Author Topic: BMW to start charging subscription fees to use features already in your car  (Read 15256 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online bdunham7

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7727
  • Country: us
And insurance due to a modification not approved by the manufacturer

Y'all must have some extra-special insurance laws there in the UK.   :scared:
A 3.5 digit 4.5 digit 5 digit 5.5 digit 6.5 digit 7.5 digit DMM is good enough for most people.
 
The following users thanked this post: MrMobodies

Offline SiliconWizard

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 14297
  • Country: fr
And insurance due to a modification not approved by the manufacturer

Y'all must have some extra-special insurance laws there in the UK.   :scared:

Don't underestimate insurance companies when it comes to minimizing whatever cash they have to shell out in case of any damage, whatever the country is.

If say your car catches fire and the expertise shows the car was modified in some way, especially if it's something related to the electric installation, you're likely to be nicely screwed.
Now sure, if nothing happens and your insurance company doesn't know, you're good.
 

Online bdunham7

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7727
  • Country: us
Don't underestimate insurance companies when it comes to minimizing whatever cash they have to shell out in case of any damage, whatever the country is.

If say your car catches fire and the expertise shows the car was modified in some way, especially if it's something related to the electric installation, you're likely to be nicely screwed.

I don't underestimate insurance companies because I have experience.  But in my locale, they have to work a lot harder to wriggle out of paying a claim than anything discussed here.  Their long knives typically don't come out until you burn your house down (at least), not over a car.  Some crappy companies will try and screw over people with small claims because they know that poor people can't afford to hire a lawyer to fight a $1000 claim denial, but that is a different sort of deal.  As a bonus, in some cases their potential costs can be astonishingly high--like tens of millions of dollars for a case where the policy limit was $100K--if they lose the game.

I've never seen a policy exclusion or clause that would allow an insurance company to deny a claim due to doing your own repairs or wiring, even add-ons.  You can get drunk and hit a tree and they'll generally pay as long as there's not a reason to conclude that you deliberately hit the tree (drunk or not).  Your rates will go up a lot.

Of course there are probably exceptions to everything I just said.
A 3.5 digit 4.5 digit 5 digit 5.5 digit 6.5 digit 7.5 digit DMM is good enough for most people.
 

Offline JPortici

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3452
  • Country: it
Here there is a specific option you have to add to prevent the insurance from suing you in case you are drunk, drugged, commit crimes - which includes modifying your car. crime because it's not going to be street legal anymore. If you don't have it they are going to pay anyway, but then they'll present you the bill and demand to pay it under the thread of suing (it's like 10€/year so no reason not to add it to your insurance)
 

Online bd139

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 23018
  • Country: gb
I worked at a fairly high level in the insurance sector for a while. If you think insurance protects you then you have some lessons to learn. Someone has to pay for whatever happened and the insurer is going to make sure that it’s not them through every technicality they can wriggle on. Insurance is a business and the operating priority is bottom line and profit and giving money away damages that.

The scary thing is some insurers have insurance against paying out provided by other pooled investors. That is basically a pyramid scheme.
 
The following users thanked this post: negativ3, Gregg, JPortici, SiliconWizard, MrMobodies

Online MrMobodies

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1906
  • Country: gb
I know someone who had their new £60k+ car taken from their drive overnight and they only had it for a couple of months.

There were many drivers in the family insured to drive the car. The insurance company started on each person on the policy to see what they can find fault on. They'd question age, previous convictions, poor health to see if it matches the policy. Then they concluded that as the main driver had more than 12 points on their license and they don't insure drivers with more than 12 points they won't be getting anything.

I barely heard this over the speakerphone:
"It was a mistake how you were granted cover, if we knew you had more than 12 points on your license we wouldn't have given you cover."
"You are lucky were are not reporting you to the police for driving without insurance."

Correct me if you thin I am wrong.  I am not sure about the full details but I think I remember them discussing something to do with a change in disclosure rules where previously if you had points on your license you didn't have to declare them after a certain amount of time passed (5 years?) but after this change the length was increased and the points accumulated to more than 12.

After that it was taken off the speakerphone and as the conversation finished with owner appearing calm he violently slammed the phone down and started swearing for a couple of minutes.

