Agreed value - who with and how?

[mhsilverw]

Agreed value for insurance - who with and how?

I have aquired a 2004 enfield motorycle with a knackered petrol engine, an am planning on replacing the engine with a Yanmar (or Yanmar clone) engine. When I asked my insurer - Footman James about the effect of this they couldn't add this to my classic policy (the bike isn't old enough) and if placed on a modern policy would only have market value on a claim.

Has anyone got a bike of similar age that they have insured with an agreed value - how and who with?

Mark

[mhsilverw]

Footman James said....

"......It would be based on a value on the modern policy, but not being on an agreed value basis it is not a certain amount you would get in the event of a claim.

You can still use documents, proof of value, receipts etc in this case to try and prove how much the bike is worth however...."

Not great - the "...try and prove ..." bit annoys me. .. I asked how it would be valued as you can't buy one of the shelf, nor is there a manufacturer. Not very encouraging.

Has anyone else fallen foul in this way. I thought insurance was (like household) 'new-for-Old --- seems not

Mark

[sbrumby]

Trying to understand insurance is complicated, Old well cared for bikes, or rare bikes go up in value, ie vincent black shadow £25,000. New cars and bikes go down in value. Your bike 2004 enfield made in india would have been £3500 when new, now with a bust engine maybe £500, add to that a yan clone £300, not realy a difficult conversion, so add £200 to that and you would get £1000. That is the way the insurance will look at it. If you put a real yan in that alone would be £1500 just for the engine.

[Crazymanneil]

I had this BS with my insurance co. They asked what the bike was bought for and also what I think its worth now (estimated value). When I went to take on the (considerable) quote I asked if the value would be agreed. Some more beaurocracy later and they said that they could do an agreed value on it but it would be less than estimated value. Essentially if I proceeded with agreed value and needed to claim then the most I could get would be the agreed value, even though the quote was based on the higher estimated value.

To me this seemed to be a bit of a 'scheme' which favours the insurers. I called the financial ombudsman and basically it does seem to come down to the agreed value or 'try and prove' (in the event) route. I completely agree that 'try to prove' is less than ideal (especially when you are paying for it) but in the end I didn't proceed with agreed value since I have receipts and hopefully that would be enough.

In fact, scratch that. Hopefully I will never have to find out since even the estimated value does not cover the labour etc.

This is by no means a reccomendation for your own situation, just a bit more insight hopefully.

Neil