Is it time to finally give up the R6 dream? | Page 4 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Is it time to finally give up the R6 dream?

bikepike

Well-known member
So insurance fraud then?

Sent from my SM-N9500 using Tapatalk
Lmao, insurance fraud....he's an insured secondary driver on a leisure vehicle. I would LOVE for someone on this forum to prove to me that insurance companies will go after you and try to see if you were actually a primary driver when it comes to a claim. Insurance companies even recommended that more experienced and older drivers are primary. Total bs
 

jc100

Well-known member
Lmao, insurance fraud....he's an insured secondary driver on a leisure vehicle. I would LOVE for someone on this forum to prove to me that insurance companies will go after you and try to see if you were actually a primary driver when it comes to a claim. Insurance companies even recommended that more experienced and older drivers are primary. Total bs
You stick with that then. It’s fraud...don’t kid yourself otherwise.
 

Sebi

Don't call me Shirley
Site Supporter
Wait. What? You're swapping the bodywork every time you do a track day?
Yup, I can get all the OEM's and headlight off in about 1 hour since I wired in quick disconnects onto the wiring harness. Race bodywork takes about 30 mins to install only since the tail section needs to be wedged in and clearance is stupid tight.

You stick with that then. It’s fraud...don’t kid yourself otherwise.
Don't assume insurance companies are stupid and don't know what's going on. Like mentioned above, they often recommend to make the older/more experienced individual the policy holder.
 

jc100

Well-known member
Yup, I can get all the OEM's and headlight off in about 1 hour since I wired in quick disconnects onto the wiring harness. Race bodywork takes about 30 mins to install only since the tail section needs to be wedged in and clearance is stupid tight.



Don't assume insurance companies are stupid and don't know what's going on. Like mentioned above, they often recommend to make the older/more experienced individual the policy holder.
If that individual is the main user of the bike only. Let’s try this another way....you call your insurance company now and tell them that the person you named as the primary owner doesn’t actually ride the bike much and it’s actually you that rides it. See what they say. Come back here and let us all know.

Don't try justifying fraud. It makes all of us look bad and it raises all our insurance. If you’re found out then you’ll be uninsurable for a long long time and that will only be the start of the problems.
 

Sebi

Don't call me Shirley
Site Supporter
If that individual is the main user of the bike only. Let’s try this another way....you call your insurance company now and tell them that the person you named as the primary owner doesn’t actually ride the bike much and it’s actually you that rides it. See what they say. Come back here and let us all know.

Don't try justifying fraud. It makes all of us look bad and it raises all our insurance. If you’re found out then you’ll be uninsurable for a long long time and that will only be the start of the problems.
The problem with your statement is that it would not hold up in court. Trying to prove a secondary policy holder "used" the bike more than the primary is next to impossible. What metric would you use? KM's put on? Hours? Number of trips in a month? Suppose for the sake of the argument you decided to use number of hours the vehicle is used in a 1 month period. How could you then demonstrate beyond doubt that person X spent more hours on the vehicle compared to person Y? Remember, in this case the insurance company is the plaintiff accusing you of insurance fraud and thus the burden of proof is on them.
 

jc100

Well-known member
The problem with your statement is that it would not hold up in court. Trying to prove a secondary policy holder "used" the bike more than the primary is next to impossible. What metric would you use? KM's put on? Hours? Number of trips in a month? Suppose for the sake of the argument you decided to use number of hours the vehicle is used in a 1 month period. How could you then demonstrate beyond doubt that person X spent more hours on the vehicle compared to person Y? Remember, in this case the insurance company is the plaintiff accusing you of insurance fraud and thus the burden of proof is on them.
So have you called your insurance agent like I mentioned or are you willing to just accept that you made a false statement to an insurance agent?

Ignorance is not a defence.
 

JavaFan

gringo diablo
Site Supporter
with a property damage only claim it's unlikely there would be much of an investigation
in the event of a fatality or serious injury where the insured can be sued, and Ins Co on the hook
better believe they are gonna look for any way out of paying, like false info on the application
in that case it's up to the insured to sue them for non-payment, good luck with that
 

Sebi

Don't call me Shirley
Site Supporter
So have you called your insurance agent like I mentioned or are you willing to just accept that you made a false statement to an insurance agent?

