- Totally get where you’re coming from.
- City rules seem to just add more hoops, but don’t really help with the actual risks.
- Had a buddy who lost his side mirror at one of those “secure” lots—same story, nobody would claim it happened there.
- At least at home, if something gets messed up, you can deal with it right away.
- The whole permit thing is a headache, but yeah… handing over your keys to strangers? That’s a tough sell.
- Maybe these rules make sense on paper, but real life’s messier.
Honestly, this whole thing has me scratching my head too. I just started looking into insurance for my first classic car and the city’s new storage rules are making it way more complicated than I expected. Like, I get that they want to keep things safe or whatever, but it feels like they’re just making it harder for regular folks to actually protect their cars.
Reading about your buddy’s mirror getting swiped at a “secure” lot is exactly the kind of thing that worries me. You’d think paying extra for a spot with cameras and gates would mean your car’s actually safe, but apparently not. And then nobody wants to take responsibility? That’s rough.
The permit process is such a pain, too. All the paperwork, inspections, and then you’re supposed to trust someone else with your keys? I barely let my own family drive my car, let alone some random lot attendant who probably doesn’t even care about classics. Maybe I’m just paranoid, but it feels like these rules are written by people who’ve never actually owned something they care about.
I guess I can see why the city wants to regulate stuff—maybe there were issues before—but it seems like they’re missing the point. Real life isn’t as neat as whatever checklist they came up with. At home, at least if something goes wrong, you know exactly who to talk to (yourself), and you can fix it on your own terms.
Anyway, thanks for sharing your experience. Makes me feel a little less crazy for being skeptical about all these new hoops we’re supposed to jump through.
Maybe I’m just paranoid, but it feels like these rules are written by people who’ve never actually owned something they care about.
You’re not alone in thinking that. I see a lot of folks frustrated by the disconnect between policy and reality. Here’s what I’ve noticed from the insurance side:
- “Secure” lots aren’t always as secure as advertised. Even with cameras, claims for theft or damage can get messy—especially if the lot owner denies responsibility.
- Some policies require you to use approved storage to keep coverage valid, which means you’re stuck with these city-mandated options whether you trust them or not.
- The permit process is a headache, but skipping it can void your coverage if something happens. That’s a nasty surprise nobody wants.
I get why the city wants to regulate, but it does feel like they’re missing the mark for classic car owners. Out of curiosity, has anyone here actually had an insurance claim denied because of these new storage rules? Or is it more the fear of what could happen that’s driving everyone nuts?
“Secure” lots aren’t always as secure as advertised. Even with cameras, claims for theft or damage can get messy—especially if the lot owner denies responsibility.
That’s been my experience too. I had my S-Class parked in one of those “approved” facilities last winter—supposedly top-tier security, but someone managed to scratch the paint and nobody could tell me how it happened. The insurance company wanted proof that I’d followed every single rule, down to the letter. It was a nightmare just getting them to process the claim.
Here’s what I’ve learned:
1. Always document the condition of your car before storage (photos, timestamps, etc.).
2. Double-check that your storage facility is actually on your insurer’s approved list—sometimes they change without notice.
3. Keep every bit of paperwork from both the facility and your insurer.
I get why there are rules, but it feels like they’re designed for people who don’t actually understand what it means to own something rare or valuable. Has anyone tried negotiating with their insurer about alternative storage options? Wondering if there’s any flexibility if you can prove your own garage is more secure than these so-called “secure” lots...
I totally get the frustration. It’s wild how these “approved” lots get all the trust, but half the time they’re just a fancy fence and a camera that may or may not even work. My uncle had his ‘79 Trans Am in one last year—he joked the only thing secure was how fast they cashed his check. Scratched door, no footage, and a lot of finger-pointing.
I’ve actually tried asking my insurer about using my own garage. They acted like I was suggesting parking it on the street with the windows down. Even after I showed them my security system, reinforced doors, the whole nine yards... they just kept repeating their policy. Guess it’s easier for them to say “use this lot” than actually check if your setup is better.
All these new city rules just make it harder for folks who actually care about their cars. Weirdly enough, I feel like my own place is way safer than any “secure” facility I’ve seen. Maybe the real security is just not letting anyone else touch your keys...
