# brakes modification premium increase ??



## Alzak

Hi

I would like to get some drilled discs for my car when I let my insurance company know they will put my premium up ?? 
as if I have to pay something extra for safety I will just keep standard brakes


----------



## mx_rab

Just dont tell them, its increasing performance but also safety. I wouldbt bother.


----------



## Ninja59

mx_rab said:


> Just dont tell them, its increasing performance but also safety. I wouldbt bother.


your an idiot if you do not.it is a mod.

ring them to find out. simples.


----------



## ahin4114

Discs are a consumable item, I've never heard of anybody having to declare them before. Different if you're going for a big disc setup, or changing calipers but I didn't think changing discs required you to notify.

As with anything, best bet is to ring and ask what difference it might make 'hypothetically'.

I did this about a full Yoshi' race system for my fireblade, insurance company said no difference in premium, but if I binned it, they would only replace with a standard exhaust. Now that was a performance enhancement!


----------



## CraigQQ

quick phone call to find out wont do any harm..

might put it up though as it gives the impression you plan on driving it harder/faster.


----------



## Shiny

OEM equivalent are fine, but uprated or performance discs must be disclosed.

Whilst you could argue it is a safety feature, the insurers will generally view it as a moral and physical risk increase when manufacturers own brakes should be more than sufficient.

Depending on which insurer you are with, it could range from normal terms, to an increased premium, to totally unacceptable.

Non disclosure could see you with a null and void policy, any who tells you otherwise has no idea about insurance. You are amending the original proposed risk and acceptance terms of your contract so it must be agreed by the insurers.


----------



## chr15rey

I told my insurance, they only need the slightest excuse not to pay out & brakes are a pretty major part of a car. The chap at Adrian Flux said "If you've upgraded your brakes you think you can stop quicker, so that means you think you can drive quicker"
Talking of insurance, mines due for renewal on 06/07, price hase gone from £350 last year to £530 this year! and for what reason?


----------



## CraigQQ

chr15rey said:


> Talking of insurance, mines due for renewal on 06/07, price hase gone from £350 last year to £530 this year! and for what reason?


its all the people upgrading their brakes.. then crashing because they think they can drive faster as they can stop quicker...


:lol:
:devil:


----------



## Alzak

I ask here as i have some problems before with my insurance, I give them a call with quote for alloys and because price they say was 200 more just for 1inch more than standard.
I keep orginal ones in the end but they change my policy and it takes me nearly 2 months to put things right.


----------



## [email protected]

If there is anything on the car that is modified then you should tell your insurer. Failure to do so could lead to your policy being cancelled, It could be that they will be fine with it but it is better to be sure and fully covered.

Dan.


----------



## Alzak

yeah I know there is no poitnt to pay insurance, if You havn't got it.
When You modify Your car without informing Your insurer is like You drive without insurance .


----------



## skyinsurance

Alzak said:


> I ask here as i have some problems before with my insurance, I give them a call with quote for alloys and because price they say was 200 more just for 1inch more than standard.
> I keep orginal ones in the end but they change my policy and it takes me nearly 2 months to put things right.


Sounds like you need to find a specialist insurer who can cater for modifications..


----------



## Alzak

I have found some information that is any part is replacement part that and it wear with time when I replace it is not classified as modification .
So replacing disc brakes for drilled is still classified as modification ?? there is no modification is simple plug and play same with brake pads if I change manufacture not for oem but sport ones again plug and play is classified as modification??

So changing tyres for different brand that the one which were on car when I bought it is classified as modification same size,load,speed ratio ??

Silicone hoses is mod as well ??


----------



## adlem

I'm with Flux and never have a problem insuring my mods, they've always been extremely helpful and I've just renewed with them :thumb:


----------



## Shiny

Alzak said:


> I have found some information that is any part is replacement part that and it wear with time when I replace it is not classified as modification .
> So replacing disc brakes for drilled is still classified as modification ?? there is no modification is simple plug and play same with brake pads if I change manufacture not for oem but sport ones again plug and play is classified as modification??
> 
> So changing tyres for different brand that the one which were on car when I bought it is classified as modification same size,load,speed ratio ??
> 
> Silicone hoses is mod as well ??


OEM equivalent replacement is not classed as a modification, so if you replaced Honda OEM brake pads with Unifit OEM equivalent pads then this does not need to be disclosed. If you replace them them EBC Greenstuff, which are classed as a performance upgrade, then they need to be disclosed.
If your car didn't come with grooved/drilled disks and you fit them, then they need to be disclosed.

