Insurance With "illegal" Modifications

[Carbon 34]

When I took out a policy with just car I lists every single mod down to the finest detail. They stated they will ensure a car that's highly modified and you are required to list the mods, but if they deem that an "illegal" mod was the cause of an accident they can opt to not cover you. For instance- if u have a 15% window tint on your vehicle and u hit someone and they can prove that the illegal tint was the cause of you not seein them then they will opt to not cover you. However stated when I took the policy they said that they were very reasonable when it comes to accidents/illegal mods. I walked away from my accident with a large list of mods with my agreed figure payout in hand shortly after the incident.

I think the main thing is to list everything, and and pursue it and don't take no for an answer-especially in this case when it's the other party that should be paying up not ur own insurance.

Thats exactly what shannons told me

Mods adr or not as long as its listed in detail are covered ( video or photos recommended )

If deemed to be the reason for accident ,no cover on that item

they always get funny when I add more to the policy but it made it easier to up the agreed market value

Lets face it 99% of any mod isnt adr doesnt mean its unsafe?, not many companies adr test anything and the adr rules in most cases are ridiculous ( except to stop bogan repair jobs ,seriously unsafe cars, emissions)

Some items carry TUV certificates which imo is even stricter then adr testing ?

Besides

most car nuts spend every dollar making it better then any adr rule specs haha

Australia has some of the lousiest insurance companies , all i hear is horror stories in Australia ,in the states claims are painless 10 min in and out most of the time, and mods they dont care about unless it causes the crash or exceeds the policy value, ie.10 grand stereo needs extra coverage over stock? cant believe australians havent rebelled yet!! lets start the uprising lol

[JTMILLER]

I am pretty sure but don't quote me... As long as the coilovers cannot adjust the height of the car below 100mm regardless of what height they were set at the time of the accident then they are legal. Also as long as they also have at least 2/3 of the original travel.

You hit the nail right on the head, although you also have to take into consideration the eyebrow height which is different on each vehicle and there is also a requirement for a bump stop. Here's the quote exactly from transport SA.

For these units to be an acceptable alternative to the original manufacturer’s suspension, they must meet the following criteria.

They must:

��

have at least two thirds of the amount of suspension travel of the original suspension system fitted by the manufacturer of the vehicle

��

have a rubber or other resilient bump stop to limit travel to ensure there is clearance between the coils when the suspension is at full bump

��

incorporate a permanent locking device on the adjustment mechanism to prevent the adjusting of the suspension that results in the vehicle’s ride being less than that minimum legal height specified for that vehicle.

http://www.transport.sa.gov.au/pdfs/personal_transport/light_vehicles_pdfs/MR1136_Requirements_for_Lowering_or_Raising_Vehicle_Ride_Height.PDF

[R33 Sleeper]

Good news from my mate, he only owned the car for a couple of weeks before the prang, prior to buying it he opted to get an RAA check.

RAA check failed to list that the car had adjustable/aftermarket coilovers installed so they agreed to cover the cost of any excess/expenses etc. and to pay for the car to be fully engineered once fixed.

Just Cars agreed to reimburse him for the damaged coilover, however he had to get a whole new set as he couldnt find a replacement for just the one, so he was abit out of pocket in the end but wont matter because it will be covered by the RAA.

[ahhbee]

thats ridiculously lucky, good to hear it was sorted though