I obviously meant in the context of a non visitor....which is what we are discussing.....Original Post Deleted
I obviously meant in the context of a non visitor....which is what we are discussing.....Original Post Deleted
Last edited by Mat; 08-04-2012 at 10:42 PM.
My personal experience is that there are very clear rules in hong kong, one of them being that you do need to have an hk licence once you have an hk Id. It is in section 3 of the hkgov how to apply for a driving license. I think our friend who has suggested that you can get away without it may well have experienced hong kong's sometime poor enforcement, but if that is your mode of operation and breaking the law is your normal approach then good luck. My view is that as a guest in hong kong, you should do your best to be keep to the laws. Also from first hand experience having insured two cars for three yeArs using KWIKSURE and also one claim, they are poor compared to the uk and expensive relative to the cover. Be very careful with the depreciation clauses and with any claim that is 100 % the other persons fault. The insurance company will depreciate your claim on a prorata basis so that if your claim is for 50000, then in addition to any excess they will take off a depreciation charge against the age of the car so you may end up getting less than 25000. This is the reason most repairs end up being a cash exchange and done at back street garages .Also they will not claim the full amount against a third party just what they have lost unless you get stuck in. This is where having KWIKSURE should help but frankly they did not? But anyway I am talking complete rubbish apparently( nice !!!!). By the way I suspect you will find your insurance is void if you don't have an hk license but have an hkid!
JC
Mat...you're wrong.
i think you two should just get together and have a p*ssing contest... get it all out of your systems so that the forum can get back to being helpful to newcomers...
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wroooooonnngggg!
I can accept that the Transport Department statement is probably not a direct quote from the applicable statute/law, so the rule I have copied above could have been translated from/into/from/to Chinglish at some point. So maybe there is a "six-month" grace period (or two months?) (one?) after all. But so far I have not seen any evidence for that. Got any?
JC, you don't mean market value do you? If you are......no please......please don't tell me you're surprised they only payout based on the current value of the car!!
Fuck me, have you ever tried to make a claim with Direct Line or Norwich Union back home? I have, funnily enough, they also take into account the depreciation of the car dummy alert
No it's not based on market value. They take age into account even if it's an appreciating vehicle. I've done claims in both UK and here and there is a world of difference.