Samco hoses should be disclosed, as they are not OEM equivalent replacement, but classed as an upgrade (although in reality it is just engine bling on most cars)

If you are unsure as to whether something needs to be disclosed, disclose it anyway and let your Insurers decide if it matters. That way you won't get a nasty shock if you are unfortunate enough to have an accident.

I've just replaced my ARB bushes with Superflex polybushes, the OEM ones are rubber, so i disclosed them. I've disclosed everything i've done from manifold to wiperblades, washer jets and led sidelights.


----------



## Ninja59

Alzak said:


> I have found some information that is any part is replacement part that and it wear with time when I replace it is not classified as modification .
> So replacing disc brakes for drilled is still classified as modification ?? there is no modification is simple plug and play same with brake pads if I change manufacture not for oem but sport ones again plug and play is classified as modification??
> 
> So changing tyres for different brand that the one which were on car when I bought it is classified as modification same size,load,speed ratio ??
> 
> Silicone hoses is mod as well ??


OEM or meeting OEM spec is not a mod. anything else is basically.

i would be unsure as to the sport pads tbh but i would ring them some might say nothing some might

regarding tyres as long as it meets the OEM specs its fine...i.e load rating, speed rating size etc. thats where alot of RF changing to non RF get caught  also the whole thing over winter tyres speed rating being lower.


----------



## PugIain

Id tell them.You crash it and the assessor notices drilled disk on a car that normally wouldnt have them,and theyll go "nope sorry kidder,it wasnt standard and you didnt tell us" besides my car does 130mph,so it will stop from 70 (the legal limit) perfectly fine.
Theyd probably want to know why the standard brakes werent good enough for you,E.G do you drive like a fool.


----------



## james_death

Make a mod and dont declare then your not insured, cars are inspected when a claim is made for say a total loss and you will loose the lot as insurance wont pay out.


----------



## Alzak

I know how it works so how about change for budget tyres which meet oem spec they do not brake like good tyres do so braking distance is longer this make car more dangerous on road.

all this is just to make more monies ...


----------



## Ninja59

Alzak said:


> I know how it works so how about change for budget tyres which meet oem spec they do not brake like good tyres do so braking distance is longer this make car more dangerous on road.
> 
> all this is just to make more monies ...


in fairness all tyres meet a minimum standard and in your example you have said they meet OEM spec. end of. you and me both know the budget tyre will have a longer braking distance but tbh if your an idiot driving up the rear end of someone and something happens personally i think your a dumbar*e and even spending money for premium ones then becomes pointless. i know there is plenty of slants on tyres, but tbh i would always go some decent rubber bands of at least mid price level....the old adage which splits people is which is better a partially worn premium or a new budget...hmm

changing something MIGHT increase your risk if you have an upgraded part for them majority of insurers. as most will assume to an extent that your not into cars and stuff...so at the end of the day yes you are a greater risk in their eyes, its not completely money driven, although admitably sometimes you have to accept that ANY business survives on cash going through it.


----------



## MB-BTurbo

Its all very well insurance sitting back and playing black and white by saying, "if its a modification from standard," etc, etc but knowing what is considered a mod is the problem. 

Is using a better brake, engine fluid a mod? Its a deviation from OEM. Tyres are a perfectly valid point as mentioned. I believe it was stated that as long as it meets the size, load, speed ratings etc then its fine. So it is more than reasonable to expect someone to apply the same logic to brakes. Same size, one has grooves, one doesn't. Is that not comparing it to tyres with different tread patterns? Some are designed for a more 'sporty drive' some are more comfort oriented, such as my Vredesteins fitted at the moment. Does this mean Im more likely to fall asleep at the wheel?

Then you come to someones old Gran who bought a second hand car with Predator pads on because the previous owner was convinced by the salesmen who was working on high commission from Black Diamond that they were what she needed. This means that she is not covered?


----------



## Shiny

As per the new Consumer Insurance Act...

_"In what circumstances can an insurer still decline a claim on the grounds on non-disclosure?

Under the Act insurers will still be able to decline a claim if it is found that a customer deliberately, recklessly or carelessly gave incorrect or incomplete information when answering questions about their circumstances, so you still have a duty to answer questions correctly. If you are uncertain on any answer, you should contact your insurer broker, or other seller of insurance.

How do I know if I am being 'careless', 'deliberate' or 'reckless' when answering questions from my insurer?

