Vehicle insurance and declaring the carry of guns ammo.
- Thread starter sanibel686
- Start date
I expect an insurance company would allow for a builder carrying wood in the premium.
sanibel686
Well-Known Member
Before April 2013 it was the responsibility of the insuree to disclose any material fact affecting risk.
A landmark court case decided that an insuree, being a lay person, is not competent to determine this.
The law changed in April 2013 to put the onus on to insurance companies to ask the questions required to determine the risk.
Insurance companies appear to have generally addressed this by asking the question will you be carrying hazardous or dangerous goods.
In my opinion this side steps what the 2013 legislation was trying to originally ring-fence as it again put the onus on the lay person insuree.
What an insurance company determines individually as hazardous and dangerous goods is entirely subjective and a matter for them to determine. It might be based on their technical and general knowledge, in our case of firearms and ammo, also probably a mix of ignorance and Prejudice.
This is why we have seen the NFU (what they consider to be a good stab things) saying they require anyone carrying more than 2000 cartridges to declare it. Then we have AGEAS reported as saying they will simply not insure anyone with firearms in the vehicle.
In short, it is my opinion that after the 2013 legislation change there is no longer such a thing as a lay person having responsibility for declaration of materiality.
A landmark court case decided that an insuree, being a lay person, is not competent to determine this.
The law changed in April 2013 to put the onus on to insurance companies to ask the questions required to determine the risk.
Insurance companies appear to have generally addressed this by asking the question will you be carrying hazardous or dangerous goods.
In my opinion this side steps what the 2013 legislation was trying to originally ring-fence as it again put the onus on the lay person insuree.
What an insurance company determines individually as hazardous and dangerous goods is entirely subjective and a matter for them to determine. It might be based on their technical and general knowledge, in our case of firearms and ammo, also probably a mix of ignorance and Prejudice.
This is why we have seen the NFU (what they consider to be a good stab things) saying they require anyone carrying more than 2000 cartridges to declare it. Then we have AGEAS reported as saying they will simply not insure anyone with firearms in the vehicle.
In short, it is my opinion that after the 2013 legislation change there is no longer such a thing as a lay person having responsibility for declaration of materiality.
Heym SR20
Well-Known Member
Add in Hydrogen - that burns pretty well.
And electric cars are highly dangerous in a crash with all the high voltages in the batteries etc.
Heym SR20
Well-Known Member
To put this into perspective here is the warnings on the back of a Lynx Aerosol and a packet of RWS ammo.
Lynx Aerosol contains “Danger - Extremely Flammable”. ammo - “ Fire Hazard - keep away from heat”
so by the logic on the OP amd insurance, every car on the road travelling with an overnight bag should be classified as transporting Dangerous Goods giving they are carrying aerosols, hairsprays and of course several litres of petrol or diesel.
jimmy milnes
Well-Known Member
Some people just can't help themselves can they... If I listed all the things I "may possibly" carry during the course of a year it would be as long as the cast list on dances with wolves..
I regularly have my dog in my truck, so should I inform my insurance company I carry livestock..
I regularly have my dog in my truck, so should I inform my insurance company I carry livestock..
Wish that was the the case, it is a class 1 hazardous goods, simple as that.
What's the bigger risk?:
1. Not declaring you carry modest amounts ammunition, a product universally and officially known not to present a significant risk, when you are not required to by law?
Or 2. Unnecessarily telling unvetted strangers your name, address, and that you have guns and ammunition?
1. Not declaring you carry modest amounts ammunition, a product universally and officially known not to present a significant risk, when you are not required to by law?
Or 2. Unnecessarily telling unvetted strangers your name, address, and that you have guns and ammunition?
Reminds us what the 1.4 S label means?
It means classified as class 1 dangerous goods. No getting away from that.
That's not quite correct is it?
Class 1 = explosives. It does not mean "dangerous goods".
4 = the hazard level " those explosives which present only a low hazard in the event of ignition or initiation," (directly quoted from HSE)
S = "Substance or article so packed or designed that any hazardous effects arising from accidental functioning are limited to the extent that they do not significantly hinder or prohibit fire fighting or other emergency response efforts in the immediate vicinity of the package"
Is the above wrong?
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
If that's travel to and from ONE place of business then that's be covered with most usual SDP terms. However if it's to and from more than one place (say for example a vet making multiple calls or a mobile hairdresser or barber or such similar) then I'd ask again.
Yes, against questions they have posed. It is called disclosure.
If they ask questions seeking facts, or ask us to provide warranties or indemnities on specific points and we fail to disclose relevant information then we can be held liable.
The notion that there is a requirement on us to disclose anything and everything without any specific requirement in the contract is a basic failure to understand how contract law works.
Fursty Ferret
Well-Known Member
Indeed.....why even mention it and complicate things
deerly departed
Well-Known Member
Rubbish
Think wrong in that to be classified class 1 they are then intrinsically a dangerous goods for transport.
UN Class Dangerous Goods Division(s) Classification
1 Explosives 1.1 - 1.6 Explosive
See table at
Classification - HSE
ADR works in such a way that classification is the precursor for everything that follows. Once a substance or article has been properly classified, table A (ADR 3.2.1) allows every other requirement to be ascertained by working logically through the columns.
WTF?? It's already been pointed out to you several times that your continued insistence about this is wrong and the law ( inter alia CIDRA 2012) explicitly and unambiguously contradicts your position.
You then insist the law is irrelevant and keep rubbishing anyone who posts anything resembling the factual. Insurance companies are regulated financial businesses, they do not and cannot ignore the law recklessly.
Think wrong in that to be classified class 1 they are then intrinsically a dangerous goods for transport.
UN Class Dangerous Goods Division(s) Classification
1 Explosives 1.1 - 1.6 Explosive
See table at
Classification - HSE
ADR works in such a way that classification is the precursor for everything that follows. Once a substance or article has been properly classified, table A (ADR 3.2.1) allows every other requirement to be ascertained by working logically through the columns.www.hse.gov.uk
Similar threads
