Car Insurance Law

Dashboard camera captures taxi driver crossing intersection on the red light!

overtaking on red light

A friend to the Arrive Alive online road safety initiative shared a video from his dashboard capturing taxi driver recklessness at an intersection. It is often alleged in the media that some of these drivers appear to have their own set of rules of the road.

In this photos the taxi driver clearly crosses the red traffic light long before it turns green.

On the Arrive Alive website we often report on unsafe driving at intersections! We would like to urge everyone approaching intersections to do so with caution and not to assume that they may merely proceed..Only proceed after checking that it is indeed safe and another is not disregarding the Rules of the Road!

Also view:

Safe Driving at Intersections

Dashboard Cameras and Road Safety

Is it legal to drive with headphones?

did_you_know782Question:

I would like to inquire if it is legal to drive with headphones , please clarify , thank you

Answer:

Yes I confirm, it is not illegal. Deaf persons are also allowed to drive, but it is dangerous as it takes out one of the senses you use to drive safely

Also view:

Avoiding distractions while driving

Hearing and Road Safety

Chase Valley resident shot in alleged hijacking incident

Police line

During the early hours of this morning Wednesday 29 January 2014 at about 05:20, Police at Town Hill received a report of a shooting incident at a residence along Chase Valley Road in the Chase Valley area in Pietermaritzburg.

On arrival Police found an injured adult male, later identified as Mr Clement Bongani Zondi (52), lying on the grass inside his premises. He had sustained a gunshot wound to his chest. Paramedics at the scene attempted to resuscitate him, however he succumbed of his injuries a short while later. It is believed that Zondi, a taxi owner operating in the Sobantu area in Pietermaritzburg, were returning home from a nearby gym and was getting out of his vehicle when he was confronted by an unknown man. It is further believed that the suspect produced a firearm and shot Zondi once in the chest and thereafter got into his vehicle, a white Toyota Hilux bakkie, and fled. It is alleged his domestic worker heard a shot coming from outside the house and immediately contacted the Police and went to investigate. On her arrival she noticed Zondi crawling towards the house and appealing for help.

A short while later at about 07:00, a member of the SAPS Pietermaritzburg Tracking Team, visiting the vicinity of the KwaMpumuza area in Plessislaer, spotted an unoccupied suspicious white bakkie parked near a premises and immediately contacted the SAPS Pietermaritzburg Radio Control Room for verification an ownership of the vehicle. Upon circulation it was discovered that the bakkie belonged to Zondi. It is believed that the suspect abandoned the vehicle in the area and fled. Zondi’s Sony Xperia was taken from the vehicle. The motive for the attack is unknown. Police are investigating a case of hijacking. No arrests have been made.

Police are making an appeal to anyone that can assist with any information regarding the incident to urgently contact the Branch Commander –Detective Warrant Officer Gideon Bouwer of SAPS Town Hill Detective Services on telephone number 033 845 7794 or on his cell at 076 592 7164. Members of the public may also contact Crime Stop on 08600 10111.

Also view:

Hijack Prevention Guidelines

Is a New Zealand Learner’s Licence valid for driving in SA?

Question:

I would like to know whether my daughter who holds a New Zealand Learner’s Licence can drive in South Africa under the South African Learner’s Licence rules?

Answer:

In terms of section 23 of NRTA, a provisional drivers license is valid as long as all of the other requirements are complied with. See section 23 and reg 110.

 Sec 23.       When licence not issued in terms of this Act deemed to be driving licence

(1)        Subject to subsection (2) and the prescribed conditions—

(a)        a licence authorising the driving of a motor vehicle and which was issued in any other country; and

(b)        an international driving permit which was issued while the holder thereof was not permanently or ordinarily resident in the Republic,

shall, in respect of the class of motor vehicle to which that licence or permit relates and subject to the conditions thereof, be deemed to be a licence for the purposes of this Chapter: Provided that if that licence is a provisional licence or an international driving permit, it shall not authorise the driving of a motor vehicle carrying passengers and in respect of which a professional driving permit is required.

(2)        (a)        The period in respect of which a licence or an international driving permit referred to in subsection (1) shall be deemed to be a licence for the purposes of this Chapter, shall be as prescribed.

(b)        The holder of a licence or an international driving permit referred to in subsection (1) may, subject to the prescribed conditions, apply for a driving licence to take the place of such licence or permit.

