Major tax fraud linked to the registration of luxury cars

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Atlantic Dawn

Wonder are they all traced back to one dealer/garage who signed off on the engine changes?

Atlantic Dawn

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Once the engine number matches the logbook that's all they check.

Foxhole Norman

Kenny Logins wrote: »

If he's reading this, he also needs to remove the plates from the ad (just had a peep).

What's wrong with the plates?

Also, I know there was a few 645i's registered wrongly as 3.0's by BMW Ireland, I wonder what the story is there.

Kenny Logins

Foxhole Norman wrote: »

What's wrong with the plates?

Also, I know there was a few 645i's registered wrongly as 3.0's by BMW Ireland, I wonder what the story is there.

The plates reveal the tax rate and registered engine size.

Foxhole Norman

Kenny Logins wrote: »

The plates reveal the tax rate and registered engine size.

Leave them on sure, he might learn his lesson then!

BarryD

Korat wrote: »

This invalidates their insurance as well.

They'd be liable for all the damages if they hit anyone.

Insurance company might say that but in the event, pay up. We were hit once by a drunk driver whose policy was based on his stated fact of being a non drinker. After a wee bit of hassle, they paid up - wasn't our fault the insurance company gave him a cheaper policy and took on this risk.

Wossack

any 1.3 turbo Glanza's?

beertons

Is it just Beemers they got?

\sigh

Toyotafanboi

Wossack wrote: »

any 1.3 turbo Glanza's?

i doubt it because the turbo and N/A are the exact same cc.

Ratchet

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Once the engine number matches the logbook that's all they check.

VIN is checked not a engine number.


on the other note this is going on for years and i seen ads like this in mid 90s

Big Nasty

beertons wrote: »

Is it just Beemers they got?

\sigh

No, no motorbikes.

Atlantic Dawn

BarryD wrote: »

Insurance company might say that but in the event, pay up. We were hit once by a drunk driver whose policy was based on his stated fact of being a non drinker. After a wee bit of hassle, they paid up - wasn't our fault the insurance company gave him a cheaper policy and took on this risk.

They would have to pay the 3rd party claim either way no matter what the driver had declared. His claim on his car would probably not be entertained and they might also seek recovery of the cost of your claim from him.

BarryD

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

They would have to pay the 3rd party claim either way no matter what the driver had declared. His claim on his car would probably not be entertained and they might also seek recovery of the cost of your claim from him.

Ah so, if some of these under declared cars are insured and hit somebody, the innocent party is covered but not the driver. Useful thing to know if that's correct, as at the time (good few years ago) his insurance company was making out they were doing this 'out the goodness of their hearts' - as if you'd believe that

daRobot

I would say that the vast majority of the 'luxury' car owners, have them insured correctly, and therefore are covered.

The jap scrap however, no so much.

Special Circumstances

daRobot wrote: »

I would say that the vast majority of the 'luxury' car owners, have them insured correctly, and therefore are covered.

The jap scrap however, no so much.

Lol.

Atlantic Dawn

With the insurers what they will likely do is if you have your car declared as a 3.5 litre car to them but the logbook has been changed to say it's a 2 litre engine they will have the options to:

• fail to pay your claim outside any third party claims
• if the correct insurance premium for the 2 litre was 50% of the cost of the 3.5 litre they will either restrict your claim by 50%
• they might restrict your claims to the value the car based on the engine cc listed in the logbook.

Dermo123

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

With the insurers what they will likely do is if you have your car declared as a 3.5 litre car to them but the logbook has been changed to say it's a 2 litre engine they will have the options to:

• fail to pay your claim outside any third party claims
• if the correct insurance premium for the 2 litre was 50% of the cost of the 3.5 litre they will either restrict your claim by 50%
• they might restrict your claims to the value the car based on the engine cc listed in the logbook.

