Bit smashed up

Why the questions have been asked by several of us ,the o.p has been on here since and not yet answered , unless the missing goods are part of a ongoing investigation then I can't see any reason for him to keep skirting the issue
And a loss adjuster would think likewise.Cough,Cough, again.
 
There could be many reasons why the OP has not said any more about his gear and he certainly doesn't have to tell us anything
 
There could be many reasons why the OP has not said any more about his gear and he certainly doesn't have to tell us anything
No, but I was simply curious as to whether his kit had been retained by someone and was keen to make sure he's checked, given the value and importance of it. If the police have removed it for safe keeping he could have it all back today.

The OP brought this up right here in his thread, so while he doesn't have to tell us anything, it was and is part of the subject of this thread so it would be just a little odd for the OP to shut that part of the discussion down.
 
I have phoned the recovery company used by the Police and there were no panniers brought back to the yard, which is why when the bike was sent on to my storage up here (since been assessed by BMW dealer workshop) there were none forwarded. They went missing before the bike was recovered - and yes, there were people walking all over the motorway. I saw my bike picked up and pushed to the hard shoulder by two motorists. There was only the one officer, and he was dealing with me - breathalysing me. The paramedic didn't want him to, but I said, provided he didn't mind if I failed through lack of breath, I would have a go. We worked together, I took a couple of deep breaths, like you might if diving to the bottom of a swimming pool, or snorkelling....and he shoved the tube in my mouth....I got enough through and it was totally zero. After that I have no knowledge, because I was wrapped up inside the ambulance.
Before the ambulance arrived I was sat on my loose pannier (got ripped off - held on the frame by large alloy blocks with two that lock it in place on a lever, which is held shut by the lid so it cannot be lifted unless the lid is open.
I have told my insurance company (cameras gear insurance company) what has happened, but not made a claim - why should I. The other guy should pay for all my losses.
I have been in contact with the Police Officer at the scene managing it and who did my breath test. He has reported it and is going to get back to me about it when he has heard. If I have no information I cannot tell you can I.

So those COUGH COUGH people, don't judge everyone else by your own standards - if I make a claim there will be deductions for 'betterment' so it is going to cost me about £5000 even if I do make a claim. So it is going to cost me big time whatever course I take. Thank you for making such a character judgement without ever having met me - that really does mark you out for what you are and the way you think. My reputation is far more valuable than that, even if yours isn't.
 
I have phoned the recovery company used by the Police and there were no panniers brought back to the yard, which is why when the bike was sent on to my storage up here (since been assessed by BMW dealer workshop) there were none forwarded. They went missing before the bike was recovered - and yes, there were people walking all over the motorway. I saw my bike picked up and pushed to the hard shoulder by two motorists. There was only the one officer, and he was dealing with me - breathalysing me. The paramedic didn't want him to, but I said, provided he didn't mind if I failed through lack of breath, I would have a go. We worked together, I took a couple of deep breaths, like you might if diving to the bottom of a swimming pool, or snorkelling....and he shoved the tube in my mouth....I got enough through and it was totally zero. After that I have no knowledge, because I was wrapped up inside the ambulance.
Before the ambulance arrived I was sat on my loose pannier (got ripped off - held on the frame by large alloy blocks with two that lock it in place on a lever, which is held shut by the lid so it cannot be lifted unless the lid is open.
I have told my insurance company (cameras gear insurance company) what has happened, but not made a claim - why should I. The other guy should pay for all my losses.
I have been in contact with the Police Officer at the scene managing it and who did my breath test. He has reported it and is going to get back to me about it when he has heard. If I have no information I cannot tell you can I.

So those COUGH COUGH people, don't judge everyone else by your own standards - if I make a claim there will be deductions for 'betterment' so it is going to cost me about £5000 even if I do make a claim. So it is going to cost me big time whatever course I take. Thank you for making such a character judgement without ever having met me - that really does mark you out for what you are and the way you think. My reputation is far more valuable than that, even if yours isn't.
I'd be asking the police to raise a theft report then, they might be able to investigate it further / speak to other witnesses etc. Worth a shot to track it down. Also, pass them the serial numbers if you have them, as when kit is recovered they always check the serial numbers against recovered and stolen property (or should I say recorded serial numbers against recovered property). You'd be surprised how much stuff eventually gets back to their owners, even if its some time down the line.
 
