Insuring old bike with swapped engine?

[VifferFun]

I think this forum deserves to know what insurer you represent so they can avoid it.

I'm not "representing" my employer, which is the reason why I don't post that information. I already stated this. And FYI, there are many people on this forum who I would prefer that they avoid my employer. Not all risks are profitable. And also FYI, I'm not advising people to purchase insurance through my employer anyway -- I try to match them with the cheapest rate.

I just did a quote with a different insurer who I dealt with years ago and I answered the following questions

What is the value of your motorcycle, including modifications, accessories and taxes?

I entered market value + value of a nice exhaust and a bore kit.

Of this amount, how much do the modifications and accessories represent? Please include taxes?

I answered the value of these mods.

What is the capacity of your motorcycle in CCs?

I entered the new CCs after the bore kit.


And guess what! My qoute remained the same. I have two major insurers to substantiate my insurance will not change with any bore kits or mods done after I answer stated questions. Your views don't match reality. It is problematic how you stalk this forum category spreading misinformation.

By "modification", the insurer is usually referring to non-performance-enhancing mods. The bore kit might not be a big deal, but an engine swap, turbo, or supercharger would be. Don't believe me? Ask your insurer how your insurance would change if you were to turbo your bike. I've spoken with underwriters from different companies who won't even write a lowered car or a jacked truck.

Yet this is besides the fact. You have a right to swap engines or transmissions or whatever and mto or most insurers could careless. MTO only cares if the vehicles has working headlights, turn signals, brake lights. MTO cares if the vehicle can be operated safely. After a safety inspection an authorized garage will issue a safety allowing you to operate on the roads. That is what mto looks at. Autowreckers have been selling engines and transmissions to install in cars for decades and somehow this practice has been accepted as ok except by you and whoever you work for. It is not uncommon for insurers to use autowreckers to source parts to repair a car after an accident but somehow its ok when done in that context? Get real buddy.

As I stated before, insurance companies could not care less about what the MTO deems fit. From an INSURANCE perspective, engine swaps with the original engine are fine (i.e. if your GSX-R600 engine fails and you replace it with a GSX-R600 engine, that's no problem). From an INSURANCE perspective, engine swaps with a different engine is up to the underwriter (i.e. your GSX-R600 engine fails and you replace it with a GSX-R750 engine).

I don't make the underwriting rules . . . I'm just telling you what they are.

[VifferFun]

In short, simply ask your insurer. The broker/agent will tell you whether or not a risk is eligible for the insurance company they represent.

[ItIsWhatItIs]

I'm not "representing" my employer, which is the reason why I don't post that information. I already stated this. And FYI, there are many people on this forum who I would prefer that they avoid my employer. Not all risks are profitable. And also FYI, I'm not advising people to purchase insurance through my employer anyway -- I try to match them with the cheapest rate.



By "modification", the insurer is usually referring to non-performance-enhancing mods. The bore kit might not be a big deal, but an engine swap, turbo, or supercharger would be. Don't believe me? Ask your insurer how your insurance would change if you were to turbo your bike. I've spoken with underwriters from different companies who won't even write a lowered car or a jacked truck.



As I stated before, insurance companies could not care less about what the MTO deems fit. From an INSURANCE perspective, engine swaps with the original engine are fine (i.e. if your GSX-R600 engine fails and you replace it with a GSX-R600 engine, that's no problem). From an INSURANCE perspective, engine swaps with a different engine is up to the underwriter (i.e. your GSX-R600 engine fails and you replace it with a GSX-R750 engine).

I don't make the underwriting rules . . . I'm just telling you what they are.

These are your views and what you think is. If I were the op I would disregard your views and swap my engine to get my bike functioning. The fact is, after an engine is swapped and if the op brings the bike to a garage that garage will only look at the safety aspect of the bike. Afterwhich they will certify the bike. They could care less whether the engine is the original. It's irrelevant to safety. My ownership only has the bike model and the fuel type. The vin of ownership is stamped on the frame of vehicle/bike, not the engine. Engines/Trans/Suspension/Exhaust are viewed as replacables and does not affect the vehicle title. However, an accident or flood damaging the frame/electrics will. If the op has a clear title, he has the right to do what he wants with his bike in accordance with the provincial laws and not the views of certain individuals. It is not uncommon for car owners to source transmissions and engines from scrap yards to replace their engines. There are no laws stopping this practice.

