Glad we didn't register at 3500 (1 Viewer)

[Jasz]

Thanks to looking at various posts on this site before buying our van, I realised that registering our van at 3500 would not give us much payload, so I took the option of registering it at 3650.
We have finally got round to getting it weighed and it came in at 3540kg, loaded ready for a trip including bikes on the back, full tank of fuel and 2 gas cylinders (1 for the Cadec).
Only 2 people, 1/4 tank (35l) of water and only 3 bottles of wine!! At least we are now ok for some more wine as long as there are no more passengers

 

[tacr2man]

10.5t here, I don’t know how you 4000kg ers cope.

11.9 tonne here dont know how you 10.5t cope

 

[tonyandcarol]

I have idea, but, I suspect that insurance companies would use overloaded vans to get out of a claim

I agree i think that would be my biggest worry plus safety. i have struggled to keep my van under weight but dont realy want to up rate it.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[EX51SSS]

Dave doesn't do tongue in cheek ........... he means everything he says ............ honest. Would I lie to you?

Well it depends on who's on the panel

 

[EX51SSS]

11.9 tonne here dont know how you 10.5t cope

Don't know how any of you do

 

[gus-lopez]

How often do you come across a 3.5t bridge? If any at all they are probably down a narrow road that is not suitable for a MH anyway.

Van can be down plated to 3.5 ton if required, LEZ is normally based on the emissions not the weight isnt it?

So as non commercial drivers which we all are, might we reasonably expect a overloading guidance leaflet for an offence ? or perhaps if we happen to come up against an officious officer we might get fined £100 for an overload of up to 10% which happens to be substantially less than paying someone to uprate our vehicle, Hmmm this needs some thought.[/QUOTE]

Unfortunately, in the event of an insurance claim the insurer will have a very different view issuing a "You are not covered" guidance leaflet. Perhaps prudent to add into your little thought [/QUOTE]

No they cannot " get out" of paying out ALL 3rd parties. That is the law . Which is basically what you are insuring against your inability to pay for everyone elses costs in the event of a 'fault' accident. If it is a no fault accident then you are claiming from the other company.
as long as you have insured a vehicle legally, you cannot legally have 'no insurance' as 3rd party claims are always covered.That was the law in the UK long before the common market/EU was thought of & is now the same all over.

Just coming to the end of second long trip around France this year. I have lost count of the number of 3.5 restriction signs we have thankfully been able to drive though.
We prefer to visit and stay in smaller pLaces and the 3.5 restriction is common.

I just object to the cameras flashing me as they think I'm over the weight in the wrong lane.

Unfortunately, in the event of an insurance claim the insurer will have a very different view issuing a "You are not covered" guidance leaflet. Perhaps prudent to add into your little thought

So please explain to me how on earth the insurance company would weigh your vehicle? If it’s a minor bump you exchange details and drive on if it’s more serious your probably going to be recovered by a low lowder and stored in a compound until the decision is made to repair or write the m/h off.[/QUOTE]

You are of course correct in the example you give. However, my thought process was more focused on a major road traffic incident where God forbid there are fatalities involved for example. I can assure you from experience that vehicles will most definitely be weighed and if you are found to be outwith the legal limits the onus of responsibility starts to shift and if you were found to be the guilty party in such a case I don't think many of us could survive financially with implications not worth even thinking about. For me it's not worth the gamble. When you start looking at severity of the accident to probability of being caught, it says it all, stay above the law it is just not worth it.[/QUOTE]


See first reply. They have to pay all 3rd parties. They might try it on to recover it from you .

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[stewartwebr]

See first reply. They have to pay all 3rd parties. They might try it on to recover it from you .[/QUOTE]

I am no legal beagle (but my Mother is, but need to ask) But when you read your insurance documents it clearly states that you must operate and comply with the law of the country as a term of insurance. If your vehicle is overweight you are not in compliance. If I am wrong (may well be) and the insurer is legally still required to pay a claim of 3rd Parties. In the event of a fatality etc where you the Policy Holder gets into legal compensation battles is the fact that the Policy Holder is being sued to benefit the third party covered under the Third Party as you state. I would think not and assume this would be your responsibility and the insurer would hang you out to dry with no support what so ever.

 

[peterc10]

No they cannot " get out" of paying out ALL 3rd parties. That is the law . Which is basically what you are insuring against your inability to pay for everyone elses costs in the event of a 'fault' accident. If it is a no fault accident then you are claiming from the other company.
as long as you have insured a vehicle legally, you cannot legally have 'no insurance' as 3rd party claims are always covered.That was the law in the UK long before the common market/EU was thought of & is now the same all over.

