The BritishV8 Pub

Retirement accounts? Don't think so, Rob. Get your drift, though.

Guys, several of you are contributors to the MGB-Roadmaster project, which is on track to be completed in time for next year's V8 meet. Wouldn't it be fantastic if we could take turns driving it around the neighborhood? Now it is obvious to me that any one of you are far more expert on the topic of insurance than I am, but I'm quite convinced that what with the fact that business fleets, rental cars and such are able to obtain insurance that somewhere out there is a policy which will allow us to do just that. I'm not the person to be working on that part of the problem. There are some things I do well and some that I do poorly, this is in the second category, and I don't think you want me doing this for a whole bunch of really good reasons. Somebody else is going to have to step up, maybe a bunch of somebodies.

So what do you say? Can you find us that policy?

JB

refresh my memory Jim, how was the group set up? Was it set up as a non-profit org? LLC? I'll volunteer to get the insurance info but will need to know if the car will be registered under a person's name or?

"Was it set up as a non-profit org? LLC?"

Yes.

Rob, Carl is correct. The organization,"British American Deviant Automotive Sports-car Society, LLC is registered in the state of Kentucky as a non-profit organization or NLC. (B.A.D.A.S.S.,LLC for short) Probably the extension on the name should be corrected to reflect the non-profit status but I've not spent enough time on it to see how to do that properly. Maybe over the winter I can do that.

The organization is a separate legal entity in and of itself, and the car is titled in the name of the organization.

Of the several possible options out there, some we might check into could include such things as fleet insurance, rental properties, and the posting of a bond. A creative agent should be able to come up with others. I see no reason for us to consider ourselves to be bound by traditional concepts as long as we achieve the goals of allowing our contributors to drive the car and limiting liabilities in the event of a mishap. The risks should be much lower than those faced by a car rental agency. Consider, each of our contributors, possibly without exception, are low risk policy owners with similar cars. With the exception of annual meets, only one specific contributor will be driving and in possession of the car at any given time, and each possessor is duty bound to confirm the integrity of the car both upon taking and delivering the car, the equivalent of a dozen safety inspections per year. We can easily provide the agency with a chain of possession in advance so that they can confirm the stats of each member in a given year's rotation schedule. We can require that the car be delivered back to the organization at each year's annual meet for an annual inspection, and we can limit the uses of the car at the annual meet to autocrosses and meet related driving by specific members if needed.

JB

Spoken as a true attorney, Boss!

When I had my car insured with Grundy, the policy spelled out very clearly in large letters what the limitations on usage were. I just went through my collector car insurance policy with State Farm with a fine toothed comb, looking for the paragraph that listed these restrictions, and couldn't find any. Called my agent and she confirmed that there aren't any, just that the car can't be a "primary use" vehicle. The only official statement of that is on the renewal form, where it lists the "agreed" value. It simply states:

"Ordinary us of vehicle....
Limited use antique/classic"

Yahoo! I'm going to drive that baby now. It still won't be a daily driver, but it will get a lot more use.

Dan:
I've had all my cars and motorcycles insured with State Farm (Canada) for thirty plus years. When I approached my agent to insure my MGB v8 conversion I was told that they would not insure it as it was not a stock vehicle.

great news Dan - enjoy the new found freedom!

Phil,

When I insured mine, I had to send the agent a bunch of pictures of the car and a detailed written description of the modifications (they had a standard form to fill out for that). You might want to try them again, maybe they've changed thier policy recently. Or, perhaps, it's just the difference between the Canadian SF and the American SF. Or maybe Canadian law has something to do with it.

If our cars were to be put under a magnifying glass just like the state of Virginia have started to do with muscle cars and modifications, then a claim could be denied. For example, my front end says "FOR RACING ONLY" and all my four wheels have disc brakes that says "NOT DOT APPROVED"; in the event of an accident that lets say I would have caused and the liability cost ran seriously high to the insurance. Of course, I would also have convinced the insurance to cover my MG for $25,000.00 and demanded to be compensated for my total lost at the same time. I believe that I may be in for a serious fight with the insurance company.

The adjuster shows up and notices the above mentioned “disclaimer markings” on the modified parts and about a week later, I get a letter in the mail stating that all claims are being denied. I take the insurance company to court but the judge rules that the insurance company gave me coverage in good faith by assumption that the car met all of the Virginia DOT laws. Therefore he renders a judgment against me in lieu of a deceiving and dishonest contract in my part.

This is a two fold issue, “liability” and “comprehensive” coverage. I could live with the total lost of my ride but liability suit may ruin my life.

Call me paranoid but, I have played these scenarios in my head many times over and I came to these conclusions; keep the coverage simple, such as in the NADA collector car book value; second, avoid as much as possible “NON DOT” approved parts (I have too many of those) or marked “FOR RACING ONLY” (I also have one of those), try in using the old school hot-rodding approach by adapting other car(s) DOT approved parts. And last, hope for the best that these parts mentioned above is not noticed by the insurance adjuster.

I’m not an expert in the ramification of automobile modification, but, I know that most of us walk a fine line; the truth is that insurance company by nature will go to great extreme to deny any claim in the first place, we’ve all gone through some agitating business; they don’t play fair and hire better lawyers.

I’ve read most of your postings and I must say that it revived some of my concerns; maybe, someone will come up with some applicable wisdom and guide line for all of us to follow. Other than that, Dan got it right by saying “take your chances”

My two cents!