Salvage Code of Practice Meeting - September 2017

BVSF were represented at a meeting of Thatcham and representatives from the Insurance Industry on Wednesday 13th September. The BVSF list of concerns with the code had been agreed by the Management Committee previously and pre-sent to form an agenda.

The BVSF can advise that the non legislative code as it currently stands with the alterations as agreed included, is acceptable to the BVSF and upon sight of the revised code and confirmation that the agreed alterations are in place will be signed accordingly.

The details of those discussion points appear below.

1)..BVSF were concerned over the fact that the Insurers were not prepared at this stage to enter into any further dialogue with regard to the sale of provenance known airbags.

BVSF advised that at the time of the next discussion of the code then this should be re-raised. It was suggested that BVSF should fund a further investigation with the view to a “PAS” or similar, the cost of this may well be prohibitive, however, even then, it was suggested that this wouldn’t automatically enable the  re-use of provenance known and electronically tested airbags to be sold. This matter will therefore require further discussion. It was noted during discussions that the potential for the code to become legislative was again mentioned. Clearly a degree of re-writing would be required for that to happen and Thatcham confirmed that BVSF would indeed be involved in any form of discussion re “adjustment” to the code after the first year. Obviously a major concern would be that IF the current code became legislative then the sale of airbags would be outlawed which the BVSF would not support.

2)..BVSF requested that the word “Repairable” was included in the section of the new code relative to the category “S” in an attempt to deflate the word “Structural” as BVSF were concerned that purchasers of repairable salvage would be “put off” by the word “structural”. BVSF confirmed that they were happy with the V5c notation which confirmed that although the vehicle was deemed structurally damaged it was considered by the insurers as repairable.

After a great deal of debate it was agreed to add the word “Repairable” in an acceptably prominent position within the code adjacent to the Category “S” notation which members could refer to when selling a Cat S vehicle.

3)..BVSF asked for confirmation that not all engineers would at the inception date of the new code be “qualified” in the use of the new code or indeed would have their “Competency ID Number” and that this included those qualified in both Motorcycle and HGV repair.

The Insurers and Thatcham confirmed that all engineers had 2 years from the inception date of the new code which is confirmed as 1st October this year to gain the qualifications as required, to include that of motorcycle and HGV repair. Should any engineer fail to gain their qualification or Competency Number by Oct 1st 2019 then they would be unable to inspect and categorise vehicles from that date onwards.

4)..BVSF asked for clarification as to the definition of a vehicle of special interest as this could be a serious loophole which vehicles could fall through. Thatcham ETC salvage sub group confirmed that “supercars”, ie Ferrari, Maserati etc are not considered vehicles of special interest and would be categorised in the normal way. Vehicles of genuine Historic Special interest would be dealt with as and when a claim arose on their own merits.

5)..BVSF requested that vehicles that had been totally submerged should be considered a Cat A rather than B. This was confirmed as the correct action to take therefore the code would be adjusted accordingly. Furthermore, BVSF requested that vehicles that had been damaged by corrosive, contaminated, polluted or salt water should also be considered Cat A. This the insurers would not readily accept but did agree that in these cases all categorisation would be made in the interests of the health and safety of members of salvage dealer staff with the opportunity to discuss in the event of a dispute.

6)..BVSF have long since complained about the references to motorcycle frames within the code and the veiled invite to attempt to repair these and to that end entered discussions with the Motorcycle Industry Association who agreed with our concerns.

BVSF can now confirm that this section of the code has now been re-written to confirm that NO category “S” can be used on a Motorcycle, it is either “N” or “A or B”  with members asked to act correctly when faced with a structurally damaged frame.

7)..BVSF raised the matter of Insurance repaired structurally damaged vehicles having a notation applied to their history as per salvage vehicles. It was generally agreed that this would be making the vehicles history transparent to purchasers but did not form part of the code discussions, however, it was generally agreed that this would be discussed in the future. This will be raised at the next Home Office meeting later this month.

8)..BVSF requested that stolen recovered vehicles with 20% or less damage would not fall within the remit of the code with the remainder being categorised as against the suggestion that all stolen recovered vehicles with little or no damage would fall outside the code. The insurers were, to a degree agreeable to the idea but wanted, in the first year of the new codes operation, to deal with each case on its own merits and re-discuss this matter in one year.

9)..BVSF asked if the rumour regarding the 2 codes working alongside each other had any truth, ie the rather confusing potential of 6 codes. This was advised to have emanated from Audatex and the rework was agreed to be up and running within 1 month of the inception of the new code.

10)..BVSF advised that the Secretary General (RW) would be attempting to gain the qualification and indeed competency ID asap so that in the event of a “problem categorisation” he could speak with experience. It should be noted however that with 2 years to gain the qualification set in stone as agreed by the Insurers and Thatcham that re-categorisation would be investigated, if requested by a BVSF member, by the Secretary General from the inception date of the new code in the event of an irresolvable categorisation dispute between the Insurer and the member. 

11)..BVSF asked in regard to those members who provide engineering facilities for insurers. It was confirmed that if a member “Suggests” a salvage category upon inspection with the final decision being the insurers then no further qualification is required. If however, a member provides a categorisation service for insurers then those staff members will require the full qualification and competency ID within the first 2 years.

I genuinely believe that this is the best outcome for members of the Federation and this is the culmination of almost 3 year’s work. 

RW