[turbodish]

Engines/Trans/Suspension/Exhaust are viewed as replacables and does not affect the vehicle title. However, an accident or flood damaging the frame/electrics will. If the op has a clear title, he has the right to do what he wants with his bike in accordance with the provincial laws and not the views of certain individuals. It is not uncommon for car owners to source transmissions and engines from scrap yards to replace their engines. There are no laws stopping this practice.

It's also not uncommon for owners of modified cars to have difficulty finding an insurer who will cover them and their modified car. A buddy of mine with a perfect driving record is trying to insure a Cobra replica and he was turned flat by the first five insurance companies he tried, including the one that's covered his other vehicles and his house for the last 20 years. The car is legal as far as MTO goes, but if it and its equipment do not fall within an insurer's comfort zone, there is no law that requires an insurance company to offer coverage to him, as he found out.

In the end, many with custom or modified cars get shuffled off to Facility coverage, which is the expensive insurance coverage of last resort. You can lie about he equipment and modifications in your vehicle, but that could prove to be very costly when the insurance adjuster comes to look at your vehicle after a crash. First, they'll have legal grounds to deny your claim; second, they'll have legal grounds to cancel your insurance coverage for misrepresentation; and third, you get put on an industry blacklist which means that every other insurance company will probably refuse to take you on as well.

[nakkers]

These are your views and what you think is. If I were the op I would disregard your views and swap my engine to get my bike functioning. The fact is, after an engine is swapped and if the op brings the bike to a garage that garage will only look at the safety aspect of the bike. Afterwhich they will certify the bike. They could care less whether the engine is the original. It's irrelevant to safety. My ownership only has the bike model and the fuel type. The vin of ownership is stamped on the frame of vehicle/bike, not the engine. Engines/Trans/Suspension/Exhaust are viewed as replacables and does not affect the vehicle title. However, an accident or flood damaging the frame/electrics will. If the op has a clear title, he has the right to do what he wants with his bike in accordance with the provincial laws and not the views of certain individuals. It is not uncommon for car owners to source transmissions and engines from scrap yards to replace their engines. There are no laws stopping this practice.

You're right and it happens all the time. However, the insurance companies also have rights themselves. Depending on the circumstances, they can pay a lessor claim amount or refuse a claim entirely. You'll lose out on the claim and negatively impact the costs of insurance in the future. The variables are many so, addressing them here would become about as interesting as reading war and peace. At the end of the day, it's best to disclose what modifications you have so, you have the proper coverage. You're paying for it, why not insure it properly. "Penny wise is often pound foolish."

Nothing illegal but, you can't expect insurance companies to provide complete coverage to a risk that's been modified.

Lastly, if you walk in or call a broker out of the blue, it's not business they welcome with open arms. However, if you have a good relationship a broker or direct insurer, they can typically find a place to get the proper coverage without having the door slammed in you face.

JMO and coming from the industry in my past life and my spouse who works for a company that doesn't insure bikes.

Take it or leave it. Doesn't matter.

[VifferFun]

These are your views and what you think is. If I were the op I would disregard your views and swap my engine to get my bike functioning. The fact is, after an engine is swapped and if the op brings the bike to a garage that garage will only look at the safety aspect of the bike. Afterwhich they will certify the bike. They could care less whether the engine is the original. It's irrelevant to safety. My ownership only has the bike model and the fuel type. The vin of ownership is stamped on the frame of vehicle/bike, not the engine. Engines/Trans/Suspension/Exhaust are viewed as replacables and does not affect the vehicle title. However, an accident or flood damaging the frame/electrics will. If the op has a clear title, he has the right to do what he wants with his bike in accordance with the provincial laws and not the views of certain individuals. It is not uncommon for car owners to source transmissions and engines from scrap yards to replace their engines. There are no laws stopping this practice.

An insurance company does NOT have to insure any street legal vehicles that do not meet their filed eligibility criteria. ALL standard insurers that I am aware of specifically state in their eligibility criteria that they will not write a policy for a modified vehicle. This is not an opinion. This is not an interpretation. It is what it is.

