Cycling insurance

vickster

Legendary Member
just thougt I better get my bikes insured as they're now more valuable than the cap on my hone insurance. Any recommendations? If I join British cycling would I save significantly on a premium?
Probably not, British cycling membership doesn't include theft insurance. Expect to pay a premium around a tenth of the bikes value I think

Can't you have them as named items on the home insurance? Mine allows bikes up to £1500 unnamed, anything over has to be named with a value. Call your insurer to discuss if you've not
 

vickster

Legendary Member
Lol. Think I'll give home insurers a call.
Make sure you also get away from home insurance, you might also want accidental damage (in case you damage the bike and it's your fault)

Assume you are a CTC or British Cycling member to to get the legal cover and 3rd party indemnity in case of an incident (where you/your bike are damaged and it's someone else's fault, or you damage someone else and it's your fault)

As ever check all the small print on the policy (especially about locks etc) and ask them to confirm on the phone so there's a record of the discussion
 
Just some food for thought: Unless you are rocking around on £6,000 bikes, I would self insure.

You are effectively paying for someone to save on your behalf, insurance companies may not even pay out in every instance of loss or theft, IMO it's a rip off. Insurance is for catastrophic loss, e.g. your house burns down and you can't afford to rebuild it. Why not just save yourself, and earn a return on your savings?! I.e. You are not paying someone else to get rich and get to keep your savings (plus returns) when in the highly likely eventuality your bike is NOT stolen.

Buy a proper set of locks and, use them correctly and you will not lose your bike. Take the time to create an anchor at home where you can lock them up safely if you fear theft at home. If someone else damages your bike, you may have the option to seek compensation from them.

If you have the value of your bike in savings, and can easily afford to replace it at any time. There is no need to insure. If you can't afford to replace the bike, you are spending too much on it in the first place!

Note: Third party liability on the other hand, is extremely important in case you hurt or injure someone else as serious injuries can cost you millions (catastrophic loss).

If you're the type of person who insures a bike, you are probably not very wealthy, now ask yourself, why are you not wealthy?
 
Last edited:

robgul

Guru
I posted this over the road on yacf a couple of weeks ago :

Adding to home insurance seems to be the most cost effective ... you need to watch out for value of bike(s) and if they have any crazy lock requirements (one offer I had required a lock that weighed very nearly more than the bike!) - and some only cover bikes at home???

When I bought a Van Nicholas last year I shopped around and ended up changing our house and contents insurance to John Lewis (via the meerkat!) .... premium was a little less than we'd been paying Lloyds TSB insurance (and that was negotiated down substantially at each renewal) ... the deal with bikes is one named (the VN) at £1,900 and then a further £5,000 value of bikes with none more than £600 ... those terms cover the rest of the bikes I have .. and there are no "you must have this lock" terms. The renewal came the other day and it's £3 more than last year. BTW the house/contents cover is better than the previous policy with Lloyds TSB)

IME the "cycle (only) policies" are all a very expensive rip-off.
===
And a further post from me :
The "at home only" comment prompted me to check my policy wording : paraphrased it's .... anywhere in Europe or countries bordering the Med, plus Canary Islands .... not covered if in a public place and not locked to an immovable object.

That would seem to cover it ... phew!
===
And added today 3 Mar : most home policies also give you third-party cover (as the CTC/BC membership

Rob
 

Leodis

Veteran
Location
Moortown, Leeds
Just some food for thought: Unless you are rocking around on £6,000 bikes, I would self insure.

You are effectively paying for someone to save on your behalf, insurance companies may not even pay out in every instance of loss or theft, IMO it's a rip off. Insurance is for catastrophic loss, e.g. your house burns down and you can't afford to rebuild it. Why not just save yourself, and earn a return on your savings?! I.e. You are not paying someone else to get rich and get to keep your savings (plus returns) when in the highly likely eventuality your bike is NOT stolen.

Buy a proper set of locks and, use them correctly and you will not lose your bike. Take the time to create an anchor at home where you can lock them up safely if you fear theft at home. If someone else damages your bike, you may have the option to seek compensation from them.

If you have the value of your bike in savings, and can easily afford to replace it at any time. There is no need to insure. If you can't afford to replace the bike, you are spending too much on it in the first place!

Note: Third party liability on the other hand, is extremely important in case you hurt or injure someone else as serious injuries can cost you millions (catastrophic loss).

If you're the type of person who insures a bike, you are probably not very wealthy, now ask yourself, why are you not wealthy?
I've never read such condescending bullshit in my life.
 
Really if you have only £5000 in assets, the daftest thing I would ever hear off would be spending it all on a bike. How will you feed and shelter yourself.

Of course if you freely hand over your hard earned greens when ever the wind blows this would explain why you only have 5k in assets.
 
Let me reiterate that insurance is about off-setting risk, the premium directly related to the risk of the loss and the value of the item insured. This isn’t about denying anyone a bike, but about thinking about the way you hand over money for a service that is essentially out to rip you off, i.e. small print exclusions in the event of which your policy and money you spent obtaining it is not worth the paper it’s written on.


Think about it, if you have £1000 in bikes, a standalone insurance policy will cost you about £60 annually. Whereas there is an alternative…


Most responsible adults will have more than £5000 in liquid assets, meaning they can afford to self-insure, if you do not, you are either financially irresponsible, prepared to take on debt in times of crisis (idiotic, as this costs you even more in the long run, why are we discussing saving a few quid on a premium if your losing out on the bigger picture???), or just less fortunate than others due to circumstance, in which case why are you in possession of £5000 worth of bikes? Without being judgemental, it’s time to get your priorities straight.


So for the sake of argument, lets continue. You have gone out of your way to accumulate £5000 worth of bike, therefore it would be reasonable to assume you can also accumulate £5000 in assets. At a conservative rate of return based on market investments (6% annually) earns you £250 each year. Assuming you don’t spend this (i.e. nothing happened to your bike), over a life time this makes you a return of £20,750 before compounding interest. I’m not wasting my time doing the maths on compounding interest for you, but that kind of figure means you’ll end up >£100,000 better off by simply having savings.


Now, do you pay out to insure your own bike knowing that the likelihood of theft or loss is incredibly small (hence small premiums on standalone policies) or do you self-insure and take practical measures to significantly reduce the risk of theft, loss or damage (quality lock, riding with care etc).


Now, the choice is yours, earn >£100,000 over a lifetime, or pay out to insure? Why do you think insurance companies make profit, even after their expenses (marketing, staff salaries, administration, company premises etc.). Where does this come from? Your premiums of course.


Insuring a £600 road bike on your house policy is one thing, but insuring a £6,000 road bike is another. One, it will not be covered because it will certainly be excluded due to its value. Two, if you did claim, your house insurance premiums going forward will take a MASSIVE hike, therefore you have simply borrowed from future self. Three, there’s no guarantee they will cough up in the event of a legitimate claim, as insurance companies will not freely hand over money and will attempt to wiggle out of any claim and the terms are deliberately worded to make this possible.
 
Top Bottom