Interested In Advertising? | Contact Us Here
Warning!

 

Welcome to Clean It Up; the UK`s largest cleaning forum with over 34,000 members

 

Please login or register to post and reply to topics.      

 

Forgot your password? Click here

H S and Son

Re: Refused van insurance....
« Reply #40 on: July 05, 2011, 11:49:40 pm »
Oh dear, sore point methinks.

♠Winp®oClean♠

  • Posts: 4085
Re: Refused van insurance....
« Reply #41 on: July 05, 2011, 11:52:09 pm »
Oh dear, sore point methinks.

Not a sore point, just a stupid, pointless post!

I take it you have a crash tested Ionics system?

H S and Son

Re: Refused van insurance....
« Reply #42 on: July 05, 2011, 11:55:03 pm »
Heavens above of course not. There's plenty of middle ground you know.

♠Winp®oClean♠

  • Posts: 4085
Re: Refused van insurance....
« Reply #43 on: July 06, 2011, 12:00:02 am »
Heavens above of course not. There's plenty of middle ground you know.

Exactly. My point is, a tank doesn't necessarily have to be bolted through the chassis to be secure. Even the ones that are will only find out just how secure they are in a crash. Unless it's an Ionic system, you have no idea what will happen. ;)

Tom White

Re: Refused van insurance....
« Reply #44 on: July 06, 2011, 12:13:40 am »
Heavens above of course not. There's plenty of middle ground you know.

Exactly. My point is, a tank doesn't necessarily have to be bolted through the chassis to be secure. Even the ones that are will only find out just how secure they are in a crash. Unless it's an Ionic system, you have no idea what will happen. ;)

Should we be drilling holes though the chassis? 

Does anyone have any engineer's reports about that or is it a standard practise or something?

Serious; does anyone know?

♠Winp®oClean♠

  • Posts: 4085
Re: Refused van insurance....
« Reply #45 on: July 06, 2011, 12:25:12 am »
Heavens above of course not. There's plenty of middle ground you know.

Exactly. My point is, a tank doesn't necessarily have to be bolted through the chassis to be secure. Even the ones that are will only find out just how secure they are in a crash. Unless it's an Ionic system, you have no idea what will happen. ;)

Should we be drilling holes though the chassis? 

Does anyone have any engineer's reports about that or is it a standard practise or something?

Serious; does anyone know?

I would imagine not many. It seems people get peed off that their insurance premium has just doubled because their vehicle is now classed as modified & so try to justify it by the safety aspect! ;D


Tom White

Re: Refused van insurance....
« Reply #46 on: July 06, 2011, 12:26:59 am »
Unless it's an Ionic system, you have no idea what will happen. ;)

And what was the maximum speed of the crash test?  I'm pretty sure it was at 30 MPH.  So what would happen if you were travelling at 45 MPH? (Which, with a 1.9 Citreon Dispatch, is about my top speed!  ;D)

Nick Wareham

  • Posts: 244
Re: Refused van insurance....
« Reply #47 on: July 06, 2011, 01:01:02 am »
Well this is something I don't think we can afford to be flippant about.

Winproclean who are you insured with?  It would be useful to know which insurance companies are bothered about this and which arent.

Quote
It is the aim of Height-Wise to:

•      Promote improved working practices and conditions for all contractors.
•      To promote professional conduct by our members at all times.
•      To ensure that our members are adequately insured for your protection.
•      To help customers make a better choice when choosing a contractor.
•      To promote higher standards of health and safety.
•      To provide information and help to contractors.
•      To furnish new and up to date working methods to our members.
•      To highlight the need for contractors to adapt to economic and architectural challenges.


very nice sounding words, but "heightwise" I think is basically just a website set up by Nat Jones so that he and a few of his buddies can have a logo to use to try to make them look professional.  If you look on heightwise's website, there are only a handful of members, and the organizations address is the same as Nat Jones's.

Winproclean - are you Graeme Anderson of High Level Window Cleaners?

the bfg

Re: Refused van insurance....
« Reply #48 on: July 06, 2011, 07:37:27 am »
What are the chances of drowning after an accident with a full tank?
















now you have me worried mate as I cant swim,    note to self   buy some arm bands and flippers and a snorkel  :D

Hedgehog

  • Posts: 80
Re: Refused van insurance....
« Reply #49 on: July 06, 2011, 01:23:58 pm »
I called Dan Such at A-Plan Insurance today (amongst others!!) 01993 841841

He got me a policy at £441.57 comprehensive. He has special schemes for window cleaners with water tanks and knows what he is talking about. The insurance company they use are happy with water tanks up to 1000lts fitted or strapped in. The tank must be secure. £100 excess. Windscreen cover also (£60 excess)

Amount can be paid over 10 months (12% charge) or over 4 months or in full. Dan also offers insurance for tools in the van.

If you call Dan Such on the number above and mention my name R Smith you should qualify for a £25 discount also.  :) :)

Hope that helps.




ronnie paton

  • Posts: 3245

Tom White

Re: Refused van insurance....
« Reply #51 on: July 06, 2011, 06:03:27 pm »
iv just rang a plan and have about 500 pound of my renewel has of yet!!

I'm with A Plan, they seem very window cleaner friendly.

But what do you mean, Ronnie?  Do you mean they're 500 quid cheaper than the price of your renewal cost?