[VifferFun]

It's also not uncommon for owners of modified cars to have difficulty finding an insurer who will cover them and their modified car. A buddy of mine with a perfect driving record is trying to insure a Cobra replica and he was turned flat by the first five insurance companies he tried, including the one that's covered his other vehicles and his house for the last 20 years. The car is legal as far as MTO goes, but if it and its equipment do not fall within an insurer's comfort zone, there is no law that requires an insurance company to offer coverage to him, as he found out.

In the end, many with custom or modified cars get shuffled off to Facility coverage, which is the expensive insurance coverage of last resort. You can lie about he equipment and modifications in your vehicle, but that could prove to be very costly when the insurance adjuster comes to look at your vehicle after a crash. First, they'll have legal grounds to deny your claim; second, they'll have legal grounds to cancel your insurance coverage for misrepresentation; and third, you get put on an industry blacklist which means that every other insurance company will probably refuse to take you on as well.

You are absolutely correct. Thank you.

[nakkers]

I think this forum deserves to know what insurer you represent so they can avoid it.

I just did a quote with a different insurer who I dealt with years ago and I answered the following questions

What is the value of your motorcycle, including modifications, accessories and taxes?

I entered market value + value of a nice exhaust and a bore kit.



Of this amount, how much do the modifications and accessories represent? Please include taxes?

I answered the value of these mods.

What is the capacity of your motorcycle in CCs?

I entered the new CCs after the bore kit.


And guess what! My qoute remained the same. I have two major insurers to substantiate my insurance will not change with any bore kits or mods done after I answer stated questions. Your views don't match reality. It is problematic how you stalk this forum category spreading misinformation.

Yet this is besides the fact. You have a right to swap engines or transmissions or whatever and mto or most insurers could careless. MTO only cares if the vehicles has working headlights, turn signals, brake lights. MTO cares if the vehicle can be operated safely. After a safety inspection an authorized garage will issue a safety allowing you to operate on the roads. That is what mto looks at. Autowreckers have been selling engines and transmissions to install in cars for decades and somehow this practice has been accepted as ok except by you and whoever you work for. It is not uncommon for insurers to use autowreckers to source parts to repair a car after an accident but somehow its ok when done in that context? Get real buddy.

Tell us who you work for so we the public know who to steer clear of.

A quote on-line is not the equivalent of a signed application. On the application, modifications is addressed. I found an OAF 1 for auto insurance but, I'm pretty sure these conditions apply for a motorcycle as well.

http://www.fsco.gov.on.ca/english/fo...ment/1213E.pdf

Page 2, section 4, special notes, Note 1.

Page 4 mentions the legalities....

[CruisnGrrl]

in this case the op is using the engine out of a similar model bike. the xj750 vs an xj650, the engines are almost the same except the upper casing (and can be swapped to make it a 750). they are drop in replacements of each other and the frame mounts the same... it would be kind of like the dodge dakota which had the option of a v8 and replacing it with the 3.9 v6. dropping in a smaller engine in this case isn't performance enhancing. it's not like adding a turbo or performance exhaust to the bike. op is best off calling duffy or the like to see what they say. the bike may be considered a 650

[bobjohnson]

What no one mentioned here is that there are only TWO insurance companies that will insure his bike since its more than 25 years old now. You have Jevco, which will insure anything, and State Farm, which will also insure anything if you pay them enough. Dalton Timmis MIGHT insure it if you want to say its a classic, but they wont let you ride it other than in parades and on club sponsored cruises.

Heres how it breaks down: If youre under 25, jevco, if youre over 25 and have 5 years on ANY drivers licence and are fairly accident/ticket free, State Farm. Coincidentally, both of these insurers wont really give a **** if you have a modified engine or modified bike at all, unless youre going for full coverage. If you want full coverage, your only option is Jevco. Well, that or facility, but expect to pay like 10x market rate for insurance.

I just went through this whole song and dance last year trying to insure a 1971 CB450 which was bone stock but which i was planning on modding at the time so i asked about it. State Farm and Jevco are your only options here in ontario.

If you want a good Jevco broker, give JR Duffy insurance a call. My agent is Brian, and hes a really stand up guy. Hes at all the bike shows too and he knows all his clients really well, and its super easy to get insurance set up. As for statefarm, it doesnt matter which agent you choose since theyll all give you the same quote. If youre getting ridiculous quotes and its fairly obvious the agent doesnt know wtf theyre talking about, try another agent. Seamus Kelly is a state farm agent who knows bikes pretty well. A couple of them told me i couldnt get coverage because i didnt have a "real vin" (bikes so old it doesnt have a 15 digit vin) but thats plain BS, they just didnt know how to enter it into the quote system.