Last edited:
Also, and this might sound odd - it might be worth asking police / Highways to go back to the scene for another scene search, explaining the above. So much debris and rubbish gets swept up / chucked / lost into the verges and undergrowth you wouldn't believe, it might even still be there (if its on the motorway though don't do it yourself or ask someone else to do it, only Highways or police)!
 
Last edited:
He is traffic - I need CID. He has passed it through, I am just waiting for the system - same with NHS, awaiting the system to get on the specialists appointment list. I just have to be patient and work at getting myself fit again - which is far more important than some black box full of electrics and some tubes of glass.....regardless of how the modern world thinks. Too much emphasis on possessions, I have learned that from this. it has completely changed my outlook - another 6" and it could have been life changing ofr me and Anna - she would be a very wealthy woman (I wonder if she knows the guy in the Volvo? :D )

I shall spend far less time working, and more time doing the things I have always wanted to do - I have a few things on my list:
go fishing and catch a halibut (Norway), which I have wanted to do since I saw a picture of Les Moncrieff with one in 1968....
ride the Himalayas - there is a guy offering me a trip and I shall just spend the money and go. Anna isn't up to it, but is happy for em to go on my own.
Burma, this winter - yes it is BURMA, and always will be. I went before, saw the sights, dad rented a bungalow in the hills and we visited the Swaydagong pagoda and other places, but that was about 1971 and I was too young to appreciate it really, I was only 12. Houseboat already organised and fishing too!
I shall spend more time travelling and fishing in this country....just more time for me and less time working. Gone are the days when I will do 30 days a month work now - I am going to limit myself to 10. For 5 years there was a manic period in my life when I only got 3 days a year off - I was working every day for 5 years, except for Christmas day, New years Eve and Day......yes, I earned a decent amount and that set us up.
 
Well said mate, nothing like a life changing experience, luckily only mentally, to put things into perspective. Enjoy the rest of your life
 
It's a shame ploddy was not so keen to check on life limb and 'property' as he was at getting a breathalyzer tube stuffed into an injured person mouth against the advice of a paramedic. Ups! I for got he is a motorcyclist.:police:
 
It's a shame ploddy was not so keen to check on life limb and 'property' as he was at getting a breathalyzer tube stuffed into an injured person mouth against the advice of a paramedic. Ups! I for got he is a motorcyclist.:police:

I'd imagine he did that after he established the fact he didn't need to undertake emergency interventions. All drivers involved in RTIs have to be breathalysed...
 
But Shapeshifter is right - the bike rider is ALWAYS wrong.......except the witnesses soon put him right. All on my side.
 
But Shapeshifter is right - the bike rider is ALWAYS wrong.......except the witnesses soon put him right. All on my side.

Not in my experience :)

(And as I said, everyone has to be breathalysed, that's not an indication of suspicion)
 
I cannot find any law that states everyone has to be breathalysed where a RTA is involved. It may be normal proceedure but not obligitory (no other option).

In this case the police went against the advice of a paramedic. Motorcyclists in my experience get a raw deal most of the time from ploddy (er.. yer OK officer I know it's for my own safety cough,cough, shocking throat today).

Looking for a prosecution rather than carrying out his first and foremost duty to protect life , limb and property.

Out the corner of his eye someone drags a set off panniers into the distance as he shoves the tube into the bikers mouth "blow as hard as you can mate I know your in pain but do yer best cause if you fail it's an offence". A parmedics request goes unheeded and the results of the breathalyser confirm that the police officer may now have to attend the request over his radio to attend a burglary taking place nearby. :rolleyes:
 
I cannot find any law that states everyone has to be breathalysed where a RTA is involved. It may be normal proceedure but not obligitory (no other option).

