with my mr serious hat on - anyone out there got insurance for a post 92 car with declared full de-cat?

I want that lovely burble back, discovered in an STi5R with Scoobsport tailpipe for my 03 UK STi PPP (can get Bob to re-map) - bu I also quite favour insurance....

 

Why not go half way and only remove one/two of the three cats (ermmm have the stis got 3?)...

I've just stuck a Blitz BB on mine and it sounds amazing...will soon find out the difference when I remove the middle section cat...

 

griff, decat doesnt invalidate insurance so not sure what your point is?

 

Are you sure on that one mate? If a car requires a cat to pass an mot, then it requires one for insurance. As the car has to road legal for the insurance to be valid.
dave

 

100% on this
a car is still insured even without mot, as i found out from personal experience!
tax invalidates insurance or rather the lack of it!

 

Misty is correct - if your car is not road legal I'm sure your insurance would be invalid. Howver, I'm also sure that most insurance companies will probably take your money and insure you with a full list of mods including a decat, but whether or not this would stand up in the event of a claim, who knows ? You would have to try and argue that they should know a full decat would make the exhaust emissions a bit questionable.

 

thats intersting, without an MOT how could the car be insurable if its not certificated road worthy ?

 

so are you saying that if you had a car with a hole in the rear silencer, or it was running rich, you wouldnt be insured then?

 

if no mot invalidated your insurance then you wouldnt be allowed by the police to drive to and from an mot station for a test/retest!!

 

I think you will find that you are allowed specifically to drive without MOT to and from MOT testing station, but that is all.



On my insurance policy document it states the following:

Policy Conditions
....
3. Duty to take care
You must do all that you reasonably can:
a) to maintain the car and any trailer which is insured in good working order and in a roadworthy condition.
.
.
.
d) To comply with the relevant statutory requirements and regulations imposed by any authority.

I would have thought that actions that would invalidate MOT (i.e. a full decat) would invalidate both of these requirements with regard to "duty of care".

i would expect that most policies would have some similar wording burried in there somewhere ?

 

Just FYI - a certain "Green" insurers will insure you if you declare a full decat

I believe the late great Pete C (hows he doing these days) said that if you are stopped at the road side you are within your rights to defer the test for so many days..... (14 i think??) so you can get it sorted.

Jza

 

Isn't it just illegal to drive a car which won't pass an emisions test? As opposed to it being illegal to drive a car without a cat???
If your car will pass the emisions test without a cat then is it illegal??? See what i'm getting at?

 

If this was the case, all those people with incorrectly spaced number-plates would be like-wise affected, as I know a number of people who put on legal plates come MoT time?

 

Thanks for all the input guys - I really think it is something we should get straight, I am all for bending rules and ignoring the ridiculous, - but if the insurance is invalid then:

a) waste of a grand a year
b) the consequences could be catastrophic if involved in serious accident

keep it coming

I know we have more than a few constabules in our midst and would welcome a researched and definitive verdict

Dont forget guys, if you dont wish to be too public there is PM


However, I really do wish to dispense with the cats / reduce to a minimum (quantify) - however I do not want to be uninsured....

 

dave

 

cheers Dave - did I miss your point?

 

Simular angle as the number plate spacing:

How many people are driving around with after market alloys or spoliers or catted "big bore" exhausts etc etc. which they havnt declared to their insurance? Loads! (They have said the car is standard) Surely all these cars have invalid insurance suppsoing they dont take the parts off before the insurance inspector comes round in the event of a claim? Surely a decat is no different really provided you:

a) defer the road side emmisions test (you have so many days to correct such a fault without penalty anyway)

b) put the standard exhaust back on in the event of a claim.

Just my opinions.

Andy

 

It could be argued that as every single impreza turbo on the road has an aftermarket de-cat exhaust and alloys then this is standard, thats my story and I'm sticking to it.

 

I don't have a (full) decat (anymore ) but all my mods are declared to the insurance no matter how trivial. For peace of mind if nothing else.

Year before last year, my insurance was, Standard car £630, all mods declared £730, last year all mods declared £675, this year (about 2 weeks ago) £620.

So I can't really complain, I guess I could get insurance on a standard car for about £550 or so I would think, but it's worth the extra £70 for the grins and the peace of mind.

 

That doesn't say the car has to be fitted with a cat. It just says that cars built after a certain date are subject to the cat emisions test

 

More stuff already talked about on this subject. The first link is quite interesting. Nothing about requirement for a cat.


http://www.direct.gov.uk/Topics/Moto...6&chk=tkjX%2Bp

http://bbs.scoobynet.co.uk/showthread.php?t=363588

http://bbs.scoobynet.co.uk/showthread.php?t=363011

http://bbs.scoobynet.co.uk/showthrea...2&page=1&pp=30

 

Why not put a Power Engineering High Flow Cat on and forget about it.

 

cos BRD want o fit full 3" decat to get power - also cocerned about noise as a daily driver..

 

Thanks Hugo for all those links - read the lot now!

Leaves subject pretty open though - we really ought to get one of our constabule chums/ Insurance contacts to provide definitive verdict, with evidence, so we can sleep at nights.

I really cant see how we can have our cake and eat it so to speak - CATS / emissions are there for a reason, I cant see the Ins and authorities turning a blind eye if a vehicle gets pranged.

If it is only a very small minority of car enthusiasts that do it and you are only exposed to a reasonable fine for flouting legislation and you remain fully insured - great - but how often does common sense get involved these days....?!

 

I have two issues to offers this thread. I wrote my motorbike off in June this year, it had a race pipe on it, power commander ect. I didn't have the original parts to return it to standard. The insurance engineer came out and didn't bat an eye lid at the 3" exit pipe ( cbr rr ) My insurance broker put the ****** up me with similar comments to what are on here ' they wont pay out ' ' your fcuked ' Guess what, they paid out in full without even a mention.
My m8 works for direct line in claims, no one has ever been refused a payout due to a lack of MOT either.