But, like most other people, I insure my motorhome fully comp rather than 3rd party at a bigger premium specifically because I want to be able to recover my costs even if the accident was my fault. And I would not be able to do that, which could be very expensive if the Moho was written off. And, if you have any assets (house etc), the insurer will almost certainly come after you to recover at least some the 3rd party costs they have incurred.

So I would rather be safe than sorry.

 

[gus-lopez]

See first reply. They have to pay all 3rd parties. They might try it on to recover it from you .

I am no legal beagle (but my Mother is, but need to ask) But when you read your insurance documents it clearly states that you must operate and comply with the law of the country as a term of insurance. If your vehicle is overweight you are not in compliance. If I am wrong (may well be) and the insurer is legally still required to pay a claim of 3rd Parties. In the event of a fatality etc where you the Policy Holder gets into legal compensation battles is the fact that the Policy Holder is being sued to benefit the third party covered under the Third Party as you state. I would think not and assume this would be your responsibility and the insurer would hang you out to dry with no support what so ever.[/QUOTE]

No. Just because you are not legal does not give the insurance company the right to attempt to get out of paying the 3rd party claims. They have to pay & then sue you.That is the law & always has been.
The insurer has to pay out all the 3rd parties regardless. They can then attempt to recover the costs from the person at fault . They cannot 'fob off' a claimant , although some will try or at least the agent will, by stating that you would have to claim yourself off the guilty party.
It has always been that way in the UK.

But, like most other people, I insure my motorhome fully comp rather than 3rd party at a bigger premium specifically because I want to be able to recover my costs even if the accident was my fault. And I would not be able to do that, which could be very expensive if the Moho was written off. And, if you have any assets (house etc), the insurer will almost certainly come after you to recover at least some the 3rd party costs they have incurred.

So I would rather be safe than sorry.

& that has become the problem. You are no longer insuring against an accident & so driving sensibly, knowing full well that an at fault accident will cost you personally but in many cases ,especially with the youngsters these days, driving without caring that an accident will badly affect your finances.

& insurance companies, certainly in the UK , have lost sight of the fact of what they are there for. To provide compensation in the event of an accident. It is a gamble. Some times they will lose & they should not be penalising the unfortunate who has suffered the accident. They never used to. Just swallowed it -

They do not penalise you here apart from any loss of ncb. Certainly do not increase premiums by extraordinary amounts. Apart from the sky high amounts we pay normally.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[peterc10]

& that has become the problem. You are no longer insuring against an accident & so driving sensibly, knowing full well that an at fault accident will cost you personally but in many cases ,especially with the youngsters these days, driving without caring that an accident will badly affect your finances.

I don't know how you could possible suggest that I no longer drive sensibly because I know I am covered by insurance. And I am sure that that comment would apply to almost everybody else on this forum.

As they say, accidents do happen and even the most careful drivers make mistakes or misjudgements sometimes, because we are all humans. And just because I did nothing wrong does not mean that I will be covered with in an accident. For that to happen I will need to find that somebody else is at fault, and that may not be the case. There are such things as "acts of god". The driver coming the other way having a truly unexpected medical episode, or the tree or power lines blowing down in a storm or a rockfall on a road just as you drive past, or the campsite being flooded or your motorhome catching fire, or ......... or ......... or.

And look what happened to me in Belgium last year. A Belgian driver reversed into me whilst we were parked up in an official motorway service area car park having lunch. It has taken the insurance company well over 12 months to get them to admit liability. How long would it have taken me and what liklihood would I have had at getting it sorted out by myself?

For all these reasons that is why I have and will always have fully comp insurance. I do not mind if you decide not to, but I am quite happy to pay for the peace of mind that fully comp insurance gives. And that will not effect my driving, good or bad, one iota.

 

[soreeyes]

There are chances of being weighed as the police and dvsa carry out stings stopping caravans and motorhomes .
I live near a dvsa weighbridge and some days they will have stings stopping all the motorhomes and caravans and will check them over and stick them through the bridge .

I should think the problem would be if overweight is not just the fine but when they say "sorry sir but I can not allow you to proceed with the offending weight " and you wave goodbye to the other half standing at the side of the road waiting for a taxi .

 

[EX51SSS]

There are chances of being weighed as the police and dvsa carry out stings stopping caravans and motorhomes .

Usually at these areas, VOSA usually :target' particular vehicles on a given day.
All white hgv
Liveried hgv
Foreign hgv
Orange plated hgv
As you said
Motorhome
Caravans
Taxi's
Coaches
They tend, but not always, pull in the same type of vehicle that day and makes it easier because they're set up on that type
They also usually have DSS to check whether claiming benefits too and it's usually the Police that intercept but could be VOSA themselves.
They also check for fuel too so that you're not avoiding VAT by using red diesel.
Tbf, the chances of being stopped on any one day is pretty rare but not impossible.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[EX51SSS]

Actually, looking at the debates going on