In this case the police went against the advice of a paramedic. Motorcyclists in my experience get a raw deal most of the time from ploddy (er.. yer OK officer I know it's for my own safety cough,cough, shocking throat today).

Looking for a prosecution rather than carrying out his first and foremost duty to protect life , limb and property.

Out the corner of his eye someone drags a set off panniers into the distance as he shoves the tube into the bikers mouth "blow as hard as you can mate I know your in pain but do yer best cause if you fail it's an offence". A parmedics request goes unheeded and the results of the breathalyser confirm that the police officer may now have to attend the request over his radio to attend a burglary taking place nearby. :rolleyes:

It's not law, it's standard practice and a requirement in the casualty report form. If 'yes' isn't ticked awkward questions are asked, though "not provided for medical reasons" is a reason for not doing it.

I can't comment on this one but normally it wouldn't be undertaken if there are serious chest injuries, but if the paramedics say the injured party can do it they'd try, otherwise they'd have to take blood at the hospital. It would be unusual to request a sample of the paramedics say it would be detrimental to the patient though.

Trust me, it makes no difference to the officer if there's a prosecution involved. It's much better if there isn't one, I don't know one single cop that would prioritise that over the safety and wellbeing of a crash victim, and I know quite a few :)

If some are bias against motorcyclists (and I'm
not aware of any that were / are) it might be virtue of the amount of fatalities involving motorcycles. I used to go to so many, and 9/10 they were 'own goals' (not saying this of the OP though, to be clear).

Not sure what the burglary bit is about?
 
Last edited:
I'd imagine he did that after he established the fact he didn't need to undertake emergency interventions. All drivers involved in RTIs have to be breathalysed...

Not in my experience :)

(And as I said, everyone has to be breathalysed, that's not an indication of suspicion)

When I wrote off my Landy 10 1/2 years ago, plod attended but despite it being a week or 2 before christmas they didn't breathalyse me despite me offering to take the test. I was later told by another plod (friend) that they tend to only breathalyse people when they're fairly sure they'll get a fail in the run up to christmas - spoils their figures if too many pass the test apparently!

If some are bias against motorcyclists (and I'm
not aware of any that were / are) it might be virtue of the amount of fatalities involving motorcycles. I used to go to so many, and 9/10 they were 'own goals'

There's a LOT of bias against motorcyclists. A stream of traffic moving at 80 - the bikers will get pulled. Hell, I've been pulled several times for absolutely no reason (and left to go on my way without even a 7 day wonder/producer.) As for the "own goals", I've been to too many funerals and every one of them was caused by a car hitting the bike, either from behind or pulling across them at a junction.
 
When I wrote off my Landy 10 1/2 years ago, plod attended but despite it being a week or 2 before christmas they didn't breathalyse me despite me offering to take the test. I was later told by another plod (friend) that they tend to only breathalyse people when they're fairly sure they'll get a fail in the run up to christmas - spoils their figures if too many pass the test apparently!



There's a LOT of bias against motorcyclists. A stream of traffic moving at 80 - the bikers will get pulled. Hell, I've been pulled several times for absolutely no reason (and left to go on my way without even a 7 day wonder/producer.) As for the "own goals", I've been to too many funerals and every one of them was caused by a car hitting the bike, either from behind or pulling across them at a junction.

If you were told that it was BS (or a lazy cop!) everyone gets breathalysed. Or at least should be!

As for own goals, most of the fatals I've been to were people going into the corner too quick, misjudging how much contact patch they had and ended up coming out of the corner the wrong side of the road into the path of oncoming vehicles. Out of the hundreds of bike fatals I dealt with that was the most common, more so than the junction pull outs. But I went to plenty of those too [emoji853]
 
Last edited:
Dead is dead.

Not a lady cop, a DI in the met.
 
If you were told that it was BS (or a lady cop!) everyone gets breathalysed. Or at least should be!