It went to the underwriters and they agreed with the decision.

I remember them writing on the report because it was a new policy with this change in effect he failed to disclose all the points dating back years that he wouldn't have to disclose with his previous cover. He got about 5 points in his previous car and the 8 points in two cars before that for speeding which was at the time over the previous threshold of the previous car but was now all included with the new increased threshold.

I never heard of that change and couldn't find anything about it and it almost sounds to me like they maybe making up the rules.
« Last Edit: July 14, 2022, 12:23:33 pm by MrMobodies »
 
The following users thanked this post: bd139

Online bd139

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 23018
  • Country: gb
That's about right.

The best option with insurance is as follows:

1. If you legally require it, go to the lowest bidder. Make sure you can afford to replace what you own.
2. If you don't legally require it, don't bother and make sure you can afford to replace what you own.

That excludes travel and health insurance which are essential if you live or travel in a 3rd world country (like America  :-DD) and property insurance.

Buying any £60k car is a risk. Buy a £5k car and have enough cash left to buy another £5k. Job done!
 
The following users thanked this post: MrMobodies

Online bdunham7

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7727
  • Country: us
I worked at a fairly high level in the insurance sector for a while. If you think insurance protects you then you have some lessons to learn.

In my experience insurance companies vary quite a bit in how much hardball they are willing to play.  I tell people to avoid any insurance company with "and Marine" in their name because those companies seem to be the most outrageous--probably because the wild world of international admiralty law has infested their culture. But depending on local laws and whether the insured has good counsel, the game of hardball can be very dangerous for them. 

If what I'm reading from UK posters is typical, your laws are different enough that at least some of the insurance companies think they can get away with this sort of treatment of their insureds.  Here they typically wouldn't dare try to withhold coverage on an unrelated issue as they know they have to work a lot harder than that.  The laws vary by state, but I'm not aware of any of them that would allow an insurance company to rescind a policy and deny theft coverage based on DL points.  There's no nexus between the two issues.  What they might do is try to show that the insured collaborated in the theft somehow.  I remember a disturbing case where one "and Marine" insurance company got out of paying a building fire claim by 'assisting' the local fire authorities in determining that the cause was arson (based on thin circumstantial evidence and some junk science, IMO) and getting the insured convicted and imprisoned.  Now that's hardball.
A 3.5 digit 4.5 digit 5 digit 5.5 digit 6.5 digit 7.5 digit DMM is good enough for most people.
 
The following users thanked this post: MrMobodies

Online bdunham7

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7727
  • Country: us
The best option with insurance is as follows:

Much better plan:

1. Get a law degree and license
2. Move to a plaintiff-friendly jurisdiction.

Quote
Buying any £60k car is a risk. Buy a £5k car and have enough cash left to buy another £5k. Job done!

Now on that I'll agree--the one thing my plan can't fix are insurance rates.  We have multi-million dollar liability coverage but no collision.  If I wreck it I buy it, which isn't a bad thing IMO.
A 3.5 digit 4.5 digit 5 digit 5.5 digit 6.5 digit 7.5 digit DMM is good enough for most people.
 

Offline ConKbot

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1380
Poverty feature for a poverty brand. Rental seat warmers goes well with rent-to-own rims. Can't afford the feature up front? Feel free to just rent it for how long you need.
 

Offline SiliconWizard

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 14297
  • Country: fr
I didn't know that BMW was a "poverty brand".

But yeah, renting schemes are for the poor, if we think about it on a more general level. What should we conclude if this scheme is becoming more common than ever? :popcorn:
 

Offline HalcyonTopic starter

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5629
  • Country: au
Here there is a specific option you have to add to prevent the insurance from suing you in case you are drunk, drugged, commit crimes - which includes modifying your car. crime because it's not going to be street legal anymore. If you don't have it they are going to pay anyway, but then they'll present you the bill and demand to pay it under the thread of suing (it's like 10€/year so no reason not to add it to your insurance)

Since we're sharing; In Australia, most (all?) insurance companies will refuse your comprehensive insurance claim if you were doing something unlawful or reckless. You're basically on your own at that point. There is no "option" to bolt-on to policies (that I've seen) that covers you for an illegal act.

