Insurance, winches and SelfRecovery declaration letters...

[Saffy]

My insurance required a letter of confirmation declaring that my winch would be used for 'self recovery' purposes only.

I can think of two reason as to why this might be.... either its to null any claim on the policy from 3rd parties that could get injured during a recovery of said 3rd party OR this a get out clause along the same lines as when the insurance policy stipulates the vehicle must not be used for higher or reward  i.e just in case you start pulling people out of ditches for money as a business venture during floods and snowfalls without taking out the appropriate risk policy.

Or is it some other reason?

If is to null claims by injured 3rd parties, then in a climate of compensation claims it possible to get sued by the person you was helping recover without any financial help from insurance... should we not all carry disclaimer forms for people to sign if they want a pull out - "you promise can't sue me if you get a recovery hook in your head" sort of thing What about the usually spectators to a recovery (passengers in greenlaning groups, ramblers on a legal lane/road I am talking about not in an offroad event), you should really shout for them to stand clear and so forth but are you ultimately responsible if they get injured by your actions during recovery or is it their own look out? 

[V8MoneyPit]

I would hazard a guess that, in law, you would be held responsible for the safe use of your equipment. Unless you could prove neglegance on the part of the injured person.... i.e. You told them to move back to a specific place and gave them ample opportunity, but they moved back while the recovery was taking place. This type of law is mostly about proving neglegance.

As for insurance, they are just covering themselves for the same thing. They cannot be there to specify how the recovery is carried out, so damage to a 3rd party vehicle could end up as a claim against them even if it was done badly.

That's just my thoughts. I'm not a lawyer!

[Range Rover Blues]

It's partly reducing their liabilty with 3rd parties (a very big part) and partly them making sure you aren't operating as a vehicle recoverer which is an undeclared use.  But also they want all the recovery work to go through their appointed companies.

[Freelander1980]

Insurance get out clause, not saying you are but to stop any old muppet just strapping a winch to the front of the motor then trawling the lanes in snow / floods etc.

Also i would have it a guess that like you state it is to stop them having loads of claims against them from you say being helpfull and just for arguements sake scratch the other persons motor or hurt somebody.

[BigSi]

I had to write the same letter for AF.

[Bush Tucker Man]

I had to write the same letter for AF.

I had to the write a similar 'Statement of Non-Intent' when I bought the 110 (insurance was with Flux at the time), stating that I wouldn't be using it for 'Hire & Reward' purposes, with it being deemed a mini-bus in their eyes.

My argument that it wasn't either wasn't accepted.
My personal view was;
It's not a mini-bus, because;
1. Not all the seats are forward facing
2. It hasn't got an 'Emergency Exit' that can be reached by all passengers

It wasn't a crew-bus either, as not all the seats are side-ways facing.

Needless to say, I had to go with their terms & conditions.

The NFU didn't for one when I transferred to them upon the renewal date

[Saffy]

I had to write the same letter for AF.

Same company aye.