The Act describes each of these concepts and will generally expect you to take reasonable care to avoid misrepresenting your circumstances when answering questions. This means ensuring you do not give information to your insurer that you know is untrue or misleading."_


----------



## chr15rey

I had the same with mine, the answer was
"You think you can drive faster because you can stop quicker"

Don't make sense


----------



## Clancy

just make sure you take out a policy with someone who doesnt mind minor modification

ive been with admiral for years with modified cars and its never cost a penny. although their quotes go up through comparison sites, a direct quote through their site doesn't increase with basically any modifications

might do with an engine swap or whatever but all the normal things havent changed mine at all


----------



## Shiny

chr15rey said:


> I had the same with mine, the answer was
> "You think you can drive faster because you can stop quicker"
> 
> Don't make sense


Insurance is rated on the physical hazard and the moral hazard.

On the physical hazard, the risk is actually improved if a car has more efficient brakes as arguably it makes it safer.

However, on the moral hazard side of things, the insurers question as to why someone would fit enhanced brakes when the manufacturer produces a car with efficent brakes that has passed rigorous testing and R&D and are adequate for the car. The deduction from this is that the person may want to drive faster, brake later etc because they have brakes that enable them to do this. This increases the risk under the moral hazard.


----------



## Shiny

Clancy said:


> just make sure you take out a policy with someone who doesnt mind minor modification
> 
> ive been with admiral for years with modified cars and its never cost a penny. although their quotes go up through comparison sites, a direct quote through their site doesn't increase with basically any modifications
> 
> might do with an engine swap or whatever but all the normal things havent changed mine at all


Admiral would have covered all the mods on my car, other than a "throttle body coolant bypass" and "lightened flywheel".

I could understand the flywheel, but the coolant bypass refusal did make me smile.


----------



## alan hanson

would bike racks that are on the car 2-3 months of the year need declaring? only just thought about it now


----------



## MB-BTurbo

Shiny, some really valuable contributions made there. Thanks


----------



## millns84

I'm sure there's some kind of loophole regarding consumable parts, surely this would apply to discs and pads etc?


----------



## steveo3002

funny old world isnt it

so you can run your high performance car on 4 mismatched 1.7mm tread ditch finders vs the michelins it came with new and thats fine


----------



## MB-BTurbo

I would like to know if there has been a case law involving insurance companies not paying out due to disc breaks having holes in them or pads are deemed to be 'better'. I can't see how they would get it past the 'reasonable person' test, which is perhaps what is suggested in the quote shiny provided us with. Is the person who either buys a car with 'updated' discs/pads or buys them mid ownership expected to know that they should be declared? Insurance companies may well prefer you to declare these but I can not see how they can wash their hands of a claim if you do not.


----------



## Bero

Officially you should of course declare it, by posing your thread you probably know that.



MB-BTurbo said:


> I would like to know if there's been any case law involving insurance companies not paying out due to disc breaks having holes in the or pads are deemed to be 'better'. I can't see how they would get it past the 'reasonable person' test, which is perhaps what is suggested in the quote shiny provided us with.


The questions would be along the lines of: -

"Were the standard disks you removed worn to the point of needing replaced?"
"Why did you change your brakes to ones that are drilled?"
"What does the drilling do?"
"Who manufactured the disks?"
"What information do they provide on the disks compared to standard ones?"

and the bonus question "Why after posing on DW and being told by insurance experts you need to inform them you failed to do so?"

If the answers lead to the conclusion that you believe the disks are a performance upgrade you're declaration then be classified as reckless etc.

I had grooved discs on the rear of my Impreza......I never declared them, but was aware of the potential consequences.


----------



## transtek

Slightly OT, but I have a related question:
If you buy a second-hand car that has been modded by the previous owner, but you are not aware of the mods (such as EBC brake pads), so you don't declare them to the insurer, could the insurer refuse to pay a claim in case of an accident for failure to disclose?


----------



## Bero

transtek said:


> Slightly OT, but I have a related question:
> If you buy a second-hand car that has been modded by the previous owner, but you are not aware of the mods (such as EBC brake pads), so you don't declare them to the insurer, could the insurer refuse to pay a claim in case of an accident for failure to disclose?


If this was an honest situation them you would be ok, as you would pass the following: -

"a customer deliberately, recklessly or carelessly gave incorrect or incomplete information when answering questions about their circumstances"

If you were genuinely not told about the uprated brake pads or a 2ltr engine that had been bored out to 2.2l etc then you would be fine. If the stakes were high enough......and you were declaring fraudulently be prepared for an investigator to find the original selling advert, and/or your posts on a forum speaking about your 2.2ltr conversion!