If a person declares the correct engine size to their insurer then the insurance company cannot really have a basis to restrict a claim because of a lower engine size on the logbook. The high premium was paid so they should be fully insured.
Now I would understand if it was the other way around!!!!

daRobot

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

With the insurers what they will likely do is if you have your car declared as a 3.5 litre car to them but the logbook has been changed to say it's a 2 litre engine they will have the options to:

• fail to pay your claim outside any third party claims
• if the correct insurance premium for the 2 litre was 50% of the cost of the 3.5 litre they will either restrict your claim by 50%
• they might restrict your claims to the value the car based on the engine cc listed in the logbook.

What you've just written has no basis in fact whatsoever.

There are many cases of genuine admin errors in the registration department, and also by the importer. BMW Ireland have a host of v8 6 series that are incorrectly registered as 3.0's.

Even if the insurance company had a leg to stand on (which they don't), how would you propose that they segment and identify the genuine vs non-genuine cases. It would make no sense.

If the car is declared to the insurance company as what it is in reality, that car is correctly insured. They are not tax collectors, and such the tax status of the car is no basis to reject a claim.

ShaunieVW

I had a 530d which was 2 litre tax but still insured as 3 litres. Only person who lost out was the tax office, hardly the biggest crime of the century. If they were incorrectly declared to insurance then that's a different matter.

jetfiremuck

These must be all pre 08 vehicles. Ffs 7 years old. Reason for cheating is big disparity/value between pre and post 08. If road tax was more reasonable the level of cheating would be less. Full vrt was paid on these cars anway as its customs/nct resposnibility to ensure vin and engine capacity are matched. They well know how to stick you when you clear a car with an optional leather steering wheel.

BarryD

I don't think Atlantic Dawn is arguing that the insurance companies be tax collectors but that insurance companies normally price their policies on the basis of engine capacity etc. If someone makes a fraudulent claim that the engine in their car is smaller than in reality to save on car tax and uses the same basis for insurance purposes, the question that arose is - are they insured? Clearly this practice is not in the insurance companies interest just as clearly it isn't for the taxman??

Special Circumstances

ShaunieVW wrote: »

I had a 530d which was 2 litre tax but still insured as 3 litres. Only person who lost out was the tax office, hardly the biggest crime of the century. If they were incorrectly declared to insurance then that's a different matter.

How did the "inaccuracy" come about?

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

BarryD

ShaunieVW wrote: »

Only person who lost out was the tax office, hardly the biggest crime of the century.

Eh, what about the rest of the compliant tax paying public? Who in theory would pay more to make up for those for pay less?

jetfiremuck

Jesus and all along i believed the badges on the back of the Beemers and Mercs were all you needed to know lol.

daRobot

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

They don't have a get out. The car is insured correctly, if they have declared it to the insurance company as such. The tax status of the car does not affect cover.

daRobot

BarryD wrote: »

I don't think Atlantic Dawn is arguing that the insurance companies be tax collectors but that insurance companies normally price their policies on the basis of engine capacity etc. If someone makes a fraudulent claim that the engine in their car is smaller than in reality to save on car tax and uses the same basis for insurance purposes, the question that arose is - are they insured? Clearly this practice is not in the insurance companies interest just as clearly it isn't for the taxman??

No, that's not what we were discussing.

If the car is a 530d and the person has told their insurance company that it is a 2.0d, when there's a 6cyl diesel up front, they are not insured, there is no question of that.

Special Circumstances

BarryD wrote: »

Eh, what about the rest of the compliant tax paying public? Who in theory would pay more to make up for those for pay less?

I'd say the boys with fiddled registrations must feel very hard done by to have this dropped on them the week of cheltenham. It's gonna take from the thrill of washing their pillow case money through the bookies...

flutered

Dermo123 wrote: »

If a person declares the correct engine size to their insurer then the insurance company cannot really have a basis to restrict a claim because of a lower engine size on the logbook. The high premium was paid so they should be fully insured.
Now I would understand if it was the other way around!!!!

do not all insurance companys have the data base at their fingertips, any time i insure a car they have all the details for me, btw as regards the nct, the car i am driving had 109k when i bought it, the nct claimed 54k as the milage, so i am thinging that the das had to be changed, it is a renault kangoo btw, who are rather famous for electrical probs