[rob.b]

I have noticed that a lot of people are changing their tyres to non run flats.
I was wondering what the Insurance Co's say when you tell them as this is a LEGAL obligation.

Recently my son was hit from behind at a junction, only to be told that they would not authorise ANY repairs until he paid an extra premium for his wheels as we hadn't told them.
Luckily I had recorded the date, time and name of person I spoke to when they originally agreed for his wheels, but still had to pay them a £200 excess for 16" Corsa wheels!!
Imagine if you dont tell them you changed from what is a standard fit tyre, and supposedly fitted to prevent accidents!!

[NFS]

Originally Posted by rob.b

I have noticed that a lot of people are changing their tyres to non run flats.
I was wondering what the Insurance Co's say when you tell them as this is a LEGAL obligation.

Recently my son was hit from behind at a junction, only to be told that they would not authorise ANY repairs until he paid an extra premium for his wheels as we hadn't told them.
Luckily I had recorded the date, time and name of person I spoke to when they originally agreed for his wheels, but still had to pay them a £200 excess for 16" Corsa wheels!!
Imagine if you dont tell them you changed from what is a standard fit tyre, and supposedly fitted to prevent accidents!!

Tyres are a consumable item, which will be replaced during the life of a car.

Wheels aren't - they are an integral part of the car and changing them is clearly a modification.

Surely, so long as we replace our tyres with ones that are appropriate for the car it isn't an insurance issue?

I wouldn't tell my insurers if I put Michelins on the car instead of the Bridgestones it came with, since BMW only 'recommend' RFT's why is it any different if I use a suitable non-rft tyre?

[Budgie]

The girl at work had something similar and was upset on the phone..till some of the men intervened.She bought a VW and it had VW dealer fit alloys fitted from new as it showed on the invoice of purchase.She wasnt getting her claim settled cos they were after fit, after one of the men in the office with previous insurance company employment intervened and pointed out that they should have looked at the original bill they would have spotted this error on there behalf.The claim was settled in full and the insurance company used people in another part of the world...OHHH YESSS. to deal with this claim....scandalous, but this is the way forward to use cheap labour and charge us the same if not more premium year after year.

[kend]

Originally Posted by needforspeed

I wouldn't tell my insurers if I put Michelins on the car instead of the Bridgestones it came with, since BMW only 'recommend' RFT's why is it any different if I use a suitable non-rft tyre?

Would the insurance company classify changing a 'RFT' for a non 'RFT' as a like for like change. I would tell them in writing and then it is clear if there is an issue in the future.

I understand that all insurance companies operate a disclosure of material facts clause where the onus is on the insured to disclose anything that may be relevant

Ken

[rob.b]

I personally agree, with the wheels thing, if they are BMW wheels then fine as my sons were Irmsher and sold by Vauxhall, but its the tyres fitted that cause me concern.
It does state ANY modifications on an insurance proposal form and the onus is on the proposer to disclose not the Insurance Co to find out!!
Runflats have been proven to stop the car quicker than non RFT's, and I am loath to change incase of another "get out" clause by these Co's.
I was wondering if anyone has any experience with an insurance Co for this sort of thing?
Rob

[dxb335d]

They stop quicker i didn tknow that?

[red-max]

I called my insurance broker to tell them I had replaced my RFTs, and they told me that it did not matter as they are consumable items and not covered by the insurance policy. Having read this thread, I think I might write them a letter and ask that it be put on file, to avoid any confusion in future.

[NFS]

Originally Posted by rob.b

Runflats have been proven to stop the car quicker than non RFT's

How can this be the case?

The ONLY difference between RFT and non RFT tyres is a reinforced sidewall. How can that have any bearing on stopping distance?

What's your source for this info?

[Serjames]

I don't see how RFT versus non RFT for stopping distances is a valid test unless you were to test every single RFT on the market vs every single non RFT on the same car in identical scenarios / temps etc.

Seems a very odd thing to state (not doubting the Poster, but doubting his source)

SJ