4 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHAlarm and Immobiliser (from factory?) <insurance>
Leading reported evidence
Install with an anti-theft device
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed · Original poster
''we will not pay out for any theft or attempted theft unless your vehicle is fitted with an anti-theft device which has been tested by the Motor Insurance Repair Research Centre at Thatcham and has been given category 1 status.''
Leading evidence: 'Install with an anti-theft device' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Install with an anti-theft device' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed · Original poster
''we will not pay out for any theft or attempted theft unless your vehicle is fitted with an anti-theft device which has been tested by the Motor Insurance Repair Research Centre at Thatcham and has been given category 1 status.''
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
Install with an anti-theft device
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed · Original poster
''we will not pay out for any theft or attempted theft unless your vehicle is fitted with an anti-theft device which has been tested by the Motor Insurance Repair Research Centre at Thatcham and has been given category 1 status.''
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed · Original poster
''we will not pay out for any theft or attempted theft unless your vehicle is fitted with an anti-theft device which has been tested by the Motor Insurance Repair Research Centre at Thatcham and has been given category 1 status.''
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
4 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Porsche Club GB: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261027T031046Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Afternoon Gents,
I've obtained a competitive price for my renewal and one of the endorsements applicable states the car must be fitted with a Cat 1 Thatcham approved Alarm & Immobiliser (quote below)...
''we will not pay out for any theft or attempted theft unless your vehicle is fitted with an anti-theft device which has been tested by the Motor Insurance Repair Research Centre at Thatcham and has been given category 1 status.''
I own a C98 (Rest of World Spec) 996 Turbo Manual, not C16 UK spec.
I know it has an alarm as it was playing up a few weeks ago, but how do I determine categorically and beyond any reasonable doubt that it satisfies the Cat 1 Alarm/Immob criteria?
How can I find out if the car was manufactured with this or not?
I wouldn't want this to be an issue in the unfortunate event of a claim, so would rather resolve up front prior to policy commencement.
Many Thanks,
Oscar
Oscar!!
The Carrera 98 Security System was fitted to all C16 UK 996s between October 1997 and 2005 and has Thatcham Catagory 1 Approval. The Approval Number is TC2-900/1197. The additional requirements for Thatcham Approval include an alarm siren and tilt sensor (Option code M536), amongst other bits and pieces. I suspect they would be fitted to your car, but it isn't certain. Some 996s were 'grey imports' from places like Cyprus, so although RHD, the build spec may be slightly different.
I was able to get a letter from Porsche Customer Services at Reading HQ, confirming the Thatcham Approval for both my 996 C2 and my 3.2 Carrera (which has the PA1000 system). I recall having to email a copy of the V5C to prove ownership, but they seemed to treat it as very much a common request. I suggest giving them a call.
Thank you for your reply Richard, sensible suggestion.
Yes, have dealt with Porsche HQ in the past (and had to provide proof of ownership) for other requests.
In fact, as a new PCGB member, I have just sent proof of ownership in order to obtain the Certificate of Authenticity FOC, so when I receive a reply, I will also request a letter confirming (or not) Alarm status.
Thanks,
Oscar
PS...once I have worked out how to add pictures to posts... a proper 'hello' from a new member post (with pics of course) will follow