(3)        An application under subsection (2) (b) shall be made in the prescribed manner to an appropriately graded driving licence testing centre.

(4)        On receipt of an application under subsection (2) (b), the driving licence testing centre concerned shall, subject to the prescribed conditions, issue to the applicant a driving licence in the prescribed manner.

Conditions for acknowledgement and exchange of driving licence not issued in terms of Act, and international driving permit

Reg 110.      (1)        Subject to subregulation (1A) and (3), a driving licence referred to in section 23 (1) (a) of the Act, issued while the holder of it was not permanently or ordinarily resident in the Republic, shall, for the period for, and subject to the conditions under which it was issued, be deemed to be a valid licence for the purposes of Chapter IV of the Act, if—

(a)      (i)    the licence has been issued in an official language of the Republic; or

(ii)   a certificate of authenticity or validity relating to the licence issued in an official language of the Republic by a competent authority, or a translation of that licence in such official language, is attached to it; and

(b)      such licence contains or has attached to it, a photograph and the signature of the licence holder.

(1A)     For the purpose of subregulation (1) the phrase “not permanently or ordinarily resident in the Republic” means being outside the borders of South Africa for an uninterrupted period of more than three months.

(2)       Subject to subregulation (3), an international driving permit referred to in section 23 (1) (b) of the Act shall be deemed to be a valid licence for the purposes of Chapter IV of the Act for the period for, and, subject to the conditions under which it was issued.

(3)        When the holder of a licence referred to in section 23 (1) (a) of the Act or the holder of an international driving permit referred to in section 23 (1) (b) of the Act—

(a)     returns to the Republic to resume permanent residence, such licence or permit shall no longer be deemed to be a valid licence for the purposes of Chapter IV of the Act, if it becomes invalid in the country or territory of issue; or

(b)    obtains permission in terms of any law for permanent residence in the Republic, such licence or permit shall no longer be deemed to be a valid licence for the purposes of Chapter IV of the Act, if it becomes invalid in the country or territory of issue.

Provided that the period of validity of such driving licence shall not exceed a period of five years from the date when such person is granted permanent residence status in the Republic.

 

(4)       Notwithstanding this regulation, a driving licence shall be deemed to be a valid licence for the purposes of Chapter IV of the Act, if such licence was issued in a territory previously known as—

(a)      The Republic of Bophuthatswana;

(b)      The Republic of Ciskei;

(c)       Gazankulu;

(d)      KaNgwane;

(e)       KwaNdebele;

(f)       KwaZulu;

(g)      Lebowa;

(h)      QwaQwa;

(i)       The Republic of Transkei; or

(j)       The Republic of Venda.

(5)        A licence referred to in section 23(1)(a) or an international driving permit referred to in section 23(1)(b) of the Act may, at any time during the validity thereof, and after the holder thereof has obtained permanent residency in the Republic, be exchanged for a driving licence in terms of subregulations (6) and (7): Provided that the requirement for permanent residency shall not apply to holders of diplomatic permits and treaty permits,

(6)        (a)      An application referred to in section 23 (3) of the Act shall, subject to subregulations (7) and (8), be made in the manner contemplated in regulation 111, and an application for the exchange of an international driving permit shall, in addition to the requirements of regulation 111 (1), be accompanied by the driving licence on the authority of which the permit was issued.

(b)      In the case of an application referred to in paragraph (a) for the exchange of a driving licence referred to in subregulation (4), which driving licence is no longer in the possession of the applicant, such application shall be made in the manner contemplated in regulation 112 (2) and the driving licence shall be authorised and issued in the manner contemplated in regulation 112 (3).

(7)        (a)      Subject to paragraph (b), the driving licence testing centre concerned shall upon receipt of an application referred to in subregulation (6) (a), authorise the issue and issue a driving licence for the class or classes of motor vehicles to which the existing licence relates.

(b)      The driving licence testing centre concerned shall authorise the issue and issue the licence referred to in paragraph (a) in the manner referred to in regulation 108 if—

(i)    it is satisfied that the applicant is the holder of the licence or permit, as the case may be, referred to in subregulation (1) and (2);

(ii)   it is satisfied that the licence or permit is still valid in the country or territory of issue; and

(iii)  in the case of an application for the exchange of a driving licence referred to in subregulation (4), if the MEC concerned confirms in writing that the applicant is the holder of a valid licence.