[ItIsWhatItIs]

I have a nissan sentra with a blown head gasket. It's cheaper to source a motor from a scrap yard than repair the problem. If I do this, do I have to tell the insurance company or does the insurance company care, no. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. How I repair/maintain my vehicle is my business. If anything done does not effect the vehicle title (color change or whatever) or vehicle safety (lights, horn, brakes, etc) I am not obligated to say squat.

[VifferFun]

in this case the op is using the engine out of a similar model bike. the xj750 vs an xj650, the engines are almost the same except the upper casing (and can be swapped to make it a 750). they are drop in replacements of each other and the frame mounts the same... it would be kind of like the dodge dakota which had the option of a v8 and replacing it with the 3.9 v6. dropping in a smaller engine in this case isn't performance enhancing. it's not like adding a turbo or performance exhaust to the bike. op is best off calling duffy or the like to see what they say. the bike may be considered a 650

Yes -- that is the key is to disclose the modification. Whether it is an issue or not is up to the insurer.

[VifferFun]

I have a nissan sentra with a blown head gasket. It's cheaper to source a motor from a scrap yard than repair the problem. If I do this, do I have to tell the insurance company or does the insurance company care, no. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. How I repair/maintain my vehicle is my business. If anything done does not effect the vehicle title (color change or whatever) or vehicle safety (lights, horn, brakes, etc) I am not obligated to say squat.

Replacing your Sentra engine with an equivalent Sentra engine is not a big deal. If you are altering the original performance specification of your vehicle then your insurer may (or may not) be concerned -- that is up to them to decide, not you.

[ItIsWhatItIs]

Replacing your Sentra engine with an equivalent Sentra engine is not a big deal. If you are altering the original performance specification of your vehicle then your insurer may (or may not) be concerned -- that is up to them to decide, not you.

Cite a law under the highway traffic act requiring you to report any repairs or modifications to your vehicle to mto. None exist. Cite a law requiring you to report swapping your engine to The insurance company. None exist

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/navigati...e=home&lang=en

In ontario we are required by law to have liability, have the vehicle safety inspected for the road, and accurate information on the ownership to get plates that's it. The rest is your opinion. Think how you want, your prerogative. If someone wants to swap engines or replace components (exhausts or whatever) that's their business and none of yours.

[Boom King]

Cite a law under the highway traffic act requiring you to report any repairs or modifications to your vehicle to mto. None exist. Cite a law requiring you to report swapping your engine to The insurance company. None exist

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/navigati...e=home&lang=en

In ontario we are required by law to have liability, have the vehicle safety inspected for the road, and accurate information on the ownership to get plates that's it. The rest is your opinion. Think how you want, your prerogative. If someone wants to swap engines or replace components (exhausts or whatever) that's their business and none of yours.

Haha, I see that you're still at it with posting nonsense. If we are going to get into legalities about this, it's pretty simple; your insurance policy is a legally enforceable contract between you and your company. If you agree on a contract where the principle risk is a car with a stock engine capable of producing 150 hp but then afterwards you swap it out with an engine that is producing 250 hp then that constitutes as material change to the contract. You must then promptly notify your insurance company. It's all in the Insurance Act; look it up. Failure to notify or misrepresenting information gives your insurer grounds to void the policy contract.

This is pretty much stated more or less in section 1.4.1 of your contract: http://www.fsco.gov.on.ca/english/fo...ment/1215E.pdf

[ItIsWhatItIs]

Ignore the propagandists, swap your engine.

[Boom King]

Ignore the propagandists, swap your engine.

Not propaganda. Unlike yourself, some of us are actually stating facts and relevant laws: http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/sta...c25_e.htm#BK12

Termination of contracts of insurance
12. (1) Where a contract of automobile insurance has been in effect for more than sixty days, the insurer may only terminate the contract for one or more of the following reasons:
1. Non-payment of, or any part of, the premium due under the contract or of any charge under any agreement ancillary to the contract.
2. The insured has given false particulars of the described automobile to the prejudice of the insurer.
3. The insured has knowingly misrepresented or failed to disclose in an application for insurance any fact required to be stated therein.
4. For a material change of risk within the meaning of the statutory conditions referred to in section 234 of the Insurance Act. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.25, s. 12 (1); 1993, c. 10, s. 52 (9, 10).