Ignorance is not a defence.
That is irrelevant, I don't know why you are interested in my personal case. For all you know, I'm insured under my policy, or maybe I don't even ride street or maybe I ride without insurance. Point is, it doesn't matter; that's my personal information that is, to be blunt, none of your business. The argument I've proposed before still stands. I'm not interested in making this a discussion on my insurance policy and what I choose to do.

One could lie about primary/secondary on any vehicle and thus commit insurance fraud. However, proving that is not feasible. Underwriters know this and rates are adjusted accordingly for the market. You are correct, the mass market pays for this case. Such is the insurance industry, and as a gentleman once put it...
 

jc100

Well-known member
...not only that but you’re potentially asking friends, neighbours and family to perjure themselves in the event that you try to keep up the sham. You can bet that some won’t. Insurance companies are primarily there to make money....if you really think a young rider as second named rider on a super sport doesn’t throw up a flag in their office for further investigation then you might want to rethink your further education options.

Lastly...you get insurance for a reason. Someone committing fraud in this way is potentially throwing cash away as a serious incident is likely not to pay out as mentioned above.
 

jc100

Well-known member
That is irrelevant, I don't know why you are interested in my personal case. For all you know, I'm insured under my policy, or maybe I don't even ride street or maybe I ride without insurance. Point is, it doesn't matter; that's my personal information that is, to be blunt, none of your business. The argument I've proposed before still stands. I'm not interested in making this a discussion on my insurance policy and what I choose to do.

One could lie about primary/secondary on any vehicle and thus commit insurance fraud. However, proving that is not feasible. Underwriters know this and rates are adjusted accordingly for the market. You are correct, the mass market pays for this case. Such is the insurance industry, and as a gentleman once put it...
Irrelevant aside from causing increased insurance rates due to fraud etc. That’s why this bugs me and it should bug everyone that follows the rules.

I'm guessing this isn’t your case though....as it wouldn’t be smart to have avatars, riding groups and YouTube channels and a lot of posts describing fraud all searchable and in the public domain would it?
 

Blackfin

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Its fun to ride a slow bike fast but not so much a fast bike slow.
I hear this all the time but don't get it. Seems like trying to ride a slow bike fast would be an exercise in frustration and you'd look pretty silly, going full tuck, wrist wrapped around the throttle while topping out at 20kph in 1st gear. Basically, you're just fooling yourself. Trying to drive a Corolla "fast" is never going to be as much fun as doing the same thing in a Corvette. With so much more performance in reserve, with much better parts and suspension, much better sound etc the experience is just way better in the more capable machine.

I dunno. Maybe if we had something like Deal's Gap or California's mountain roads and canyons with super-tight twisties, switchbacks and hairpins that old nugget might make sense. But around here...not so much.
 

Sebi

Don't call me Shirley
Site Supporter
I'm guessing this isn’t your case though....as it wouldn’t be smart to have avatars, riding groups and YouTube channels and a lot of posts describing fraud all searchable and in the public domain would it?
Again, I am not discussing my personal situation as it is nobody's business except mine.

I hear this all the time but don't get it. Seems like trying to ride a slow bike fast would be an exercise in frustration and you'd look pretty silly, going full tuck, wrist wrapped around the throttle while topping out at 20kph in 1st gear. Basically, you're just fooling yourself. Trying to drive a Corolla "fast" is never going to be as much fun as doing the same thing in a Corvette. With so much more performance in reserve, with much better parts and suspension, much better sound etc the experience is just way better in the more capable machine.

I dunno. Maybe if we had something like Deal's Gap or California's mountain roads and canyons with super-tight twisties, switchbacks and hairpins that old nugget might make sense. But around here...not so much.
I think this point stands at the track where you'd upgrade the suspension and geometry of the 250. I spent the first 3 years and a little over 20,000km's of my riding time on a 250 and it was a blast. That being said, I thoroughly enjoy the R6 and would never go to a small displacement bike for the street. Reality is, the acceleration of a SS is something that never fails to put a grin on my face :D. Funny enough, I was considering a 250 as a track bike. It's quite a bit cheaper (both upfront and tires/parts) and it really teaches you to carry speed through a corner. Plus you can add +5 ego points every time you pass a SS ;)
 

Evoex

The God
Site Supporter
I hear this all the time but don't get it. Seems like trying to ride a slow bike fast would be an exercise in frustration and you'd look pretty silly, going full tuck, wrist wrapped around the throttle while topping out at 20kph in 1st gear. Basically, you're just fooling yourself. Trying to drive a Corolla "fast" is never going to be as much fun as doing the same thing in a Corvette. With so much more performance in reserve, with much better parts and suspension, much better sound etc the experience is just way better in the more capable machine.

