If my helmet was stolen ... | Page 5 | GTAMotorcycle.com

If my helmet was stolen ...

Relax said:
Agent:
"I heard back from one of the underwriters. They believe that where the accident occurs, that state's law would apply. But even if the helmet is not required, because the driver did not mitigate his/her loss by wearing a helmet, then accident benefits may reduce some of the coverages."
Click to expand...

*SNIPPED" a bunch...
So, your company doesn't have it written into the policy but benefits may be reduced. Allstate says No. You must we are a helmet.

Does that make it more palatable to ride without a helmet? Great! I've got head trauma! Surgeons get paid enough to open up my cranium but that's as far as they get paid without my pocketbook.
 
TK4 said:
How do Sikhs get away with it ?
Click to expand...
They are complying with the law. I am assuming insurance is the same price even though the risk profile is different. The insurance company could argue they are distinguishing based on risk but when the risk is directly tied to religion, I'm not sure they would win that fight and it would definitely suck for PR.
 
bitzz said:
... cuz I like to play the devil's advocate: When ever the topic of riding with no helmet comes up, I'll remind y'all of Dale Earnhart. The mechanism of his demise is possible, on the average human, at the speed of 15 KPH, (you can kill yourself running (on foot), into a wall (Dale hit the wall at about 50KPH IIRC) and there is a VERY good chance Dale would have walked away from that with a sore neck if he wasn't wearing a helmet.
... BEFORE the arguments start: Dale was going DOWN the track at over 100mph (in the X axis) but he hit the wall doing around 30mph (in the Y axis)
And now we wear a HAAS brace, which may or may not have saved Dale... but his crash is why everybody wears one.
Click to expand...
C'mon Bitzz, check the facts. The NASCAR taxicabs run around Daytona at an average speed of about 190mph. Earnhardt got turned around and headed up the banking into the wall, sure some speed was scrubbed off, but the speed upon impact was around 150mph, I reckon. Quite a bit more than 30mph, don't you think?

A few factors may have contributed to his death: an open face helmet; improperly installed seat belts; and lack of use of a head and neck support, such as a HANS or Hutchens device. In addition to the basilar skull fracture (the stated cause of death), he also sustained blunt force trauma to the head.

The HANS device was already growing in popularity prior to Earnhardt's death, but was mandated by NASCAR shortly after.

Earnhardt was not the first, nor the last, to die from basilar skull fracture. Other stock car drivers who suffered a similar fate: Adam Petty (Kyle's son, Richard's grandson), Kenny Irwin Jr., Tony Roper, Blaise Alexander, and Indy car driver Gonzalo Rodríguez, among, quite likely, many others.
 
GreyGhost said:
They are complying with the law. I am assuming insurance is the same price even though the risk profile is different. The insurance company could argue they are distinguishing based on risk but when the risk is directly tied to religion, I'm not sure they would win that fight and it would definitely suck for PR.
Click to expand...
I imagine it's different on courses, trackdays, racing etc.
 
BigEvilDoer said:
*SNIPPED" a bunch...
So, your company doesn't have it written into the policy but benefits may be reduced. Allstate says No. You must we are a helmet.

Does that make it more palatable to ride without a helmet? Great! I've got head trauma! Surgeons get paid enough to open up my cranium but that's as far as they get paid without my pocketbook.
Click to expand...

It was a clarification that not all insurers have the same requirement, contrary to what was implied by your posts (specifically that Ontario law applies outside of Ontario, and that failure to comply results in complete nullification of the policy). None of that changes whether I would wear a helmet under certain circumstances, because nothing has changed from what I expected.
 
Relax said:
It was a clarification that not all insurers have the same requirement, contrary to what was implied by your posts (specifically that Ontario law applies outside of Ontario, and that failure to comply results in complete nullification of the policy). None of that changes whether I would wear a helmet under certain circumstances, because nothing has changed from what I expected.
Click to expand...
So if you’re arguing symantics, sure, you win.
But, as a general statement, insurance isn’t the same without a helmet.
 
BigEvilDoer said:
So if you’re arguing symantics, sure, you win.
But, as a general statement, insurance isn’t the same without a helmet.
Click to expand...
In a similar duty to mitigate vein, here is a car that recently crashed in the rain on the 400. Charge laid (they dont specify the charge but likely related to the tires). I suspect insurance will pay. It would be interesting to know if insurance limits payout for driver failure. I doubt it.

2023-05-03-hwy-400-crash2.jpg;w=960;h=640;bgcolor=000000


www.midlandtoday.ca

Midland residents injured in Hwy. 400 crash

Driver, passenger sustained non-life-threatening injuries in collision Wednesday morning
www.midlandtoday.ca www.midlandtoday.ca
 
GreyGhost said:
They are complying with the law. I am assuming insurance is the same price even though the risk profile is different. The insurance company could argue they are distinguishing based on risk but when the risk is directly tied to religion, I'm not sure they would win that fight and it would definitely suck for PR.
Click to expand...
It's very likely Insurance companies prefer no helmet. Vegetables are expensive, funerals are not.
 
BigEvilDoer said:
So if you’re arguing symantics, sure, you win.
But, as a general statement, insurance isn’t the same without a helmet.
Click to expand...

It's not semantics. There is nothing in the OPA1 that indicates this.
 
Baggsy said:
I have a trunk on my bike. They'd have to take or open that first.
Click to expand...
Same here. The good thing is when it's closed there is no way to know if there's anything in it, so most thieves will just walk on by.

However, one time after locking my helmet in the trunk I return and find the trunk lock is broken and I can't open it to get my helmet. No matter how much I tried it wouldn't work. I was down in the Queen/Coxwell area and lived in Orangeville, so going home to get a spare was not an option. Never thought of going to Canadian Tire to get a cheap helmet, but that's a great idea.

Fortunately I carry a tool kit under my seat. After about 30 minutes I was able to work the hinge pins out of the Givi trunk and pry the top open just enough to get the helmet out.
 
TK4 said:
How do Sikhs get away with it ?
Click to expand...
They lobbied the insurance industry long and hard enough to convince them that Turbans are the same as helmets safety wise.
 
BigEvilDoer said:
They lobbied the insurance industry long and hard enough to convince them that Turbans are the same as helmets safety wise.
Click to expand...
In Ontario, can anyone wear a turban and ride a motorcycle without being in contravention of the law?
 
I don't think it has anything to do with a turban being as safe as a helmet. I'm pretty sure it's a just a religious exception. That said, I haven't looked into it much since I'm not thinking of converting.
 
Chris-CJ said:
In Ontario, can anyone wear a turban and ride a motorcycle without being in contravention of the law?
Click to expand...
As far as I know you need to be a member of the Sikh religion.

Either way, you won’t catch me ripping around in a turban, regardless of religious affiliation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom