Can you settle a pub argument. iirc In the good old days, driving without an MOT was a fairly irrelevant offence. Fine only.
Now it seems to invalidate your insurance and they might do you for that instead?
True, or false?
|
I dont believe that it can invalidate the 3rd party element of your cover. However it may give the insurer the right to reclaim from you any thing they have had to pay out. This will depend on the small print of the policy. Then try getting insurance after a claim like that!
Since the police only have access to your certificate of insurance and not the small print of your policy I cannot see how they could do anything. Now if the certificate starts to contain conditional wording that would be another matter. Conditional wording already is included on the certificate for named drivers and driving licence status, so I suppose everything is possible!
Wait for RTFM to comment.
--
pmh (was peter)
|
Should say "No FM2R" to comment.
Senior moment. Oh for an edit facility.
--
pmh (was peter)
|
|
|
|
|
if you have paid the insurance premium your insurance will cover third party liabilities which means you have insurance whether you have an mot certificate or not as there are cases where it is legal to drive without an mot
|
|
Only to drive to a 'Local' MOT test station by prior appointment. Regards Peter
|
On a slightly different note, is it permissible to drive to an MOT station with a SORN'd car whose MOT has expired, and the new one is needed to re-register the car in question?
TIA
Jack
|
|
|
>only to
& lots of other reasons.
But that's not the point here.
|
A requirement of all insurance policies require you keep the vehicle in a roadworthy order. An MOT only proves this - on the day it was obtained.
I've heard it said that some companies require this, but an awful lot of telephones sales staff are misinformed about this as I also know they've said this about policies where no such requirement exists.
Indeed, a policy with the restriction "you must have an MOT" could be a problem. You can drive any road vehicle to a pre-booked MOT without one (many of us have done this) and several classes of vehicles, are MOT exempt.
|
|
Mark has commented on this before, his opinion as I recall was that it shouldn't make a difference.
|
|
|
Good old Section 148 Road Traffic Act 1988
...where a Certificate of Insurance has been delivered..to the person by whom a policy has been effected...so much of the policy as purports to restrict..
the insurance of the person insured by the policy..
by reference to the below matter (there are several) shall as respects such liablities as are required to be covered by a policy be of no effect:
the condition of the vehicle.
The crux of this is that no MOT does not invalidate Insurance in respect of third party risks so you don't get done for no Insurance. BUT in the event of an accident if small print in policy mentions keeping vehicle in road worthy condition and this subsequently breached then the Insurance Company can come back to the owner for monies not paid out and or to deny comrehensive cover.
The other point raised re driving to booked MOT whilst vehicle on SORN.
No problems.
Schedule 2 Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 exempts a vehicle from Excise duty to and from pre booked MOT so the question of loss of revenue is not involved.
dvd
|
...line 11 above (obviously) should read:
' monies paid out '
dvd
|
Thank you very much.
That's not what it says here
www.motcentrefinder.co.uk/nav/info_pages/driving_t...l
but I'd rather believe the legislation!
|
That the car be tested every on expiry of the last MOT
Says that as well - which isn't even English.
|
|
|
That's not what it says here www.motcentrefinder.co.uk/nav/info_pages/driving_t...l
there is a feedback form on that site. you could tell them of their error.
|
|
|
|
|
"The other point raised re driving to booked MOT whilst vehicle on SORN.
No problems.
Schedule 2 Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 exempts a vehicle from Excise duty to and from pre booked MOT so the question of loss of revenue is not involved."
DVD - Very many thanks - where would we be without you! Car in question is my chum's XJS V12 convertible, which only sees the light of day between 1 May (hence topicality) and 1 Nov each year. Very nice too in metallic red with magnolia leather piped in red - the car, not my chum ....
Best wishes.
Jack
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
>>Now it seems to invalidate your insurance and they might do you for that instead?
Firstly insurance cannot be invalidated in that way. It is enforced by the RTA that TP liability cannot be avoided, pretty much "whatever". Therefore the insurer will end up paying out. However, he can recover his money from you.
Insofar as the rest of the cover under insurance - AD, Rugs & Clothing, Radios etc. that is merely subject to normal contract law and not goverened by the RTA - and if you void the contract Ts&Cs then you're stuffed.
Therefore there is nothing to be "done" for since a lack of MOT cannot invalidate the RTA part of your cover.
The majority of insurance policies do not ask for an MOT, instead they insist that the car is roadworthy. A car without an MOT may still be roadworthy, and car with an MOT may not be. Normally proof that a car would have passed an MOT is sufficient. The fact that it might fail an MOT may still not be sufficient grounds for trouble depending on what it might fail on, its relevance to the cars "roadworthyness" and its relevance to any particular incident.
Whether you knew, could have know, should have known or should have made sure that you knew is also relevant.
|
In my neck of the woods, court fines for having no MOT are far, far higher than having no insurance, careless or even dangerous driving and numerous other offences, judging by local newspaper coverage.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
|
|
|
