Breakdown Cover Exclusions

[Bill_qaz]

2b is the wording I believe mike is referring to.
Checked on my current policy and it's the same as your Stephen

[svenedin]

2b is the wording I believe mike is referring to.
Checked on my current policy and it's the same as your Stephen

Yes. I read that as going out driving with inadequate oil or water rather than a catastrophic leak whilst out driving but it definitely needs to be clear what the insurer means. As for the fuel well I do think that means running out of it during a journey.

Stephen

[mike1864]

An exclusion clause from Stephen's policy: "8. More than the cost for legal abandonment and any Customs Duty imposed if the estimated repatriation cost exceeds the market value of the Insured Vehicle".
Note it's the market value, not the main policy's Agreed Value.
So if you break down in France, the recovery company's repatriation costs are capped at their definition of its market value; not the Agreed Value.
If this is £400 versus £10,000, it's not enough to bring it home.
Again, I hope our Club can clarify these points with Peter James.

[svenedin]

Yes I hope for clarification because it is rather expensive to purchase separate European breakdown cover with the likes of the AA or the RAC. Since I have just booked my ferry crossings to France and back for MoT 2026 at prices that made me feel faint, I would rather not spend even more money!


Stephen

[simmitc]

I spotted this topic not long after Mike opened it, and referred it to the insurer for comment on the items raised to that point. The insurer responded very quickly, but this is the first opportunity that I have had to post the response.

• As to name, the scheme is administered by DAS who are in the process of rebranding to ARAG, hence you might see references to both in the documentation. The roadside assistance will be provided by patrols from a well-known, generally respected, and instantly recognised organisation whose mechanics all have appropriate training and experience.

• The exclusion is in reference to servicing neglect rather than component failure. It goes without saying that breakdown cover is not a substitute for regular servicing so cover is not provided if the breakdown is due to the car being habitually driven with low oil or water – if a component fails which results in loss of oil or water that’s obviously a different matter. There are many components on a car that, should they fail will result in loss of fluids.

In a nutshell, if the car is maintained correctly but suffers loss of fluids due to the failure of a component, then there should not be any problem.

I see that some additional questions have arisen and I shall refer these over to the insurer, but at our review meeting in a couple of weeks time rather than asking for a comment every couple of days. If anyone has any other queries then please do let me know so that we can obtain clarification. All points will be followed up and I shall report back in due course.

[svenedin]

Thank you very much Simon.

I think one of the other questions is not related to breakdown cover but whether the member-to-member cover is valid in Europe? This would be useful for Minors on Tour if a PJ insured member needs to drive the car of another PJ insured member.

Stephen

[mike1864]

Thanks to Simon, both for setting up this insurance, and for undertaking to address these few loose ends.
I'd still prefer the Company's position on fluids to have been better expressed in the first place, rather than being modified by subsequent correspondence (a clarification which, on the dreaded day, will probably not be in the hands of the breakdown company's employees).
The problem here is that DAS/ARAG's Terms are standard. So they won't change the text just for our little club.
The mis-fuelling overseas remains an unhelpful exclusion. I'm aware of only two such incidents, and they both happened on the Continent. One was a filling station error, the other was down to the driver.
I've just spotted another anomaly. Page 36 of PJ's Terms says the policyholder WILL enjoy a reduced the premium at the next renewal if no claims have been made. No ifs or buts; simply 30% discount in Year 2. But the PJ phone rep had told me it doesn't apply. But then again, the MMOC says NCB applies if it's a "daily use" car; but PJ never asked about the frequency of our use, let alone define this term.
I am confident Simon will bring clarity to all these points in his meetings with PJ.