As for own goals, most of the fatals I've been to were people going into the corner too quick, misjudging how much contact patch they had and ended up coming out of the corner the wrong side of the road into the path of oncoming vehicles. Out of the hundreds of bike fatals I dealt with that was the most common, more so than the junction pull outs. But I went to plenty of those too [emoji853]


One of the reasons why, despite having ridden all year round since 1976, I still go and do riding and driving courses every year. As I have only been riding with a full license for 41 years I ALWAYS come away with something of use, either something new that has been improved in the technology department, signage department or technique. If it isn't new, you get pulled up on where you are slipping, and things get reinforced. It is well worth the two days away - usualy I go to North Wales and do the Bike Safe course at Rhyll fire station, or the First Bike on Scene course - some years I do both in the same year. I also like to get an assessment from the local IAM group for my car driving too. I don't bother doing the test, but you can pay a reasonable amount for a one-to-one assessed drive, it is only about £50 all in and worth every penny. It also keeps your driving / riding up to scratch - I wonder how many drivers or riders who have been driving for 5 years or more think they know it all and don't need any pointers? They are all perfect, of course.....
 
Dead is dead.

Not a lady cop, a DI in the met.

Sorry just realised, that was a typo, I meant *lazy* not *lady*!

Yes but we were taking about how they ended up dead. If it was a DI, CID don't have a clue about traffic, most have never been to a crash outside of their probationary years so I'm not surprised that came out that way...
 
Oddly enough, I'm booked in to do a BikeSafe course in October. ALL the local ones before then were full and I only managed to get the October date due to a cancellation.

Been a few years since I did a course (early '90s IIRC) and that was to be a CBT instructor.
 
Yes but we were taking about how they ended up dead. If it was a DI, CID don't have a clue about traffic, most have never been to a crash outside of their probationary years so I'm not surprised that came out that way...


He was in the part that investigates plod's own misdoings/malpractices and had done most aspects of the job before being transferred over. Now retired since he was fed up with the number of cases he found were justified.
 
He was in the part that investigates plod's own misdoings/malpractices and had done most aspects of the job before being transferred over. Now retired since he was fed up with the number of cases he found were justified.

Very few PSD ever get involved in traffic, and as a DI he wouldn't have been involved in any general patrol work for many years, let alone traffic.

My last specialist Roads Policing role lasted nearly 10 years so I'd like to think my view would be more current and accurate ;)
 
I have told my insurance company (cameras gear insurance company) what has happened, but not made a claim - why should I. The other guy should pay for all my losses.

Simon, it may be better to actually make a claim yourself, then your insurance company can try to re claim from the offender/his insurer? ( take advice)

You are correct that life is far more important than chattels, but you shouldn't be out of pocket because of something that wasn't your fault.

Continue your recovery & look forward to your planned excursions/trips. (y) Life is too short as it is.
 
Simon, it may be better to actually make a claim yourself, then your insurance company can try to re claim from the offender/his insurer? ( take advice)

You are correct that life is far more important than chattels, but you shouldn't be out of pocket because of something that wasn't your fault.

Continue your recovery & look forward to your planned excursions/trips. (y) Life is too short as it is.

More or less what I have done - I have left myself the option of claiming from my own insurance, but told them I was going to add it to my losses that the lawyer/solicitor (I don't know the difference) is going to put together for my claim:
bike repairs
clothing
possessions lost
loss of earnings (I have a diary of commissions I will not be able to fulfil, including a trip to the USA to shoot an event and features of bikes on display there - 10th show, so a bit of a splash) Then touring on a press bike afterwarrds....three other publishers have provided evidence of the work hey had me earmarked for that they will have to place elsewhere.
then any medical bills, the travelling costs to and from hospital twice a week (22 miles each way) - any other odds and sods that crop up.

I expect things will get sorted, but I have been warned that it may be 2020 before it even goes to court....hey ho!
 