If the car had a big bore exhaust, body kit and 20" spinners would be a lot different!


----------



## MB-BTurbo

Bero said:


> Officially you should of course declare it, by posing your thread you probably know that.
> 
> The questions would be along the lines of: -
> 
> "Were the standard disks you removed worn to the point of needing replaced?"
> "Why did you change your brakes to ones that are drilled?"
> "What does the drilling do?"
> "Who manufactured the disks?"
> "What information do they provide on the disks compared to standard ones?"
> 
> and the bonus question "Why after posing on DW and being told by insurance experts you need to inform them you failed to do so?"
> 
> If the answers lead to the conclusion that you believe the disks are a performance upgrade you're declaration then be classified as reckless etc.
> 
> I had grooved discs on the rear of my Impreza......I never declared them, but was aware of the potential consequences.


This isn't about me as I'm not in such a positions. I do, however, have a keen interest in these matters. Should the time arise when I wish to change the type of pads I want to be best placed in knowing whether they should be/need to be declared. Just because the insurance company say they need to be doesn't mean that you are under legal obligation to do so, and it is this that I find interesting.

I am also interested in where the burden of proof lies. Surely you would be covered until it is proven that you were otherwise aware of what you were doing. It would be very hard to prove either way. Supposing a garage has 'these discs' that were better quality and recommended, would the average joe even consider the need for telling their insurance company? This is neither dishonest or wreckless. I know of someone else who bought grooved discs. He couldn't care less whether they were, he bought them because they were rust resistant. It was only because the rust resistant versions only came in grooves that he ended up with them. seems to be many points to prove.


----------



## Shiny

There is a legal obligation as it is a contract. Insurers ask questions and form a contract based on your answers. If you choose to non disclose or misrepresent, then your contract could be voided. The contract is based on utmost good faith as they are relying on you to provide correct and honest answers.

Things have changed slightly recently as a result of the Consumer Insurance Act. I'm on my phone so apologies for the short reply, but it is explained in more detail here https://www.abi.org.uk/Insurance-an...he-Consumer-Insurance-Act-means-for-customers


----------



## Bero

Shiny said:


> There is a legal obligation as it is a contract. Insurers ask questions and form a contract based on your answers. If you choose to non disclose or misrepresent, then your contract could be voided. The contract is based on utmost good faith as they are relying on you to provide correct and honest answers.
> 
> Things have changed slightly recently as a result of the Consumer Insurance Act. I'm on my phone so apologies for the short reply, but it is explained in more detail here https://www.abi.org.uk/Insurance-an...he-Consumer-Insurance-Act-means-for-customers


I imagine the 1st test would be 'did the modification make a material impact to the risk/contract'. If it was a gt30 turbo the answer would be undeniably yes.

Different brake pads that are the same size as OE and cheaper....although possibly sold as performance......is questionable.

Even more so if it was a garage who installed them and gave you that option without mentioning any claims of performance improvement.


----------



## Shiny

In the good old days, if someone had their door kicked in, if an assessor came out and spotted uprated brakes, the claim for the kicked in door could be refused and the policy could be null and void due to non-disclosure.

Under the new Consumer act, from what i understand, if the brakes would have been acceptable if they were originally disclosed, or subject to an extra premium, then the claim would be dealt with (subject to the client paying the extra premium if there was a charge for the brakes). 

I deal mainly with Commercial Insurance nowadays and the rulings under 2015 act are that a breach of warranty would not affect a claim if the breach had no bearing on the occurance of the claim. This may well apply to the personal act, i.e. the door damage would be paid even though the brakes had been non-disclosed, as the brakes had no bearing on the door being kicked in. I'm not 100% on this.

Non disclsoure goes back to the innocent, reckless, deliberate. 

If you had your brakes changed at a garage and, in the very unlikely event, they fitted performance pads without informing you, then this would be innocent. You can not disclose something you were not aware off.

If the brakes were fitted with your knowledge, but you didn't consider your insurance, even though you had told your insurers that your car was not modified when you took out the insurance, then this is likely to be considered reckless.

If you knew about the brakes, new your insurers had be told, but didn't in case they charge you extra money etc., then this would be deliberate non-disclosure.