The exact wording in my policy states:

You are not covered under any section of this policy for damage, loss, cost or legal liability that is caused by or arises from or involves any reckless act by you, the driver of the car or by a person acting with your encouragement, assistance or express or implied consent to the reckless act (such as street racing, burnouts, donuts, driving into water, illegally using a mobile phone, driving at excessive speed).

Whilst not specifically named, you can bet that driving while impaired by alcohol, drugs or prescription medication will come under that clause as well.
 

Offline Bud

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6877
  • Country: ca
When the Judgement Day will come, insurance companies will be #1 on the list to be exterminated. They've become parasites on the body of the Society.
Facebook-free life and Rigol-free shack.
 

Offline HalcyonTopic starter

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5629
  • Country: au
When the Judgement Day will come, insurance companies will be #1 on the list to be exterminated. They've become parasites on the body of the Society.

I'm not so sure about that. I currently have an on-going claim after someone rear-ended my car while I was stopped at a set of traffic lights last year. But because of the state of the world at the moment, getting parts for European cars is taking many months. I've been without my car now for over 8 months, yet my insurance company is covering the cost of a hire car until I get mine back. Because I'm not at fault, none of this is costing me a cent (in fact, my premiums this year went down in price).

Yes it's frustrating not being able to drive my own car, but things could be far worse if I had to pay repairs myself, plus a temporary hire car. I'd be out of pocket by about $60-70k at this point.

Insurance is certainly worth it as the guy that hit me is finding out. He was uninsured and my insurer will be chasing him for costs. It's enough to send some people bankrupt.
 

Offline Bud

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6877
  • Country: ca
How exactly they are going to make him pay? He may have an upper hand if they harass him and he can file a police report.
Facebook-free life and Rigol-free shack.
 

Offline HalcyonTopic starter

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5629
  • Country: au
How exactly they are going to make him pay? He may have an upper hand if they harass him and he can file a police report.

Not really my problem. I pay for comprehensive insurance so that all my costs (and any third party medical or property costs) are covered. I don't have to chase anyone for anything. If and how the insurer chooses to pursue the at-fault party for costs is up to them. I would suggest in my case, they will absolutely do so as we're not talking small sums of money.

There are several avenues an insurer can go down. Firstly I'd suggest they will send the at-fault driver a letter of demand (which he will probably ignore). Following that they can send the debt to a debt collection agency or choose to take the driver to court to recover costs. If the insurer obtains a judgement from a court, then the debt is enforceable. I'm not sure what powers courts have to enforce debts in civil matters, but it probably ranges from a court ordered payment to property seizure and maybe even salary garnishes (I'm not 100% sure on that last one).

The other option is he declare bankruptcy, which in itself has long-standing and serious ramifications.

Basically, the way it works here in Australia is that CTP (Compulsory Third Party) insurance is part of the registration of a vehicle. It covers a third party's medical bills and you can't opt-out of it. It doesn't cover property damage or pay for things like hire cars etc...
Insurance for property is optional, but you're a lunatic if you don't at least get third party property insurance (that covers the other person if you have an at-fault crash, but not your own car). Even if you drive a worthless shit box, third party property insurance is one of those necessary things you need to avoid the situation I've described above.

If you have a good driving record and no history of at-fault claims, car insurance can actually be quite reasonably priced (for what it covers). As a 30-something year old with a good history, to insure my vehicle fully comprehensively costs me about AUD$900/year and a portion of that is tax deductible (as I use my car for work-related purposes).

My father always said to me from when I started driving "always have insurance, in-case you hit a Mercedes". And even when I owned a car worth no more than $1500, I still had insurance for that reason.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2022, 08:59:09 am by Halcyon »
 

Offline JPortici

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3452
  • Country: it
Insurance is certainly worth it as the guy that hit me is finding out. He was uninsured and my insurer will be chasing him for costs. It's enough to send some people bankrupt.

That is why they're providing you the rental car "for free".