Sorry to hear about all this, been riding bikes for 45 years so I understand your thoughts etc. Don't forget you can claim for bike hire when you are fit enough to ride again. As the add says, every little helps.
Hope you feel better soon.
Matt
 
More or less what I have done - I have left myself the option of claiming from my own insurance, but told them I was going to add it to my losses that the lawyer/solicitor (I don't know the difference) is going to put together for my claim:
bike repairs
clothing
possessions lost
loss of earnings (I have a diary of commissions I will not be able to fulfil, including a trip to the USA to shoot an event and features of bikes on display there - 10th show, so a bit of a splash) Then touring on a press bike afterwarrds....three other publishers have provided evidence of the work hey had me earmarked for that they will have to place elsewhere.
then any medical bills, the travelling costs to and from hospital twice a week (22 miles each way) - any other odds and sods that crop up.

I expect things will get sorted, but I have been warned that it may be 2020 before it even goes to court....hey ho!
I still don't understnad the method being used to make a claim here. I am assuming you have been involved with insurance claims before.

My understanding of insurance law is that if you are fully comprehensive insurance you inform your insurance of the accident you have had and they then approach the insurance company of the other driver and make a claim against him for your losses if he is negligent.

If you are negligent then your insurer pay your losses not the other parties insurance, any uninsured losses (excess) have have to be persued by you which would be recovered by a solicitor for you if you had legal assistance when you took out you policy.

If you are anything other than comprehnsive then you have to persue a claim against the negligent party for all your losses in which case you would normaly engage an independent solicitor.

If you are fully comprehensive and you do not let your own insurers deal with this and are unsuccessful in proving negligence / recovering all your losses I would find it highly unlikly you will then be able to turn to your own insurance company and say " I am now claiming from you because my claim was not sucessful when I handeld it my self". It would be very likely your insurance company would say "you should have let us handle the claim how we wanted to"

I think if you read your policy that is what it will say. If you chose to handle the claim yourself (not allow your the insurer) then you are on your own.

Unless you are not fully comprehensive of course in which case you will be persuing the claim yourself. If you took legal assistance they will persue the claim.

Point being are you not fully comprehensive insurance? :thinking:
 
I am fully comprehensive on the motorbike. This is not the advice MY INSURERS GAVE ME, it is NOT THE ADVICE THE INSURANCE BROKER HAS GIVEN ME - they have both told me I have to use their approved repairer and crap solicitor (actually a 'claims handler') instead - so because I would not acceed to their insistance on me using 'their approved repairer, who is in Kent, I was left out in the cold to do it myself.

I shall contact the broker tomorrow and the insurer and just ask again what the situation is - if they will repairt my bike, pay for the losses of my clothing but have the bike repaired AT THE PLACE I DECREE, then they can carry on. The reason I have gone on my own is because they wouldn't agree to that. Their 'approved repairer' has an atrocious reputation and everyone in the motorbike club has said DO NOT LET THEM GO ANYWHERE NEAR YOUR MOTORBIKE. That s why I am insiting on a better repairer with a very well respected reputation.

So, what now?
 
Last edited:
I am fully comprehensive on the motorbike. This is not the advice MY INSURERS GAVE ME, it is NOT THE ADVICE THE INSURANCE BROKER HAS GIVEN ME - they have both told me I have to use their approved repairer and crap solicitor (actually a 'claims handler') instead - so because I would not acceed to their insistance on me using 'their approved repairer, who is in Kent, I was left out in the cold to do it myself.

I shall contact the broker tomorrow and the insurer and just ask again what the situation is - if they will repairt my bike, pay for the losses of my clothing but have the bike repaired AT THE PLACE I DECREE, then they can carry on. The reason I have gone on my own is because they wouldn't agree to that. Their 'approved repairer' has an atrocious reputation and everyone in the motorbike club has said DO NOT LET THEM GO ANYWHERE NEAR YOUR MOTORBIKE. That s why I am insiting on a better repairer with a very well respected reputation.

So, what now?

I'd get a quote from someone you're happy to carry out the work and present it to your insurer. They should consider any quotes presented to them.
 
That is the stage I am at now - Pidcock BMW have had it on the ramp and are producing the estimate for repair for me. The repairer I want to use is an independent with an enviable reputation for proper job done right.

