Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

VIC RACV and Personal Items

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by grumpydog666, Jan 3, 2012.

  1. As part of RACV's Comprehensive Motorcycle Insurance, they state that

    There does not seem to be any clarification of what condition the equipment must be in before they will replace/repair the item. Do you believe it would need to be in an unusable state or simply damaged would suffice?

    The PDS does not state anything to do with this, but it is clearly written on their website. I think they are implying that the equipment must be unusable but what is written and provided with my insurance states nothing more than 'replace or repair items work by you or your passenger'.
  2. Why have you chosen RACV? Do you know about their anti-motorcycling stance?
  3. No particular reason. Found it difficult to find quotes from other insurance companies to do bikes when I was looking for insurance, and already had policies with RACV.
  4. The fact that they haven't defined it actually sways in your favour not theirs.
    It's reasonable to assume you would replace the helmet after an accident.
    It's not reasonable to assume you would replace your glove if it got a scratch on it, however if the leather tore, then yes they would repair/replace.

    Also, you should try Swann, QBE, InsureMyRide, GIO, AAMI, or ANY of the other insurers for quotes also.
  5. Would never talk to AAMI, had too many problems in the past getting with dodgy repair jobs.
    • Like Like x 2
  7. If the item is damaged then it would get paid for. Usually if there is an accident a helmet will always get paid out on because the costs involved in checking if its still safe or not would out weigh a new helmet.
    I think if the items is in worse condition following an accident then you can get paid for a replacement. However your payout would be based on the pre-accident condition and they would take the item as salvage or to ensure it is disposed of. So most times if it is only minor damaged, it is worth keeping and not claiming. The helmet is a different story though.
  8. Sorry mate but that's wrong. Yes they take the item as salvage, but it's not "pre-accident condition". There are essentially 2 types of insurance payment in this instance, indemnity and R&R. The insuring clause only mentions R&R, with no mention of it being indemnity value or depreciation applicable.

    Therefore, R&R conditions (Replacement or Reinstatement) apply. You would most likely be credited the amount you paid for the item, or the current replacement value (Retail price from the place of purchase).

    If you have had experience where the claim was paid and depreciation was applied, you should check the insuring clause as you may have been duped. Just remember, you don't need insurance experience/qualifications to be a claims officer (providing you're "supervised"). Some of these claims officers don't even know their own policy wordings - I know this because it's my job to know the wordings.
    • Like Like x 2
  9. Hey N FAT,

    I stand corrected. Been a while since motor insurance and the mind is not clear. I believe i was getting mixed up with payouts to Third Parties and not the insured party.

    Thanks for the clarification.
  10. And they will apply the excess over the whole claim if its a bike and gear involved, but if you are just claiming stolen or lost gear then the excess will still apply.
  11. No worries dude :)

    You're correct with there being a difference with Third Party payments, but there are ways around it to have it Replaced with no depreciation depending on your policy and the circumstances.

    Correct. The excess applies to the claim, that is, the claim in it's entirety.
  12. Sorry for the late reply. Work has me swamped at the moment

    Thanks for your input