(8)        If there is a dispute as to the class of motor vehicle in respect of which a driving licence has been issued in terms of subregulation (7) (a), the MEC concerned shall determine the class of the motor vehicle.

Regards

 

Alta

Alta Swanepoel & Associates

Traffic enforcement within gated estates and communities remains a challenge

Question:

Good day. Perhaps you can provide me with some guidance. I stay in a complex and there are numerous vehicles with expired licence discs. These people happily take to our roads with these vehicles and are obviously in contravention of the law.

I have taken this up with our body corporate and they are reluctant to take action as these vehicles are not on a public road they say. My argument is that in a sense any movement within the complex does suggest that they are on a public road. More importantly, how do we know whether that car belongs to its rightful owner and is not a stolen vehicle stored here while the dust settles?

I look forward to your input. Thank you

Answer:

This is a hot topic for us at the moment as there is an enormous amount of abuse happening in Estates and housing developments where their home-owners associations are illegally involving themselves in the enforcement of traffic laws.  Many of these developments think that they are able to get around the fact that they have no legal authority to enforce any traffic laws by writing these into their home-owners rules and regulations, however this still doesn’t make it lawful and in fact, those who engage in these practices are committing fraud.  This is because only a duly appointed peace officer may issue a traffic fine in terms of the National Road Traffic Act and other legislation and a “public road” is defined in the National Road Traffic Act as follows:

 

“public road” means any road, street or thoroughfare or any other place (whether a thoroughfare or not) which is commonly used by the public or any section thereof or to which the public or any section thereof has a right of access, and includes -

(a) the verge of any such road, street or thoroughfare;

(b) any bridge, ferry or drift traversed by any such road, street or thoroughfare; and

(c) any other work or object forming part of or connected with or belonging to such road, street or thoroughfare.

 

It is our view as well as the view of counsel who provided us with a legal opinion on this matter that the main section of the definition in the National Road Traffic Act is very clear in its definition on what does in fact constitute a public road and we do not believe that any housing estates, whether they be a freehold or sectional title development is not excluded from this definition, regardless of who builds and/or maintains the roads therein.

It is a requirement in terms of regulation 36(3)(a) and (b) of the National Road Traffic Act that each and every motor vehicle be registered and licenced if it is operated on a public road.  This provision reads as follows:

(3) (a) No person shall operate on a public road, a motor vehicle that is not registered and licenced or not licenced, unless such vehicle is exempt from registration and licencing as contemplated in regulation 5.

(b) No person shall operate a motor vehicle on a public road unless a valid licence disc or licence disc and roadworthy certificate is displayed on such motor vehicle as contemplated in subregulation (1).

I am pleased to hear that your body corporate is reluctant to take action themselves since them fining people would most certainly be unlawful.  There is however nothing which prevents them from approaching your local traffic authority and asking them to come and fine the owners of the motor vehicles that are not properly licenced.

However, I would hasten to add that they would probably be reluctant to do this as well, given the fact that your body corporate would then have to deal with the unhappiness’s of all of those who fall foul of such an operation.  Unfortunately it seems to have become a South African norm that those who choose to break the law and are subsequently taken to task tend to squeal like stuffed pigs when this happens and we have had scores of complaints from people who have gone to do their shopping, only to come out and find a traffic fine placed on their windscreen for having an expired licence disc.

These people hold the view that the parking lot of a shopping centre is private property and therefore they should not be fined by traffic officers whilst they are on that property.  But sadly, these people are grossly misinformed since car parks at shopping centres are indeed deemed to be public roads and even if they weren’t, how does anyone suppose that a motor vehicle got there in the first place, if it had not been operated on a public road to start with?

If your body corporate would like to mitigate the backlash from residents who believe they are above the law, perhaps they could send out a notification to all residents that it has been noticed that many unlicensed motor vehicles are evident in the complex and the body corporate urges them to bring their licensing up to date as they will be asking traffic authorities to visit the complex.  Whether the traffic authorities will in fact bother to come or not is another thing altogether.

Best Regards,

Howard Dembovsky

National Chairman – Justice Project South Africa (NPC)

Also view:

Rules of the Road and Road Safety within Gated Estates and Communities

You need to display the vehicle licence disc itself, not the document on which it was printed!