The camera is being covered spereratley and it is my camera insurers I have told I am doing my best not to claim from them.

There is obviously money in it, because whoever you ask, they all say I should do it with them !
 
Last edited:
I am fully comprehensive on the motorbike. This is not the advice MY INSURERS GAVE ME, it is NOT THE ADVICE THE INSURANCE BROKER HAS GIVEN ME - they have both told me I have to use their approved repairer and crap solicitor (actually a 'claims handler') instead - so because I would not acceed to their insistance on me using 'their approved repairer, who is in Kent, I was left out in the cold to do it myself.

I shall contact the broker tomorrow and the insurer and just ask again what the situation is - if they will repairt my bike, pay for the losses of my clothing but have the bike repaired AT THE PLACE I DECREE, then they can carry on. The reason I have gone on my own is because they wouldn't agree to that. Their 'approved repairer' has an atrocious reputation and everyone in the motorbike club has said DO NOT LET THEM GO ANYWHERE NEAR YOUR MOTORBIKE. That s why I am insiting on a better repairer with a very well respected reputation.

So, what now?
OK I see now. As far as I know this is what happens. You have an accident damge is done and you are fully comprehensive.

The legal position is that your insurance has agreed to cover your insured losses. That means you can take your bike to your chosen repairer and tell them (your insurer) that bloggs repairs is repairing your bike and they will receive a bill for the cost of the repaire.They to my knowledge cannot refuse to allow you to do that.You are not compelled to use thier apprpoved repairer (check your policy wording).

At the same time as that they should deal with your claim for injuries ect and discuss that with the other parties insurers as to liabilty ect. All your losses,camera ect the lot should be covered if the other party is found to be negligent. If the other party is not found negligent, then for your camera gear you may then have to call upon your seperate camera insurance as your own motor vehicle insurance may have value limits on items carried in vehicles even though you are fully comprehensive.

The broker is supposed to be on your side.

I had this sort of thing with Hastings Insurance . My car was written off (hit from behind) when it was easy to repair. So asked to keep the salvage (car) and take a reduced payout for the loss and repair the car my self. Hastings (my insurance) would not let me keep the salvage as it was part of their policy. I checked the policy and it was written into the policy that salvage could not be retained by the policy holder ! So I went direct to the other parties insurance and they sent me a check for the write off value and I kept the car. Hens always read the policy.

Shame your bike was not written off it makes things a lot easier.
 
Last edited:
I take it you know not to volunteer the information that there is an insurance policy in operation reagrding camera equipment.
 
I take it you know not to volunteer the information that there is an insurance policy in operation reagrding camera equipment.

I didn't, but I do now......altough given the value I expect they will ask. What I don't understand is, why will it make any difference? The instigator is still the instigator and blame does not shift to me. The other party has been prosecuted for careless driving, so that does add some weight to our argument for liability.
 
With car insurance if you don't use the insurers approved repairer the insurance company sometimes doesn't give warranty on the repair or jncreases the excess, neither of which will presumably worry you because claiming off the other insured driver means you won't pay any excess anyway and you will be happier with your own repairer. You may have a but if a fight with the other insurers for not using their approved repairer but again any dispute could be sorted in the small claims court I guess and any reasonable person would feel you had a right to use whomever you wanted to so long as the price was fair and similar to the approved repairer's price.
Matt
 
I didn't, but I do now......altough given the value I expect they will ask. What I don't understand is, why will it make any difference? The instigator is still the instigator and blame does not shift to me. The other party has been prosecuted for careless driving, so that does add some weight to our argument for liability.

Just read through my previous post again and you will see that it is only if the other party is NOT found negligent that the issue of claiming on your insurance for your camera gear comes into play.

As regards to not volunteering that there is another insurance on the camera equipment-

I am thinking about a paragraph I read somewhere in an insurance policy that stated "if there is more than one insurance policy in force on the insured risk the loss will be split between the policies involved" Which may involve loss of no claims / increased future premiums on both policies.

