[RedTerrano]

Sun film ban. Done.
Cap on cars owned. Done.
Now this.
Eagerly waiting for the day, when Milaards will mandate spark plugs on diesel engines.

September seems to be the favourite month to dent the common man's wallet.
Back in 2018 it was the new motor vehicle rules which almost doubled the insurance cost.

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com...w/66132366.cms

This year, this new bombshell.

Everyone from the taxman, to insurance companies to finance companies will be happy. Will be interesting to see how this new diktat affects the sales numbers.

[anandhsub]

From what I read it only says bumper to bumper insurance is mandatory for the first 5 years. Doesn't say it has to be bought at the time of the purchase.

So you have to mandatory renew the bumper to bumper insurance at the end of the 1st year and not just continue with the third party insurance.

Am actually surprised there are car owners who only use third party insurance even for the first few years.

[Jude300]

Very absurd indeed and I am not sure if this will take flight. Could be challenged at the Supreme Court. This is very much in favour of the insurers and the financing banks. Its the timing of the judgement that makes me wonder how this will happen. Pass a judgement on the 26th of August and start following it from 1st of September. How do they expect to cascade the info down the line? How are the questions on NCB etc going to be answered?

How many laws do we have to follow? A law by the union government, one from State government, some for local panchayats, some from these kind of judgements and then some based on various interpretations of the judgements. The contentious judgement on use of sun films; how many government vehicles are driven with sun films? How many politicians follow that? How many times do we see a policeman riding his bike without a helmet?

End of the day the lay man is in the quandary and takes the beating.

[Sran]

Milords should stick to judiciary but taking a cue from our neighbours they always try to usurp the powers of legislative. These milords are a bane to society, the kid gloves they use to justify their power grab is nauseating. According to milords only they have their IQs in farenheit and rest have IQs in celsius.

Car ownership just got costlier and insurnce companies will dance their way to bank. Continue this way and individual identities will be tossed away and people will be burdened with collective responsibilities. Even the fines for not having an insurance is usurping individual liberty. Nobody who is under 35 years of age should be made judge. They are inexperienced in worldly affairs and judgements should be based on laws and not on whims and fancies of being a path breaker.

[karthik1996]

Have posted about this in Nexon thread also, before I stumbled across to this thread.

I had booked a Nexon XZ+(O) ST petrol on Aug 4 and it has reached the dealers yard today. Will be doing a PDI on Monday after which will settle the payment and proceed for Invoicing. Based on the current timelines, the vehicle will go for registration on September 1st or 2nd. Have rejected the dealers offer for Insurance (after reading through the insurance threads) for Rs.51k and have a quote for Rs.31k from Royal Sundaram 1 OD+ 3 TP with the following add-ons: Zero Depreciation Unlimited Claims in Zero Dep + Consumables cover + Key Replacement + Windshield Protector + Tyre Cover +Engine Protector + RSA.

With this Hight court judgement, I am not sure how it would impact the registration process. Though I am yet to take the insurance(waiting for PDI), on checking with the agent, the agent has no clue about this.

Any members could help me with this? This would be my first car purchase and any help would be welcome.

Also I am not sure why I am not able to see the previous post in the same thread.

[IamNikhil]

Since the honourable black robes have never had to buy a car with their own money, considering the taxpayers foot all their fat bills, these "learned" people have made it their life's mission to increase the hardships of the common man. Considering the recent spate of judgements, wherein the judiciary is unabashedly impinging upon the territory of the legislature, it wouldn't be too preposterous to assume that the country is being subjected to back-seat driving!

Any HC order is binding across the country, so expect massive chaos in the days to come. Literally no one, NO ONE actually cares a fig about the common man, everyone wants to simply impose their whims and fancies on us as and when they please! Expect this order to be challenged in the SC soon. Here's hoping.

[hareshjethwani]

Originally Posted by karthik1996

Any members could help me with this? This would be my first car purchase and any help would be welcome.

I just got my Creta registered. Have taken my own insurance. You need to get the car insured before it is taken for registration. So get the insurance done ASAP and get it registered. But I am not sure if the RTO will object when it is sent for registration that it has the 3 year insurance as it will be the 1st already. Why don't you do the PDI and get the insurance on Monday. You can get it registered on Tuesday to avoid any hassle.
EDIT - Monday is Janmastami,so not sure if it will be a working day.