Question:

My licence disc was cut out of the paper invoice that the new disc came on. My son is young and tends to do these things. Now I have the paper invoice on my dashboard but the round disc has gone missing. Is this legal or will I get a fine?

Answer:

Unfortunately, you are required to display the licence disc itself, not the document on which it was printed.  Regulation 36 of the National Road Traffic Act (below) states this.

 

36. Display of licence disc or licence and roadworthy certificate disc

(1) The owner of a motor vehicle shall display a licence disc or licence and roadworthy

certificate disc, whichever the case may be, issued in respect of such motor vehicle—

(a) if the motor vehicle is fitted with a transparent windscreen, by affixing it on the lower

left hand corner in such a manner that the print on the face of the licence disc or

licence and roadworthy certificate disc, whichever the case may be, is clearly legible

from the outside to a person standing in front or to the left front of such vehicle;

(b) if the motor vehicle is not fitted with a transparent windscreen, by affixing it in a

conspicuous position on the left front side of such motor vehicle in such a manner that

the print on the face of such a licence disc or licence and roadworthy certificate disc,

whichever the case may be, is clearly legible from that side; or

(c) if such licence disc or licence and roadworthy certificate disc, whichever the case may

be, is required to be displayed on a motor vehicle in a position where it is exposed to

the weather, be protected by affixing such licence disc or licence and roadworthy

certificate disc, whichever the case may be, on the inside of the transparent front of a

durable watertight holder.

 

Since you have a practical problem here, I would suggest that the best thing to do would be to go to your licensing authority and ask them to supply you with a duplicate licence disc.  A fee will be charged, but they should provide it to you without too much hassle.

Best Regards,

Howard Dembovsky

National Chairman – Justice Project South Africa (NPC)

Are there any provisions in the road traffic act that limit the noise level emanating from a vehicle?

Question:

Are there any provisions in the road traffic act that limit the noise level emanating from a vehicle. And do any such provisions relate only to engine/exhaust noise?

My question relates to people who fit powerful subwoofer systems to the vehicles and drive around with music at top volume so that the sound of the thumping bass can be heard from sometimes hundreds of metres away?

I have been plagued by a youngster who visits one of my neighbours and who sometimes drives past my house 3 or 4 times on a Saturday afternoon?  Is he only in contravention of local by-laws or national road laws too?

Additionally and separately on Saturday afternoon when I accosted him, he was drinking beer whilst driving on a public road. I pointed out that this is illegal and it only heightened his aggression (as one would expect).

Answer:

I can help with the legislation. It is copied for you. Testing stations also have to have a noise meter and vehicles must be tested for it when they are tested for roadworthiness.

Exhaust silencers and exhaust pipes

Reg 209. No person shall operate on a public road a motor vehicle—
(a) unless an efficient exhaust silencer or muffling device is affixed thereto in such a manner that the exhaust gas from the engine is projected through such silencer or muffling device, which shall be so constructed as to reduce and muffle in an effective manner the sound produced by such exhaust;
(b) if any mechanism or device is attached thereto enabling the exhaust gas from the engine of such motor vehicle to be projected otherwise than through the silencer or muffling device referred to in paragraph (a);
(c) if the exhaust gas or smoke from the engine is so dense as to cause a nuisance to, or obstruct the vision of other road users;
(d) if the exhaust pipe or silencer thereof is in such a position that oil or other flammable liquid or material can drip or fall onto it, or is not in efficient working order, or is so placed and maintained that exhaust gas or smoke leaks into the driving cab or passenger compartment of the vehicle; and
(e) which, when tested, exceeds the limits prescribed in code of practice SABS 0181 “The Measurement of Noise Emitted by Road Vehicles when Stationary”.

Vehicle causing excessive noise
Reg 310. No person shall operate or permit to be operated on a public road a vehicle in such a manner as to cause any excessive noise which can be avoided by the exercise of reasonable care on his or her part.

Regards

Alta

Alta Swanepoel and Associates

Justice Project says Road Law enforcement in South Africa is a monumental failure

With the 2012 “festive season” road death toll set to spiral to 1,600 or more by the time the count is officially stopped on 10 January 2013, South Africa is facing a record high in fatalities this season. It has also been stated by Collins Letsoalo of the RTMC that during this period, some 12,000 people have been injured and it must therefore be remembered is that these are PRELIMINARY figures, which will rise significantly within the 30 days after each crash as people die from their injuries.