As it looks as though there may be a conviction (it's a conviction you need) then the motor vehicle insurance of the other party covers all loses.

It looks as though I could be right. I have had a quick search and this was the second report I found. American but all insurance is similar.

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/happens-two-insurance-policies-cover-same-risk-42091.html

It probably will not be that important but letting it be known there is a policy inforce for expensive camera gear may well result in a " well you claim on that and we will deal with the accident" attitued. :muted: :muted:
 
Just read through my previous post again and you will see that it is only if the other party is NOT found negligent that the issue of claiming on your insurance for your camera gear comes into play.

As regards to not volunteering that there is another insurance on the camera equipment-

I am thinking about a paragraph I read somewhere in an insurance policy that stated "if there is more than one insurance policy in force on the insured risk the loss will be split between the policies involved" Which may involve loss of no claims / increased future premiums on both policies.

As it looks as though there may be a conviction (it's a conviction you need) then the motor vehicle insurance of the other party covers all loses.

It looks as though I could be right. I have had a quick search and this was the second report I found. American but all insurance is similar.

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/happens-two-insurance-policies-cover-same-risk-42091.html

It probably will not be that important but letting it be known there is a policy inforce for expensive camera gear may well result in a " well you claim on that and we will deal with the accident" attitued. :muted: :muted:

A quick question?

In the scenario you mention ,when Simon gets his monies to buy the new camera gear he will I surmise be informing his (specialist) insurer of all the serial numbers etc , therefore is he not obligated now to let his cam kit insurers know there was a total loss and the circumstances but (as I was once told many moons ago in regard to car insurance if not making a claim) he is telling them for "information purposes only [at this stage]". AFAIK this 'for information purposes only' fulfills the insured's obligation to tell his insurer that there has been a loss???
 
We know that we have to do that (declare accidents) with our car insurance but I don't know about the camera gear insurance.

When Simon gets his new gear and gives over serial numbers of new camera gear to the insurance I cannot see why it should bring up a red flag due to a claim made through other insurers. And if they did he would have not done anything in breach of the policy by not 'volunteering' the loss unless he was required in the policy (like car insurance) to notify of any losses. Check policy again.
 
We know that we have to do that (declare accidents) with our car insurance but I don't know about the camera gear insurance.

When Simon gets his new gear and gives over serial numbers of new camera gear to the insurance I cannot see why it should bring up a red flag due to a claim made through other insurers. And if they did he would have not done anything in breach of the policy by not 'volunteering' the loss unless he was required in the policy (like car insurance) to notify of any losses. Check policy again.

A good point re: checking the policy.................though my surmise was that it was likely a 'common clause' in all policies where physical items are concerned about declaring a loss, as I recall in the case of losses abroad for anything you may have taken on holiday you must notify the loss within a reasonable timeframe and include a copy of the police report (to prove that the loss was recorded independently)?
 
Just read through my previous post again and you will see that it is only if the other party is NOT found negligent that the issue of claiming on your insurance for your camera gear comes into play.

As regards to not volunteering that there is another insurance on the camera equipment-

I am thinking about a paragraph I read somewhere in an insurance policy that stated "if there is more than one insurance policy in force on the insured risk the loss will be split between the policies involved" Which may involve loss of no claims / increased future premiums on both policies.

As it looks as though there may be a conviction (it's a conviction you need) then the motor vehicle insurance of the other party covers all loses.

It looks as though I could be right. I have had a quick search and this was the second report I found. American but all insurance is similar.

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/happens-two-insurance-policies-cover-same-risk-42091.html

It probably will not be that important but letting it be known there is a policy inforce for expensive camera gear may well result in a " well you claim on that and we will deal with the accident" attitued. :muted: :muted:

As the third party will presumably be paying for it all then I don' think the dual-insurance possibility is an issue. That would only be if Simon himself was insured twice for the same thing, then the liability would be split across the insurers.

As it is, the fact Simon has insurance should hopefully be irrelevant. Although you should notify your insurers that there has been a loss, even if you are not claiming against it.
 
Back
Top