[Turbanator]

I don’t think this can be implemented in hurry before IRDA accords approval. It’s not technically feasible as well due to NCB getting passed or taken back depending on the claim in preceding year. Third party was possible as there’s no NCB on that. Even, TP is no longer mandatory for 3 years. Someone will get a stay or go to a different court surely.

Regarding, members waiting for new car deliveries, Insurance is to be done before delivery and vehicle details are must preferably copy of invoice.

They should go ahead as per existing one year only. Am not sure if the insurance companies themselves are equipped to issue 3 year policies!

[Jude300]

Originally Posted by Turbanator

I don’t think this can be implemented in hurry before IRDA accords approval. It’s not technically feasible as well due to NCB getting passed or taken back depending on the claim in preceding year. Third party was possible as there’s no NCB on that. Even, TP is no longer mandatory for 3 years. Someone will get a stay or go to a different court surely.

Regarding, members waiting for new car deliveries, Insurance is to be done before delivery and vehicle details are must preferably copy of invoice.

They should go ahead as per existing one year only. Am not sure if the insurance companies themselves are equipped to issue 3 year policies!

That's the point. Is it even possible? The judgement doesn't seem to answer those questions and has put customers and the industry in the quandary. This will hurt the industry as it comes a month ahead of the festive season. Haven't seen any news on any plans to challenge the judgement yet. Hope there is someone seeking a stay on the judgement

[prajwalmr62]

I'm very confused by this.

So, court reviews the compensation case, and mandates that along with third-party, there should be insurance for driver and passengers. Fair enough, but why tag in Zero-depreciation? Why not make driver-passengers insurance mandatory along with third-party? AFAIK, it can be elected even after 5 years, but ZD cannot.

Or is it that when availing ZD one also should avail driver-passengers insurance as mandatory? What about cars older than 5 years? Don't they have drivers or passengers?

I support making driver + passengers insurance as mandatory, as it should have always been. Most general public do not check what is included and what's not, and always confused between numerous nomenclatures (probably like our court did here). It is very easy for insurance companies to wash their hands off the case by stating that insurance had only third-party or did not have driver/passenger coverage.


---

Also, who wrote this article in News18?

... for a period extending up to five years. After that period, the owner of the vehicle must be cautious in safeguarding the safety of the driver, passengers, any third parties as well as themselves.

No man, a owner/driver should be cautious in safeguarding the safety all the time. Until 5 years drivers can drive the way they want it?


In the same report, this is what court said,

... cautious in safeguarding the interest of ...

These two sentences have very different meaning. A journalist should have known better.



---

Originally Posted by karthik1996

With this Hight court judgement, I am not sure how it would impact the registration process.

It doesn't talk about 5 years on time of purchase. So, you don't have to worry about it now. By the time your renewal comes up, this will be rectified.

[ganesc]

Intially I thought it was due to a misunderstanding that bumper-to-bumper means covering the occupants of the vehicle but doesn’t seem to be the case as the judgement clearly states this in addition to. Owner coverage was already mandatory I guess and it would be good to have paid driver cover and even passengers cover mandatory but bumper-bumper?!

Hope it’s stayed and/or corrected to cover just the occupants mandatorily(recall Rs.100/occupant now) in addition to Third party coverage. And hope they make it applicable for commercial vehicles first if not done already.

[bullitt1]

I think the next judgement would be :

1. 5 year mandatory service package (what if owners do not maintain the cars)

2. 5 year mandatory fuel (what if the owners do not drive as much)

For Compass sport, dealers quote 1 lac insurance, if this insanity comes true, then additional 4 lacs at the time of purchase if to be taken at once.

[sierrabravo98]

Guys, please stop hyperventilating and relax. From what I could understand, the judgement just states that a vehicle has to be covered under a bumper to bumper insurance policy every year for the first 5 years of its life. No one is forcing you to purchase a policy with a term period of 5 years at the time of purchasing the vehicle. Just get your policy renewed every year (which is an annual ritual for most members here). And anyways, there are hordes of sundry judgement which do not get implemented by the executive (not that is a good thing). Don't bear undue stress due to one more such unimplementable one. The merits of the judgement can be appealed in the SC.

Do correct me if my interpretation is wrong.

[landcruiser123]

Completely unnecessary over-regulation - it certainly improves cash-flow for insurance companies. I guess no prizes for figuring out the lobbyists behind this move.

The government should set minimum insurance requirements for vehicles and high penalties if caught not complying with the minimums.

[nitkel]

While this is a ridiculous decision, it can be binding only in Tamil Nadu isn't it? No need for folks from other states to start worrying about this!