Me, i also have kasko on my car. While the cost of insurance is then more than double i already got everything back. A couple of years ago i was on a cliffside road and i had to hit the guardrail to make way for your typical asshole bwm driver that appeared in the middle of the road coming on the other side after a turn. That or a corner impact which, being on a cliff side, would surely have had fatal consequences. Of course the asshole didn't stop and ran away and even if i had a dashcam taping everything the insurance agent said that without an impact it's reeeeeeealy risky to get the other guy involved, the guy can sue back and even if i win it's going to take forever. I swore vigorously for a couple of minutes then calmed down because fuck it, i have kasko for this exact scenario (accidents on mountain roads due to road contidions, or all those exceptions in weather and vandalism coverages). the final bill was more or less the amount of kasko i paid over the years and i didn't have to put out a cent more. in the end there was balance in the universe
« Last Edit: July 15, 2022, 11:17:51 am by JPortici »
 

Offline ConKbot

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1380
I didn't know that BMW was a "poverty brand".

They already push the lease thing at the dealership way more than other brands. "Can't afford to buy,you can lease!" Combined with rental features now so vehicle lessors can seem as affluent as possible while living beyond their means.  Along with being a rapidly depreciating, so it's basically worthless in a few years. Sure sounds like a poverty brand to me.  Vs stuff like Ferrari, Lamborghini, Toyota, Honda, that have a chance to hold their value.
 
The following users thanked this post: thm_w

Offline PlainName

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6796
  • Country: va
I didn't know that BMW was a "poverty brand".

I just bought one, and I can assure you I'm not flush. Mind, it's 9 years old so maybe now a 'value' item.

Regarding UK insurance, a few years back I was T-boned by a car overtaking stationary traffic on the wrong side of the road approaching traffic lights. Clearly in a rush to jump the queue. As it happens, there was no damage (small scuff on rear tyre) so I forgot about it, until I got a demand for extensive damage from the other driver. Since I had legal insurance my insurance company handled it and eventually decided it was knock-for-knock! Bastards. So I investigated myself and proved that she lied in her description of the incident, and then lied when her 'independent' witness was in regular contact on social media with here. Nevertheless, it was still determined to be knock-for-knock.

That's when I figured it was worthwhile loading up all my vehicles with dashcams.
 

Offline HalcyonTopic starter

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5629
  • Country: au
Insurance is certainly worth it as the guy that hit me is finding out. He was uninsured and my insurer will be chasing him for costs. It's enough to send some people bankrupt.
That is why they're providing you the rental car "for free".

Free unlimited rental for drivers who are not at fault is pretty common with most (big) insurers here, not sure about the smaller budget ones, but I don't recommend them. 2 weeks of free car hire is also included by default if I have an "at fault" crash, with the option of paying extra to bump that up to unlimited as well (which I don't pay for).

That's when I figured it was worthwhile loading up all my vehicles with dashcams.

Also an excellent idea. It's a lesser known fact on this forum, but I'm happy to share it publicly, that I was a police officer for 14 years. One thing I realised pretty quickly that people involved in crashes lie through their teeth. Even if it's a minor crash, almost everyone lies. I can probably count the number of times on one hand where someone has said to me "I'm at fault, I made a mistake". I think because money is involved, the greed kicks in and at-fault drivers have to attribute as much blame onto someone (anyone) else, as humanly possible. (The old "dark brown dog ran out in front of my car" is a common one as is "the other guy was speeding".)

Always have your own evidence to prove your own innocence.

In contrast, you arrest someone for assault, domestic violence etc... they are far more likely to admit guilt.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2022, 02:54:40 am by Halcyon »
 
The following users thanked this post: PlainName, Nominal Animal

Offline helio0centra@gmail.com

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 29
  • Country: ca
People who buy a BMW or Mercedes are probably not likely to hack it. But if this trend works its way down to mid grade and economy cars the odds of people bypassing the DRM circuit board to power the elements on their own will drastically increase.
 

Online MrMobodies

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1906
  • Country: gb
And insurance due to a modification not approved by the manufacturer

I once ordered a GPS tracker from China in 2013 to be fitted to a truck. I was told to contact insurance to make sure it was okay incase anything happens. So I phoned them and they said to me they'd have to approve it first before connecting it up to the vehicle's electronics and to email them over what I plan to install which was the listing, the specifications, pictures of the unit that turned up. I said it was ordered direct from China and has a built in 3.7v lithium backup battery but in a metal case.