----------



## Shug

Not wishing to provide my insurers with an easy win should I need to claim, I covered every modification with my insurers. They left half of them off the policy and when queried, they said the ones listed were all they cared about.
Which included the uprated brakes. (plus the engine change, carbs, adjustable shocks and exhaust and alloys)
They didn't seem fussed on the interior changes (seats, dials, steering wheel, stereo etc)


----------



## Shiny

10+ years ago there were only a handful of insurers that would accept modifications. It was a strict "unacceptable" with the rest of them.

There is now more flexibility with some insurers, but still many that will not allow any modifications at all.

I've disclosed all of my mods on both cars, from a lightened fly wheel, exhaust, induction etc all the way down to sill plates, wind deflectors, washer jets and wipers.

Two bits of advice i would always give are -

1. Disclose all you mods, no matter how trivial they may seem, and let your Insurers decide if they are relevant.
2. If you are planning to mod your car, check with your Insurers before  you go ahead. Last thing you want is to spend a grand getting coilovers on your car only to find out that they are unaccpetable to your Insurers, so you will be faced with having to find alternative insurance and a new annual policy. This is especially important if you are building up your NCB.


----------



## Bero

Shiny said:


> If you had your brakes changed at a garage and, in the very unlikely event, they fitted performance pads without informing you, then this would be innocent. You can not disclose something you were not aware off.


You input is always appreciated :thumb:

Although I think this is quite possible.

"The standard Brembo replacements are £250, or we can fit DBA/Mintex/godspeed that are £200"

possibly with "or cheap nasty pattern parts for £150...but do you want to rely on them?" added at the end.

"Please fit the ones that cost £200 please."

The issue is NO named brake manufacturer will speak about, being average, or the same as others. They ALL speak about 'superior stopping', 'ahead of the competition' etc which could categorise them as 'performance'.....although they may be cheaper then OE...and may or may not be 'better' than OE, some of the ColourStuff pads were infamous for being dirt cheap but singing their praises for being awesome....but people finding them to be terrible!

In any case, what is a 'performance' version? One that stops better? One that has a higher friction co-efficent? One that creates less brake dust? One that runs cooler? One that fades less? What if your new pads do 2 things better, and 2 things worse?

Even pattern parts cant match the OE ones in all respects.....I know it's an unanswerable conundrum.....and there is no straight forward answer without it being solved in a civil case.....

Of course the best answer is inform the insurer of everything then you're 100% covered


----------



## Shiny

To be fair, the likes of Ferrodo, Mintex, EBC all make OEM replacement equivalents. I think they sometimes refer to them as "premium", on the basis they may produce less dust or last longer.

However, if you have DS2500, 1144s or Green/Yellow/Redstuff etc, these are clearly sold as a "performance" pad, offering improved, sportier (i.e. performance) braking over and above OEM. Also marketed as the likes "fast road use" or "track day" use.

OEM quivalent replacement consumables are pretty much to the manufacturer's original spec, some may be of less quality, some may be of better quality, but still to OEM requirements. These are not a problem with insurers.

Performance parts, such as brakes that offer enhanced braking over and above OEM etc, must be disclosed.

Incidentally, when i bought a Supersprint exhaust for an old Accord of mine, I told the Insurers it was only fair as I currently had a cheap Bosal exhaust (OEM equivalent) but it was so rubbish that i lost performance, so i was in credit with them  It worked. :lol:


----------



## Delboy_Trotter

Declare, declare and declare - yes, it could be argued that its a saftey thing, but its a modification from the OEM spec.......

I narks me as i wanted to fit a stage 1 exhaust system to my classic mini when i was 18, but my insures said it would jack my premium, so i didn't, because most of the specialist wouldn't touch me till i was 21 i waited till i was 21 and paid up, so why should you get away with it?

All the mods on my VW T4 are declared, (lowering, egr blank, de-cat, interior) and i pay a bit extra for it, but i know im covered.

Sorry for the rant, but it winds me up......if you cant take the hit or don't want your premium to go up, don't do it


----------



## MB-BTurbo

No one here is saying you should not declare mods. Just for the record, I have several superficial mods declared, right down to tinted windows as I have to much to lose in the event of a large non payout. We were discussing whether a few holes or grooves in discs are deemed, or should be deemed, mods in the first place. We then digressed a little, playing devils advocate by discussing parts fitted to cars that we weren't aware of or weren't aware would even be classed as mods. It is a healthy discussion bringing up some interesting points, don't feel narked, its ok.


----------