I dunno. Maybe if we had something like Deal's Gap or California's mountain roads and canyons with super-tight twisties, switchbacks and hairpins that old nugget might make sense. But around here...not so much.
He's not wrong! Anytime you want a whirl on the Grom drop me a line, if you don't crack a smile i'll buy you lunch.
 

Evoex

The God
Site Supporter
Again, I am not discussing my personal situation as it is nobody's business except mine.



I think this point stands at the track where you'd upgrade the suspension and geometry of the 250. I spent the first 3 years and a little over 20,000km's of my riding time on a 250 and it was a blast. That being said, I thoroughly enjoy the R6 and would never go to a small displacement bike for the street. Reality is, the acceleration of a SS is something that never fails to put a grin on my face :D. Funny enough, I was considering a 250 as a track bike. It's quite a bit cheaper (both upfront and tires/parts) and it really teaches you to carry speed through a corner. Plus you can add +5 ego points every time you pass a SS ;)
I hear you, when i fly by SS on the Grom i'm racking up uber points!
 

raginduck

Well-known member
Site Supporter
That is irrelevant, I don't know why you are interested in my personal case. For all you know, I'm insured under my policy, or maybe I don't even ride street or maybe I ride without insurance. Point is, it doesn't matter; that's my personal information that is, to be blunt, none of your business. The argument I've proposed before still stands. I'm not interested in making this a discussion on my insurance policy and what I choose to do.

One could lie about primary/secondary on any vehicle and thus commit insurance fraud. However, proving that is not feasible. Underwriters know this and rates are adjusted accordingly for the market. You are correct, the mass market pays for this case. Such is the insurance industry, and as a gentleman once put it...
Bikes have to be insured for the lowest experienced person... You can not have your your, 'years of experience' dad be the primary on your bike and expect to be covered when you crash it.
If you situation is similar to this... You are not insured if something happens.
Very easy to prove if it's your body smeared across the scene.. and the insurance is under someone else's name.
 

Trials

Well-known member
Bikes have to be insured for the lowest experienced person... You can not have your your, 'years of experience' dad be the primary on your bike and expect to be covered when you crash it.
If you situation is similar to this... You are not insured if something happens.
Very easy to prove if it's your body smeared across the scene.. and the insurance is under someone else's name.
... so are you saying if somebody steals a motorcycle, the motorcycles insurance won't cover it? .... if things go bad

Never mind :I just found this -> https://www.insurancebusinessmag.com/ca/news/auto/insured-cars-taken-without-consent-are-considered-uninsured-ontario-superior-court-47099.aspx
 
Last edited:

Sebi

Don't call me Shirley
Site Supporter
... so are you saying if somebody steals a motorcycle, the motorcycles insurance won't cover it? .... if things go bad

Never mind :I just found this -> https://www.insurancebusinessmag.com/ca/news/auto/insured-cars-taken-without-consent-are-considered-uninsured-ontario-superior-court-47099.aspx
Makes sense, if someone takes your vehicle without consent (Ie. steals it), then it is assumed as uninsured. Clearly that is much different than if a primary policy holder adds a secondary policy holder as an occasional driver. In such a case, consent is implied. For that reason, if you hold a G class license and someone in your household also gets a G class, they are included into your policy as the Insurance company realizes implied consent. If you choose not to go this route, you can file the OPCF 28A form essentially promising that the driver will not operate the vehicle on public roads. If they do and an incident occurs, insurance will not pay out as there is a legally binding document. However, if a secondary policy holder is involved in an accident, insurance would obviously cover it. A secondary driver on a policy is still on the policy.
 

Top Bottom