Car insurance for semi-pro musicians

[Mickeyboro]

Having both retired, my wife and I insured our car for social use only. Now I have joined a band that does regular (30+) local gigs a year, she is worried I would not be covered if I had an accident going to or from a gig.

I get the feeling when the word 'musician' is mentioned the price will soar. Anyone gone through this, and is there a way to minimise the likely financial damage? Thanks!

[fretmeister]

The financial penalty is far smaller than you breaching the terms of your policy and the insurers seeking reimbursement from you for any outlay.

Non-disclosure is always a bad idea.

[steantval]

I never mention it, it's not an occupation, it's a hobby.

[Happy Jack]

Given the amount that I "earn" from playing in a pub band, I think of the cash as being a donation to cover expenses rather than income.

Taken in the round, I doubt that I would have a problem with describing my journey (in the event of an accident/claim) as being anything other than driving to/from a pub.

The issue that would concern me would be having pro-level gear nicked from my vehicle, or my vehicle nicked when fully loaded. I imagine that I would have some trouble explaining why I was driving to a pub for an evening out whilst carrying several thousand pounds worth of gear ...

[ambient]

Don’t mention it.

when I used to drive I called myself a teacher. I do teach, and it forms the bulk of my income.

[Monkey Steve]

48 minutes ago, Happy Jack said:

Given the amount that I "earn" from playing in a pub band, I think of the cash as being a donation to cover expenses rather than income.

Taken in the round, I doubt that I would have a problem with describing my journey (in the event of an accident/claim) as being anything other than driving to/from a pub.

The issue that would concern me would be having pro-level gear nicked from my vehicle, or my vehicle nicked when fully loaded. I imagine that I would have some trouble explaining why I was driving to a pub for an evening out whilst carrying several thousand pounds worth of gear ...

The last sentence of this.  

Insurers don't have a great reputation for acting reasonably, or using common sense.  What they do is point to the clause in your policy that says that they're not going to pay out because you didn't tell them everything that they wanted to know.  

Clearly there's a difference between professional musicians driving all over the country and getting a fiver and a few beers for playing the local once a month, and not all insurers will regard the two as the same, so the best thing to do is ring your insurer and ask.  And get them to either point to the clause in the insurance document or confirm it in writing.

[ambient]

Would you have to tell them you played golf, or went fishing, or a myriad other things that people do as hobbies that require you to have expensive equipment?

[Monkey Steve]

7 minutes ago, ambient said:

Would you have to tell them you played golf, or went fishing, or a myriad other things that people do as hobbies that require you to have expensive equipment?

only if you were getting paid for it

getting your gear nicked from outside of a pub where there was a band being paid to play will be something of a giveaway

[fretmeister]

12 minutes ago, Monkey Steve said:

The last sentence of this.  

Insurers don't have a great reputation for acting reasonably, or using common sense.  What they do is point to the clause in your policy that says that they're not going to pay out because you didn't tell them everything that they wanted to know.  

Clearly there's a difference between professional musicians driving all over the country and getting a fiver and a few beers for playing the local once a month, and not all insurers will regard the two as the same, so the best thing to do is ring your insurer and ask.  And get them to either point to the clause in the insurance document or confirm it in writing.

That seams entirely reasonable to me, after all the policy cost was based on the information provided. It also seems to be a lack of common sense to not tell an insurer things that you suspect would change the price or the cover available. I don't have a lot of sympathy for those who fail to inform an insurer of all pertinent facts and then complain when the insurer won't pay out.

If you were buying a policy for your favourite bass you wouldn't be leaving out information that might mean no cover - so why take a different approach for the car?

 

 

[fretmeister]

9 minutes ago, ambient said:

Would you have to tell them you played golf, or went fishing, or a myriad other things that people do as hobbies that require you to have expensive equipment?

Nope. you're not getting paid for it.

 

If you get any money at all then it's a job. Paid Hobbies are still jobs. "Doesn't even cover the overheads" is still a job. If you want to get really picky - free beer and crisps for the band = payment = job.

