a danger of injury to any person". At no point is the term "roadworthiness" when describing a motor vehicle have anything to do with emissions since by the very definition set out in law, emissions do not make a vehicle a danger to any persons.

4. And even after all of the above, removing a single set of cats on an R35 still allows it to pass emissions, and as such an MOT, so by an insurance industry criteria, the car is apparently "roadworthy".


So does the insurance industry have a definition of roadworthiness that does not follow UK law?


----------



## Joust (Oct 28, 2012)

charles charlie said:


> What is the insurance industry's definition of roadworthiness given the following:
> 1. MOT test is not a certificate of roadworthiness, and the DOT expressly states an MOT is done to "ensure that it meets at least the minimum road safety and environmental standards. The test relates only to the condition of the testable items at the time of the test. It should not be regarded as evidence of the condition of the items tested at any other time nor should it be taken as evidence of the general mechanical condition of the vehicle"
> 2. The Road Traffic Act 1988 also does not define "roadworthiness" but does however state that an "unroadworthy vehicle is in such a condition that its use on a road would involve a danger of injury to any person". At no point is the term "roadworthiness" when describing a motor vehicle have anything to do with emissions since by the very definition set out in law, emissions do not make a vehicle a danger to any persons.
> 4. And even after all of the above, removing a single set of cats on an R35 still allows it to pass emissions, and as such an MOT, so by an insurance industry criteria, the car is apparently "roadworthy".
> So does the insurance industry have a definition of roadworthiness that does not follow UK law?


You are quite correct, the definition of roadworthiness is a matter for the courts to decide. As you point out, based on the opposite which is defined, removing cats would not make a car unroadworthy.

Unless therefore they define it in your policy, it will have no enforcement ability under contract law (and the general provisions of insurance that have been around since the C16), and certainly if they did try and reject a claim on that point that a simple troll off to the FSA would sort that out.

My guess, because it's not stated, is that claims rejected for removal of cats are nothing to do with the roadworthy point, but will have been rejected under the uninformed modification clause that is in all policies.

Even then, there is good IOB and now FSA case history in insurers being forced to pay up when an uninformed modification had no bearing on the premium loading.

The statement from Adrian Flux backs that up.

J


----------



## rob wild (Jul 30, 2007)

Just out of interest if you were pulled over by vosa/Police and the car failed the emissions test would you not be fined?


----------



## goldgtr35 (Aug 15, 2012)

rob wild said:


> Just out of interest if you were pulled over by vosa/Police and the car failed the emissions test would you not be fined?


I would think, they would be well within the law to confiscate your car, as it's not roadworthy,, 
Before people jump down my throat, my TVR Griff has no catts, 
I've said it before, but here goes , if you have no catts and have a big accident the insurance company are well within their right , not to pay out as your car is in a unroadworthy state, and shouldn't be used on public roads,


----------



## Joust (Oct 28, 2012)

rob wild said:


> Just out of interest if you were pulled over by vosa/Police and the car failed the emissions test would you not be fined?


VOSA can't stop private cars, they can only stop lorries and passenger vehicles.

The police can stop and check emissions for VOSA staff for all vehicles, with a sanction notice given if they exceed the limits. This gives a certain amount of time for the fault to be rectified.

You have 14 days to fix, only then can a prosecution be brought.

All covered here

http://www.transportoffice.gov.uk/crt/repository/CONT032945.pdf

The only exception to this is certain LAs can give FPNs within Air Quality Management Areas. A decatted car would be unlikely to be so far out as to give rise to a FPN, but it is a theoretical possibility. The list of AQMAs is here
List of Local Authorities with AQMAs - Defra, UK

The FPN is normally £20-£40.

J


----------



## iamwill007 (Aug 2, 2015)

I don't have insurance, I might consider one now!


----------