George P

  • Posts: 1304
Re: Refused van insurance....
« Reply #52 on: July 06, 2011, 06:15:58 pm »
Heavens above of course not. There's plenty of middle ground you know.

Exactly. My point is, a tank doesn't necessarily have to be bolted through the chassis to be secure. Even the ones that are will only find out just how secure they are in a crash. Unless it's an Ionic system, you have no idea what will happen. ;)

i have an idea about crash testing, , when our van crashed at around 60 - 70mph writting off 2 vans, only the tank moved just enough to snap water pipe and empty water all over motorway, the frame didnt move, occupants safe, would that have happened if strapped in only? maybe it would - i dont know, but maybe something worth considering,
george

dave.e

Re: Refused van insurance....
« Reply #53 on: July 06, 2011, 06:26:48 pm »
i think all the trad guys are laughing there sock off about all this. its OK to tell insurances you carry a tank in the back of your van and then they bump up the price but i think we need to starting telling them that our mobile phones sitting on the dash broad ;D ;D and we have just strapped that down as well because lets face it at 45mph and that phone its ya its going to hurt :'(. lets face it guys if we do have a accident the insurance will do all they can not to pay out anyway.

ronnie paton

  • Posts: 3245
Re: Refused van insurance....
« Reply #54 on: July 06, 2011, 07:32:27 pm »
iv just rang a plan and have about 500 pound of my renewel has of yet!!

I'm with A Plan, they seem very window cleaner friendly.

But what do you mean, Ronnie?  Do you mean they're 500 quid cheaper than the price of your renewal cost?
ye that it, hopeing they can get it less but my renewal was close to 5K for a mini fleet.

mikecam

Re: Refused van insurance....
« Reply #55 on: July 06, 2011, 08:14:36 pm »
There is a lot of rubbish talked on this subject, most of it is emotionally driven. First of all and above all else the important thing for anyone to remember no matter what insurance you have or what securing methods, whether tested or not, is that you have a water tank in the back, water is loose/flexible /fluid and as such can generate large pressures/surges if you have to stop quick!! Its doesn't matter if you are insured to the hilt and have a fully crash tested system, you should still remember what you are carrying and drive with care. If anyone thinks they can drive their WFP van as they drive their car because they are well insured and crash tested then more fool them! That said........
 I've insured several vans for window cleaning, some ask about the tank, some don't. The ones that have asked about a tank have not asked for any crash testing certs. If they asked me for a cert and i couldn't provide one then i would take out the frame and secure it with webbing strapping so its not a 'mod' .Whatever van you have will have manufacturers data for the van loading/restraining points and it should be within their criteria.
 I would personally refuse to deal with an insurance company that wanted tank certs as their is no national/EU regs that cover the fitting of tanks so its at their own bequest you furnish them with such details. And , to be honest such details are just a quango driven requirement from the likes of <certain known WFP system manufacturers> and Thatcham Research ( a private profit making company).
 who also liase with insurance companies.
 I also got an email today, same as many of you will of done...........
from H20 systems or someone like that waffling on about crash tested systems.
 So...if its too expensive or you can't provide a cert then get it strapped down good with appropriate rated webbing/ratchet straps, rely on the manufacturers tolerances for  securing points. Or alternativley tell them to get stuffed with their crash testing certs request. Fitting only involves spreader plates or bars and does not include going into a chassis for securing. If it included going into a chassis for securing them they'd have to do one for each model they did.
 The best insurance is to drive like your tank might kill you if it came adrift ad also you want the cheapest one !!!

Tom White

Re: Refused van insurance....
« Reply #56 on: July 06, 2011, 10:51:49 pm »
Top post, Mike.

And if you - like me - work with your lass, this is an important safety feature:


G Griffin

  • Posts: 40745
Re: Refused van insurance....
« Reply #57 on: July 06, 2011, 11:42:13 pm »
I`ve heard something that might interest you about this today. Apparently, the police have a new crack team checking water tanks to see if they are secured or not. It`s down to a large increase in the number of wfp users sloshing about on the roads.
They are called the Secured Tank Detectives. I strongly suggest you contact your insurance and ask have they any experience of STD`s.
I`m insured with a firm called Vic Dennis (www.VD.co.ck) and they are certainly on the balls with this subject.
Contact them and ask for Rob Knott or Dick Hitchen and tell them I sent you  ;).
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

George P

  • Posts: 1304
Re: Refused van insurance....
« Reply #58 on: July 06, 2011, 11:47:06 pm »
I`ve heard something that might interest you about this today. Apparently, the police have a new crack team checking water tanks to see if they are secured or not. It`s down to a large increase in the number of wfp users sloshing about on the roads.
They are called the Secured Tank Detectives. I strongly suggest you contact your insurance and ask have they any experience of STD`s.
I`m insured with a firm called Vic Dennis (www.VD.co.ck) and they are certainly on the balls with this subject.
Contact them and ask for Rob Knott or Dick Hitchen and tell them I sent you  ;).


like it, very good

Dave Willis

Re: Refused van insurance....
« Reply #59 on: July 07, 2011, 07:36:11 am »
Common sense really - do you carry your kids/wife in the van?
Do you think those little spot welded loops they fit in the French vans will hold the tank? Spreader plates under the tin floor?
Try lifting your tank off the floor with half an inch of water in it.
 Choice is yours at the moment - might not always be that way.