[steantval]

16 minutes ago, fretmeister said:

That seams entirely reasonable to me, after all the policy cost was based on the information provided. It also seems to be a lack of common sense to not tell an insurer things that you suspect would change the price or the cover available. I don't have a lot of sympathy for those who fail to inform an insurer of all pertinent facts and then complain when the insurer won't pay out.

If you were buying a policy for your favourite bass you wouldn't be leaving out information that might mean no cover - so why take a different approach for the car?

 

 

I'll lack common sense then, what I do in my spare time has nothing to do with them, it's a hobby and not a job.

If I was playing full time it would be daft not to mention it, but I don't.

It would be really interesting to have a poll on this forum (excluding the pro players) who mention this fact to their vehicle insurers, I recon it's not that many.

[Tonteee]

2 minutes ago, steantval said:

I'll lack common sense then, what I do in my spare time has nothing to do with them, it's a hobby and not a job.

If I was playing full time it would be daft not to mention it, but I don't.

It would be really interesting to have a poll on this forum (excluding the pro players) who mention this fact to their vehicle insurers, I recon it's not that many.

* Name and address changed for reasons of privacy..

[steantval]

12 minutes ago, Tonteee said:

* Name and address changed for reasons of privacy..

Yeh, like the guys who remove or cover up their number plates when doing track days.?

[FinnDave]

2 hours ago, fretmeister said:

The financial penalty is far smaller than you breaching the terms of your policy and the insurers seeking reimbursement from you for any outlay.

Non-disclosure is always a bad idea.

This, with bells on. I reckon for every three people working in insurance, two of them are there to try to find a way to wriggle out of paying up when you claim. 

I can't really hide what I do from my insurers as my wife works for them, but having spoken to them at length about exactly this issue, not telling them about something relevant when taking out or renewing a policy can leave you uninsured in the unfortunate event of you having to make a claim. I pay something in the region of £120 a year extra for my car insurance for 'business use' which in my case is defined as playing music in return for payment.  

I also have separate insurance cover for my bass equipment as they cannot cover it under my house insurance once it is classified as 'being used for professional purposes'. Again non-disclosure can result in your insure being decried null and void.

My wife just asked me to stress that if we had a fire or burglary and my instruments were only covered by the household insurance, not only would I not receive any compensation for the loss of my bass gear, but the entire policy could be cancelled, so we would receive nothing for any losses incurred. Likewise, if you use your car to take amps, cabs, basses etc. to and from gigs, in the event of a claim being made, if that hadn't been declared then they may well not compensate you for any of the loss. If a third party is injured and you are effectively uninsured, you are in pretty deep trouble!

[ambient]

1 hour ago, Monkey Steve said:

only if you were getting paid for it

getting your gear nicked from outside of a pub where there was a band being paid to play will be something of a giveaway

If you left your ear unattended you probably wouldn't get paid out anyway.

[T-Bay]

1 hour ago, fretmeister said:

Nope. you're not getting paid for it.

 

If you get any money at all then it's a job. Paid Hobbies are still jobs. "Doesn't even cover the overheads" is still a job. If you want to get really picky - free beer and crisps for the band = payment = job.

Not sure on the last one, I got a free beer at an open mic I did last month. I wouldn’t count that as being employed or feel any great need to submit a self assessment tax form off the back of it.

[PaulWarning]

depends on you attitude to risk, on insurance forms it asks what you occupation is, not occupations, some folk don't like to leave anything to chance, take out maintenance contracts for instance, or extra insurance for bass gear, other weigh up the risk and decide whether to take it or not, me? the chances of having an accident and then the insurance company finding out you were going/returning from a paying gig and then saying you're not insured are about the same as me winning the lottery, but at the end of the day it's what you feel comfortable with

[ambient]

So those classing themselves as being 'semi-pro', do you declare this to HMRC?

