# Car jacking not covered by insurance



## Paul Hackley (Jan 3, 2003)

Try this one, my insurance for my Skylines and now my renewal for my BMW contain a new exclusion.
Any accident, injury, loss or damage which directly or indirectly relates to Terrorism.
But then they define Terrorism as,
Terrorism means any act or the use of threat or force.
and then
or involves serious violence against a person or persons
or 
Involves the use of firearms.
Looks like I've got to sell everything and buy a Toyota truck!!
Paul


----------



## Fullonloon (Feb 18, 2002)

I sincerely hope this isn't a precedent. Insurance really is the biggest scam known to man. I wonder how many people have the 'not covered by act of terrorism or act of god' clause in their policy allready but aren't aware of it. It could be a nasty suprise for someone.


----------



## BBD (May 30, 2002)

is this for real ???? 
so basicaly any car theft the insurance company can throw it on the terror BS can call it a day.

this is something like building insurance in the states, Insurance for tall buildings has gone up but doesnt cover any terrorist acts.


----------



## MattPayne (Apr 11, 2002)

so, if some religous nutter from the local asylum threatens you with pastry based desert, claiming that hes on a mission from god and steals your car... your not insured...  


soon it will get to the stage where the insurance document will state which 3 explicit types of theft or damage will actually be covered...  

probably requiring written conformation from said thief that he did not mean any harm, or emotional distress to your or anyone else.....


----------



## ZXSpectrum (Feb 27, 2002)

Christ! How long will it be before this situation pushes drivers of decent cars to start carrying knives, batons, pepper spray, mace or even guns to protect themselves and thier property...

The police probably want this so they can do ppl for carrying stuff to protect themselves and thier cars to save them catching the real scum!


----------



## Duncan IV (Jan 15, 2002)

ZXSpectrum said:


> *Christ! How long will it be before this situation pushes drivers of decent cars to start carrying knives, batons, pepper spray, mace or even guns to protect themselves and thier property...
> 
> 
> *


----------



## Lee Loader (Nov 25, 2003)

Might have to consider fitting them flame throwers that they use in South Africa, get a bit of chargrilled thief on the go!!!!!!
 :smokin:


----------



## LSR (Jun 4, 2003)

Lee Loader said:


> *Might have to consider fitting them flame throwers that they use in South Africa, get a bit of chargrilled thief on the go!!!!!!
> :smokin: *


Illegal in Great Britian (oxymoron ). Can't even protect your own property - well if the police are not useful (come late, don't care), nothing done about crime, insurance not offering protection (defeats the purpose somewhat), and posting about a stolen car on all car clubs in the UK the only action left (and that's after the car is stolen  ), then where is the justice, and what other action is left but to give the suspect a lesson yourself.

Some of the laws in this country (the 'you cannot protect your own property' law) make my bloid boil (but this insurance clause isn't govt related). Needless to say, I'd like to see what the decision makers behind the insurance clause and this govt law about being powerless when someone is in the process of breaking into your car would do.   Perhaps the govt would realise that there is something wrong when everyone carries weapons and beat thieves up when they steal a car (or try to, or unsuccessfully). Seems to me that, like someone I know said, laws and methods of protection that decent people take don't protect them, and sometimes protect the guilty. 

I suppose the only real measure to take is to buy the best car security products, and not skimp when buying them. A few thousand pounds is a lot cheaper than 10s of thousands of pounds buying a new car.


Rant off


----------



## -[c0Ka|Ne]- (Jan 1, 2004)

Thats f**king disgraceful what a BS clause. Surely this can't catch on? Hopefully the government will step in and sort it out (Probably will take 10 years for it to happen, and the decision will end up going against drivers anyway.)

All that does is increase the danger of driving a sports car. Drivers will be more compelled to carry weapons in an attempt to defend what is theirs. Needless to say, any increase in confrontations is going to result in more incidents.

Really, why do we pay taxes?


----------



## Matt_S (Apr 21, 2002)

-[c0Ka|Ne]- said:


> *Really, why do we pay taxes? *


My first thought was why the f**k do we pay bloody insurance!?! This thing has popped three times this year already!


----------



## -[c0Ka|Ne]- (Jan 1, 2004)

HAHA I meant insurance sorry 

But then again, WHY do we pay taxes? :smokin:


----------



## Paul Hackley (Jan 3, 2003)

*You can't win*

Read the small print!!
Try this one. The insurers insist on a cat1 alarm, so on the latest toy I've gone for Clifford, 500. This has an optional anti hi-jack system, that every time you get in the car you have to punch in your security code. Once armed and with the engine running, if you open and close a door it continues to run until it senses acceleration and on the next time engine revs slow it cuts out the system until the code is re-entered. The bad news is if you have this option connected it is no longer Thatcham approved as Thatcham does not allow a running car to be switched off thus your insurance is void.
Sounds like we've been caught by the short hairs !!!!
Paul


----------



## InsBro (Jul 29, 2002)

You need to find an Insurer that will allow black jack etc (ones that can see the benefits in the different security devices).

Some give additional discount for it

Jeremy


----------



## smileyculture (Oct 25, 2003)

InsBro said:


> *You need to find an Insurer that will allow black jack etc (ones that can see the benefits in the different security devices).
> 
> Some give additional discount for it
> 
> Jeremy *


do you know of such a company?

cheers jason


----------



## InsBro (Jul 29, 2002)

Yes Jason

Jeremy


----------



## ColinM (Sep 29, 2002)

*Re: You can't win*



Paul Hackley said:


> *The bad news is if you have this option connected it is no longer Thatcham approved as Thatcham does not allow a running car to be switched off thus your insurance is void.*


Does that mean a Turbo Timer would also invalidate a CAT1 alarm/immobiliser ?


----------