On 23 December 2011, Justice Project South Africa (JPSA) welcomed the statement by the Department of Transport that a permanent CEO would be appointed “soon” to head up the Road Traffic Management Corporation. It’s now January 2013 and still, this has not happened and the RTMC remains a State Owned Company with no board of directors and no permanent leader, 35 months after the former CEO was suspended and subsequently sent on his way with an out of court settlement.

The dysfunctional state of the RTMC and its inability to coordinate law enforcement efforts has been acutely highlighted by the record high numbers of fatalities this “festive season”. It has also highlighted the acute lack of professional, visible traffic policing which would contribute greatly to making South Africa’s roads MUCH safer.

On Wednesday 2 January 2013 “Letsoalo denied that enforcement or punitive measures could be lacking, resulting in high levels of irresponsibility on the roads” in an interview with SABC 2. He went on to say “The issue can never be about the stringency of the law. We are doing everything in our power. The issue is that the South Africans must understand that the responsibility is theirs and everybody else’s.”

Yes, “everyone” must take responsibility for the carnage on our roads and “everyone” includes all road users, but it also includes the RTMC and law enforcement authorities.

The RTMC was established primarily to coordinate law enforcement and ensure road safety on South Africa’s roads and it has failed dismally in this task. The deep level of denial shown by the RTMC is further demonstrated by Ashref Ismail saying “Our plans are working, but it’s not acceptable that between 38 and 50 people die on the roads daily and during the festive season it is only 42 people a day”. What exactly does he mean “only 42 people a day”?!

Traffic authorities throughout South Africa, with the only possible exceptions of the Western Cape and Kwa-Zulu Natal, have all but completely abandoned the principle of effective, visible policing – in the pursuit of financial gain from the prolific and ineffective use of speed cameras, with little or no moving violation enforcement.

The last full “Weekly Cumulative Festive Season Road Safety Report” emanating from the RTMC was for the period 1 to 25 December and included their “Enforcement Outcomes and Highlights”. There have been several other updates in the road fatalities since then, but these have not included the “Enforcement Outcomes and Highlights”.

Examination of the data contained in this report reveals just how seriously the RTMC and traffic officials are really taking their mandate and it’s hard to fathom just how they conclude that they have “done everything they can to reduce the carnage”.

There are reportedly some 17,000 traffic officers in South Africa and the RTMC seems to be of the opinion that the following cumulative arrests for serious road crimes up to Christmas day are quite simply, acceptable:

• 1,153 for driving under the influence of alcohol;
• 123 for excessive speeding;
• 32 for reckless or negligent driving;
• 78 for excessive overloading and
• 46 for fraudulent, false or non-existent driving licenses and documents.

We feel that it is important to put this into perspective and have broken these figured down to the work done by each traffic officer. The above figures would mean that each traffic officer managed, over a 25 day period, to arrest:

• 0.068 people for DUI;
• 0.007 people for excessive over speeding;
• 0.002 people for reckless or negligent driving;
• 0.005 people for overloading and
• 0.003 people for fraudulent, false or non-existent driving licenses and documents.

Granted; in the same period, some 361,102 (21 per traffic officer) vehicles were stopped and inspected and 97,789 (or 5 per traffic officer) infringement notices were given out, but one has to ask just how effective traffic policing has actually been and how seriously traffic officials are taking their mandate?

With all due respect, it is totally unacceptable that in the same period (1-25 December), 890 crashes which killed 1098 people occurred and 11 of the 18 major crashes investigated by the RTMC (61%) were head-on collisions. Head on collisions mostly occur as a result of dangerous and illegal overtaking.

Worldwide, it has been proven – both in research and in practical implementation that road users’ “voluntary” compliance with traffic laws is directly proportional to the chance of them being caught disobeying the law and being taken to task. Similarly, research has proven that the efficacy of anti-intoxicated driving programmes is directly proportional to the speed with which conviction and punishment occurs, not so much the severity of the punishment meted out. In general, intoxicated driving cases in South Africa take two years or more to reach finality.

It has been suggested that South Africa needs 100,000 more traffic police officers, but what is forgotten is that traffic officers do not have to investigate crimes like is the case with SAPS. According to SAPS, there are currently 156,489 police men and women in South Africa for a total population of around 55 million people.

