Exactly, and anyone not getting the exact Ts&Cs in black & white is leaving themselves exposed.
Driving with an undeclared, decatted exhaust could cost a hell of a lot of money.
Can you ever run a de-cat exhaust and actually be insured? Somewhat of a grey area?
- Thread starter norm
- Start date
Exactly, and anyone not getting the exact Ts&Cs in black & white is leaving themselves exposed.
Driving with an undeclared, decatted exhaust could cost a hell of a lot of money.
Up until my car has been put back to standard this weekend, my car passed it's MOT fine each year with a sports cat.
My bike is decatted and passes MOT fine because a motorbike doesn't need a cat.
why would an insurance payout when they don't need to? If you were in a moderate accident you can't exactly sneak into the impound yard and put a cat back on.
Think an insurance company investigating if the car had/has a cat fitted after an accident, would 1 in a billion, it's not like have no cat would have caused the accident....
Wow you've written off a lot of GTR's. Name change to Godzilla killa?
Last edited:
It is for sure a grey area.
Essentially insurance companies allowing a modification to a car which technically makes then un-road worthy, it is why a de-cat in the US is called a test pipe for example and is only supposed to be used for off road use.
Also the worse offenders do actually tend to be supercar owners, all those Mclaren 720S running around making 900-1000HP are running straight pipes, insured and mods declared but an MOT failure. Was literally at Mclaren and a 950HP 720S Spider was in for a new fuel pump which had no cats. Loads of 458 owners do the same as of course do Lamborghini owners as on said cars it seems to enhance the sound, I've just always found de-cats are smelly and sound woeful compared to sports cats.
My 458 and 600 LT stock, they shall remain that way, the 458 sounds awesome as it is and the 600 LT is plenty fast enough.
But one of my cars does have straight pipes, but its legal, the Corvette.
Essentially insurance companies allowing a modification to a car which technically makes then un-road worthy, it is why a de-cat in the US is called a test pipe for example and is only supposed to be used for off road use.
Also the worse offenders do actually tend to be supercar owners, all those Mclaren 720S running around making 900-1000HP are running straight pipes, insured and mods declared but an MOT failure. Was literally at Mclaren and a 950HP 720S Spider was in for a new fuel pump which had no cats. Loads of 458 owners do the same as of course do Lamborghini owners as on said cars it seems to enhance the sound, I've just always found de-cats are smelly and sound woeful compared to sports cats.
My 458 and 600 LT stock, they shall remain that way, the 458 sounds awesome as it is and the 600 LT is plenty fast enough.
But one of my cars does have straight pipes, but its legal, the Corvette.
One of my best friends is a relatively senior level guy in car insurance on the claims side. We talk about stuff like this from time to time and I post what I take from my conversations with him here and in previous threads in the hope that maybe people will be saved from themselves.
Sure, you might bin a tuned GTR and get a payout - likely in fact if it’s a single vehicle accident where the loss is five or maybe scraping into low six figures. That’s been said above as a “worst case scenario” and perhaps you can recover the car and tamper with it post crash etc…
That absolutely isn’t the worst case scenario.
The actual worst case scenario is where you ruin one or more people’s lives in ways that need significant, lifelong medical care. The bills for that can run into the millions quite easily. IF - and it is very much an if - your insurer can demonstrate that, had you been honest with them (and there’s case law about what that means), they wouldn’t have issued you with a policy then you are in an extremely serious position. The insurer is obligated to pay out under the RTA (as is/was the MIB in the case of a policy made void from inception - which can’t be done in the U.K. any more). In the case where the policy is reduced to only cover the obligations under the RTA they will not be doing that on an indemnity basis. What that means in reality is they are coming after you for their entire costs. That £1k/week credit hire bill for their courtesy car? On you. The entirety of their claims for medical care? On you. The limits for those sorts of things are staggering, with the largest claims in the order of £20m+.
You can bet your life that faced with a £20m liability the insurer is going to leave no stone unturned when it comes to material misrepresentation.
Is it worth it?
Sure, you might bin a tuned GTR and get a payout - likely in fact if it’s a single vehicle accident where the loss is five or maybe scraping into low six figures. That’s been said above as a “worst case scenario” and perhaps you can recover the car and tamper with it post crash etc…
That absolutely isn’t the worst case scenario.
The actual worst case scenario is where you ruin one or more people’s lives in ways that need significant, lifelong medical care. The bills for that can run into the millions quite easily. IF - and it is very much an if - your insurer can demonstrate that, had you been honest with them (and there’s case law about what that means), they wouldn’t have issued you with a policy then you are in an extremely serious position. The insurer is obligated to pay out under the RTA (as is/was the MIB in the case of a policy made void from inception - which can’t be done in the U.K. any more). In the case where the policy is reduced to only cover the obligations under the RTA they will not be doing that on an indemnity basis. What that means in reality is they are coming after you for their entire costs. That £1k/week credit hire bill for their courtesy car? On you. The entirety of their claims for medical care? On you. The limits for those sorts of things are staggering, with the largest claims in the order of £20m+.
You can bet your life that faced with a £20m liability the insurer is going to leave no stone unturned when it comes to material misrepresentation.
Is it worth it?
I have a 200 cell sports cat that's passed about 5 MOT emissions tests (BCS Powervalve exhaust) The testers have never said anything to me about having to get it hot. Maybe the cheap ones are more of an issue?
I see it on the time with car youtubers, de-catting and always think how are they passing an MOT, the same with tinted front windows. I like Matt Armstrong, but you can see half of his cars should fail an MOT when he says he says he's getting one tested.
I had tinted front windows(not windscreen) on my car from when I bought it. It only had one MOT but nothing was mentioned about it
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2018
- Posts
- 1,400
Sports cats are not road legal even if they pass an MOT. They are not type approved and thus not road legal. Replacement cats must be type approved to be road legal.
No different to a decat from a legality perspective. Only difference is you can pass the emissions test now.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2018
- Posts
- 1,400
Only if the sports cat is type approved, then it is fully legal. MOT will just check for emissions.