I think this semi-pro thing is a little bit of a grey area, I'd have thought that it needs more than just the odd gig here and there, no matter that they're paid. Surely it's how you class yourself?

I class myself as professional, I complete a tax return every year, detailing my income various income streams, gigs, teaching etc. If I was semi-pro, I'd be completing a tax return from 2 or more jobs, if I wasn't treated as PAYE somewhere.

Edited December 11, 2017 by ambient

[PaulWarning]

1 minute ago, ambient said:

So those classing themselves as being 'semi-pro', do you declare this to HMRC?

I think this semi-pro thing is a little bit of a grey area, I'd have thought that it needs more than just the odd gig here and there, no matter that they're paid. Surely it's how you class yourself?

I'm not good enough to be semi pro 

[T-Bay]

1 minute ago, PaulWarning said:

I'm not good enough to be semi pro 

I’m barely good enough to be semi amateur!

[Blink]

If you use an insurer who understands musicians then there is no problem. I use Musicguard and they automatically include public liability insurance so they understand that you will be performing in public and they will insure gear left in cars (subject to you taking some entirely reasonable precautions). I am not a representative of Musicguard and I have yet to make a claim so I can't comment on their claims handling. Insurance problems seem to arise when you try to extend home contents cover to make it cover something that it was never intended cover.

 

N

[fretmeister]

10 minutes ago, ambient said:

So those classing themselves as being 'semi-pro', do you declare this to HMRC?

I think this semi-pro thing is a little bit of a grey area, I'd have thought that it needs more than just the odd gig here and there, no matter that they're paid. Surely it's how you class yourself?

I class myself as professional, I complete a tax return every year, detailing my income various income streams, gigs, teaching etc. If I was semi-pro, I'd be completing a tax return from 2 or more jobs, if I wasn't treated as PAYE somewhere.

If I get paid then I declare it. Doesn't matter if that is a music or magic gig, same applies.

[fretmeister]

16 minutes ago, T-Bay said:

Not sure on the last one, I got a free beer at an open mic I did last month. I wouldn’t count that as being employed or feel any great need to submit a self assessment tax form off the back of it.

You weren't booked as an act for an open night.

[T-Bay]

Still not sure refreshments count as payment. As an example, If someone was booked to give a talk for instance, no payment asked for or received but they get a cup of tea and a biscuit, that would count as payment under your system but I don’t think any reasonable evaluation of it would even come close to that. It’s no different if you play a couple of songs.

[fretmeister]

1 hour ago, steantval said:

I'll lack common sense then, what I do in my spare time has nothing to do with them, it's a hobby and not a job.

If I was playing full time it would be daft not to mention it, but I don't.

It would be really interesting to have a poll on this forum (excluding the pro players) who mention this fact to their vehicle insurers, I recon it's not that many.

Payment = job. Even if you make a loss, as no doubt most of us do. That is the only definition the insurers will care about. Not the "I do it for the love of it" or the "I'm just happy to cover the cost of a set of strings every now and again" type explanations.

 

The amount of hours you put in has no bearing on it at all. I only perform magic for a few hours per month. Nevertheless that involves travel to different venues and I get paid for it. Some years I make a little profit. Others I don't. It's still a job. The fact that I have a regular Mon-Fri job as well also has no bearing on whether the magic is a job. 

Musicians (and magicians) tend to perform in the evenings. Travel Time of day changes policy risks. Rush hour - higher risk. After 9am and before 4pm - lower risk. 5pm onwards - higher risk again etc.

Also - if you are travelling with others they want to know if the policy might be called upon to cover loss if earnings - not just for you, but anyone else you might damage. That all goes in the underwriting decision process.

 

While a forum poll would be interesting, all it would do is show the number of people putting themselves at risk of their insurers not paying out. It won't have any influence on policy terms or underwriters decision process. A far more useful poll would be to ask whether people actually check the policy terms before paying for the policy to see if it actually meets their needs. I'm betting most will buy on price alone and then complain later when it meet expectations.