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/sta...08_e.htm#BK232
Misrepresentation or violation of conditions renders claim invalid
233. (1) Where,
(a) an applicant for a contract,
(i) gives false particulars of the described automobile to be insured to the prejudice of the insurer, or
(ii) knowingly misrepresents or fails to disclose in the application any fact required to be stated therein;
(b) the insured contravenes a term of the contract or commits a fraud; or
(c) the insured wilfully makes a false statement in respect of a claim under the contract,
a claim by the insured is invalid and the right of the insured to recover indemnity is forfeited. R.S.O. 1990, c. I.8, s. 233 (1).

You asked to cite some laws... there they are. It's written in plain english. If you choose to try to act ignorant about them, then it's your gamble. Don't come back on here crying innocent if you fail to adhere to these laws and get caught.

[nakkers]

Ignore the propagandists, swap your engine.

Sure, take this advice. It's not his life it's affecting. You can ride for several years paying for insurance and then if you need to use the insurance you pay for, be denied a claim.

Ask Wesley Snipes what he thinks of the laws regarding paying income tax in the USA.


The 4 page insurance application clearly outlines what you are agreeing to and what your responsibilties are regarding modifications. It's not that difficult. Consulting a broker or insurance agent for such matters is generally a good idea.

Even an occassional propagandists can dispense some reasonable advice.


Cheers.

[ItIsWhatItIs]

Not propaganda. Unlike yourself, some of us are actually stating facts and relevant laws: http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/sta...c25_e.htm#BK12

Termination of contracts of insurance

12. (1) Where a contract of automobile insurance has been in effect for more than sixty days, the insurer may only terminate the contract for one or more of the following reasons:
1. Non-payment of, or any part of, the premium due under the contract or of any charge under any agreement ancillary to the contract.
2. The insured has given false particulars of the described automobile to the prejudice of the insurer.
3. The insured has knowingly misrepresented or failed to disclose in an application for insurance any fact required to be stated therein.
4. For a material change of risk within the meaning of the statutory conditions referred to in section 234 of the Insurance Act. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.25, s. 12 (1); 1993, c. 10, s. 52 (9, 10).

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/sta...08_e.htm#BK232
Misrepresentation or violation of conditions renders claim invalid
233. (1) Where,
(a) an applicant for a contract,
(i) gives false particulars of the described automobile to be insured to the prejudice of the insurer, or
(ii) knowingly misrepresents or fails to disclose in the application any fact required to be stated therein;
(b) the insured contravenes a term of the contract or commits a fraud; or
(c) the insured wilfully makes a false statement in respect of a claim under the contract,
a claim by the insured is invalid and the right of the insured to recover indemnity is forfeited. R.S.O. 1990, c. I.8, s. 233 (1).

mumbo jumbo, all conjecture on your part. Swapping engines and replacing parts with aftermarket parts is a fact of vehicle ownership. If you are to afraid to take advantage of the marketplace to maintain your vehicles and insist on running to the OEM for every part is your choice. We are in an open market, where the consumer decides how to maintain their vehicle.

Produce an MTO or Police hotline to report vehicles not using new oem parts. Because there is no such thing, your posts are nothing more than fear mongering and spreading propoganda.

[Boom King]

mumbo jumbo, all conjecture on your part. Swapping engines and replacing parts with aftermarket parts is a fact of vehicle ownership. If you are to afraid to take advantage of the marketplace to maintain your vehicles and insist on running to the OEM for every part is your choice. We are in an open market, where the consumer decides how to maintain their vehicle.

Produce an MTO or Police hotline to report vehicles not using new oem parts. Because there is no such thing, your posts are nothing more than fear mongering and spreading propoganda.

Haha, so because there's no hotline means that type of act is not an offense? Can I mount a radar detector in my car in Ontario? I mean there's no hotline for it right? So I guess by your logic, I'm in the clear. Again, keep in mind that something which is illegal is not insurable but even when it's legal an insurer may still not want to cover it. There's a big difference there that is flying right over your head.