There are approximately 10 million licensed drivers on our roads, so it stands to reason that fewer traffic officers should be able to police our roads effectively, especially since their task is merely to catch and testify against offenders.

We have been repeatedly told that South Africa only has 17,000 traffic officers, however; given that the JMPD has some 4,800, the EMPD 1,200 and the TMPD 1,800, (7,800 cumulative) are we supposed to believe that just under half or South Africa’s entire traffic officer contingency is based in these three Cities in Gauteng alone? If the answer to that question is “yes” then we need to be asking why there is such a concentration in such a small area of Gauteng, let alone South Africa and whether this is a sound strategy?

There are those who would argue that the reason for this is that Gauteng has the highest vehicle population, however it must be borne in mind that Gauteng has around one third of the country’s vehicle population, not half.

The entire traffic policing issue must be revisited and its methodologies seriously questioned. It is quite clear that camera enforcement and sporadic road blocks are not achieving much, given that camera speeding fines continue to grow in number and roadblocks produce very few real results, apart from creating long delays.

A much better way to utilise the resources available would be to deploy smaller groups of traffic officers over extended distances and to conduct checks and enforce moving violations. Simply using the phrase “zero tolerance” must be stopped and applying it must become the rule, rather than the exception. Threats rarely have any consequence on adjusting peoples’ behaviour and the odd example here and there after someone has killed scores of people being given a “harsh” sentence has little effect.

Justice Project South Africa hereby calls for a National Day of Mourning for all road fatality victims on Friday 11 January 2013 and for an urgent review of traffic policing to be undertaken by the Department of Transport and the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development. When we say “urgent”, we don’t mean “sometime in the future”, we mean NOW!

BMW recalls 5000 X5′s in SA on power assisted steering correction

BMW South Africa is recalling about 5000 X5′s as part of a huge world-wide correction for a bolt that could fail and affect the power-assisted steering.

“I can confirm that BMW South Africa is affected by the technical campaign,” a BMW spokesman said. “This affects BMW X5 xDrive35d vehicles produced between June 2006 and November 2012 as well as BMW X6 xDrive35d vehicles produced between July 2007 and March 2010.

“About 240 000 vehicles are affected worldwide and 5034 in South Africa.”

The recall is for a bolt which could break and cause the loss of power-assisted steering which may increase the risk of a crash but there have been no incidents or injuries involving the problem in North America, Canada or South Africa.

BREAKING BOLTS

The US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said a bolt holding a belt pulley could loosen and break. “If that happens the car can lose power-assisted steering, making it difficult to steer.”

Customers in SA are being contacted to have the bolt for the deflection pulley replaced by a more robust version and locking agent.

The trouble was discovered in 2011 in Canada. Dealers will replace the bolt and tighten it to the proper specification. They’ll also add a coating to keep the bolt from coming loose.

[AP]

Also view:

Alarming number of vehicle owners not responding to vehicle recalls

Do not assume that your car insurance policy covers hail damage!!

Hail Damage on the East Rand / Photo from News24

Many might be in for a rude awakening when receiving notification that their car insurance policies do not cover hail damage! The recent hail damage in Gauteng has been extensive and left thousands of motorists with some severe damage. Santam confirmed that the insurer received close to 2000 claims for hail damage to cars and homes in the East Rand. Other insurers also revealed a significant increase in claims and extended office hours to assist with the processing of claims.

Unfortunately for many insured clients their failure to read their policy contracts may prove to be costly!  With insurance costs escalating many prefer the most affordable options -but fail to recognize that there is a reason why the policy might be more affordable… It is most likely that the insurance is less than comprehensive or that cover for some damage is provided as “optional cover” and with “an additional premium” to be charged for that cover.

We have found one such policy which clearly describes that Hail damage is not covered unless specified under optional cover and at an additional premium.

Example:

Example where the Hail damage is covered:

Policy Document from King Price

Conclusion

It remains important for vehicle owners to carefully consider their car insurance and to read the policy contract with attention to detail. You simply cannot blame the insurer if you sign and agree to the terms and conditions of such a policy.

If you live in an area where storm damage does not regularly occur, you may well decide not to include hail damage as one of the perils you are covered for…

The best advice would however be to avoid the gamble – Rather compare car insurance products from different insurers with hail damage included in the cover provided!!

Also view:

Saving money by not paying car insurance? You may need to think again!!

Car Insurance and Road Safety