They approved it under the condition that it was fitted by a qualified vehicle electrician with a fuse inbetween the vehicles power supply in a dark cool place and to safely keep any documents, proof of the work such as the quote, receipts and pictures of it fitted with the cables and fuse and the contact details of the installer and the company they work for.

The electrician connected it up to the with one of those external fuses in this tiny enclosure but when they finished up it was nice and hidden out of the way with the antenna

It was noname 3g GPS and was provided with GPSGate that used Google maps. I found it very easy and intuitive to use, non bloated UI and it had tools to estimate out fuel from the journeys. It had all other connectors for things. I could order like an alert button, microphone and camera but unfortunately the seller told me that they just stopped making them and the GPS unit.

Unfortunately they still had to send other workers out to check up on the driver. I suspected the driver was using a signal blocker of some sort when he became aware of it as the GPS would go offline for long periods of time and would reappear for seconds from long distances apart in places around London he was not suppose to be and the mileage we took down would confirm this. When this driver wasn't using the vehicle GPS tracker worked fine especially when other workers used it and when it was parked it at nights at the firm.

I did some tests, hooked up a 5v supply supply and also tried an an electric tire pump to the cigarette socket and as anticipated when I turned the key from the ignition to start the engine that socket looses power for about 1 to 2 seconds and that happens to the radio too. Which would help confirm my suspicions he was using some the signal blocker. The boss didn't bother to search or challenge him over it. Instead he just billed the estimated fuel of out his wages
« Last Edit: July 18, 2022, 07:10:49 pm by MrMobodies »
 

Offline janoc

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3781
  • Country: de
People who buy a BMW or Mercedes are probably not likely to hack it. But if this trend works its way down to mid grade and economy cars the odds of people bypassing the DRM circuit board to power the elements on their own will drastically increase.

Not likely. 90% of car owners are barely sufficiently tech savvy to change a flat tire or replace a blown lightbulb (where possible), this sort of stuff is complete voodoo for most. 

And even then - if you do that, it is very probable that an error will get recorded in one of many on-board control modules. And an error code being present during the mandatory technical inspection every two years? Well, your car has just failed it and you have to have it fixed otherwise not legal to drive. Doesn't matter that it is a code for a blown interior lighting bulb and not anything safety related - the rules say no codes, so no codes ...

Some of this stuff can't even be reset by simply reconnecting whatever was disconnected or attaching some dongle with software from the internet to reset the ECU codes. Only the dealership can do it because the ECU is locked down too. So visiting the kid down the street to reset your ECU before the check and then putting the hack back in place afterwards is probably not going to be an option.

Basically - if you don't want this sort of crap to proliferate, don't buy cars having it. Auto manufacturers are pretty good at watching their bottom lines - and installing stuff that the majority will not pay extra for and activate will get old and unprofitable fast.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2022, 08:14:51 pm by janoc »
 
The following users thanked this post: Halcyon, SiliconWizard

Offline Dave3

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 55
  • Country: au
Free lifetime maps have been around for a long time and it's not unreasonable for a consumer that pays good money for a vehicle, to expect that functionality to continue for as long as the map provider releases those updates. free maps that you can download and update yourself.
After TomTom redefined "lifetime" and stopped updating maps for lot of GPS models, TomTom lost a lot of customers.
 

Online MrMobodies

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1906
  • Country: gb
https://www.which.co.uk/news/article/tomtom-withdraws-lifetime-maps-for-certain-models-a2T9A8l7YpLA
Quote
TomTom goes on to explain its definition of lifetime updates, saying: 'Lifetime means the useful life of the device, i.e. the period of time TomTom supports your device with updates, services, content or accessories. A device will have reached the end of its life when none of these are available anymore.

Useful life of the device seems vague to me.
If only they defined it a bit better maybe something like "lifetime window" or state at least x amount of years of support for the maps?

One time I brought another 3 year (they sell them as 3 or 5 years) on site service agreement warranty to extend it after its original three year warranty was up but it will only be for 2 years. They referred to it as the "lifetime window" which was only 5 years support for that particular model from when they started to manufacture it and when they planned to end support.
 
The following users thanked this post: madires, Dave3


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf