My friends car had no MOT

GordyR

C_Ronaldo wrote: »

GordyR

id come clean re the MOT issue

Thanks mate. I think I would have done anyway, but i've never been in this kind of situation before and just wasn't sure how best to handle it.

Any other opinions?

Keith

GordyR wrote: »

a rabbit ran out in front of me causing me to brake hard and swerve. I hit a traffic island which sent me into a spin.

Could you have foreseen the results of your braking? The law states if an animal steps in front of you and avoiding it would cause an accident you should hit it, unless it's a dog in that case you should avoid it and cause the accident.

As you are taking the vehicle to a prebooked MOT tell your insurance company, after all the garage will have your details in the book for Wednesday and will provide a copy for your insurance company to prove that you were driving to a prebooked MOT.

Quentin

Driving with no tax is not an insurance issue, and no MOT has already been discussed throughout the thread.

gabyjane

Thanks guys didn't expect to see so many replies!
Well my friend drove it to the garage and it got MOT'd, it failed and had to takeit in for £160 of work! she came round last night and all is well, she is very lucky i thnk and i'm sure she won't do it again!

x_raphael_xx

GordyR wrote: »

Thanks mate. I think I would have done anyway, but i've never been in this kind of situation before and just wasn't sure how best to handle it.

Any other opinions?

At the risk of being flamed again...

I believe that you are allowed to drive without MOT if you are heading for a booked MOT appointment with your garage.

No doubt someone will tell me if I'm wrong.

Wig

GordyR wrote: »

my front drivers side wheel actually became detached! The whole drivers wing is demolished. Despite the cars value being around £18,000 this leads me to believe it could be a write-off.

Where do you guys think I stand? Will the insurance company pay up? Should I declare straight away about the MOT/SORN issue or should I wait until they bring it up, if they do at all?

If your insurer decides to pay you the market value of your vehicle, you must send them all vehicle keys, the certificate of motor insurance, the vehicle registration document and (if this applies) the Department for Transport test certificate (MOT) before they will pay your claim. They may move your vehicle somewhere safe.

It's the part in brackets, the 'if this applies' bit that gives me hope. What do you guys think?

I'm in two minds on this one.

One way of handling it I'm thinking would be to keep quiet about the "no MOT" (but notify the garage and ask them to keep hold of the record that your car was booked in, and I would ask them to reply to a letter from you asking them to confirm to you in writing, that your car was booked in for the MOT on Wed, and that it would have been acceptable for the car to be brought to the garage the day before the test (Tue).

Then make a claim as normal with the insurer and if and only if they ask for current MOT cert, you tell them and show them the letter of confirmation from the garage. After all, YOU HAVE DONE NOTHING WRONG so there is no need to tell them the car was being driven to an MOT centre.

The ONLY thing you have to worry about is was there a fault (brakes etc) that could have caused the accident? If 'yes' they will not payout.

Second point of little concern is if they write off your vehicle, they may undervalue your car for having no valid MOT cert. I say "little concern" because I don't for one minute believe that your car will be written off if it is worth £18K. If for any strange reason they do write it off, wait for the settlement figure and then if you don't like it (because of no MOT undervaluing)..... you can have the repairer re-allocated to someone who is not a rip off merchant. One of the National chains of vehicle repairers or a repairer who will use good quality "second hand - used" parts to cut down on costs.


My second 'frame of mind' would be to tell them up front that the car had no MOT, but I don't see (at this stage) that you have any requirement to do so, so I would choose not to tell them up front.


If the car is being stored in some commercial yard somewhere (at cost), and you have room on your property for it to be delivered, You might want to consider moving it to your home, because if there were faulty brakes and it becomes a nightmare claim the insurer will not pay for the storage fees.

EDIT: Just to add, they could only legitimately ask you for the MOT certificate anyway, if and only if they write off your car (and even then it could be disputed). Yet another reason not to bother them with the irrelevant information that you had no MOT from the start (of the claim). Doing so could only lead to problems with them thinking (wrongly) that they might have a 'get out' of your claim. If they do not write your car off, and ask you for your MOT cert, just refuse and tell them they have no right to ask for that document as it could not possibly affect the validity of your claim (for a repair).

Conor_3

x_raphael_xx wrote: »

At the risk of being flamed again...

I believe that you are allowed to drive without MOT if you are heading for a booked MOT appointment with your garage.

No doubt someone will tell me if I'm wrong.

You are 100% correct and this also illustrates why those who say their insurance is invalid without an MOT are wrong.

raskazz

GordyR, you shouldn't be worrying about this too much IMO. As mentioned in the thread earlier, your insurer can only reject the claim on grounds of unroadworthiness if the unroadworthiness caused or contributed to the claim. A lack or MOT also doesn't automaticallty mean that the car is unroadworthy.

It is highly unlikely that they will ask for an MOT certificate unless the vehicle is written-off, and if they do, simply explain the circumstances as you did in your post. There's no need to raise the MOT issue yourself unless your insurer asks you questions on it or requests MOT documents.

Wig

Conor wrote: »

and this also illustrates why those who say their insurance is invalid without an MOT are wrong.

Not really, because those insurers who do stipulate it in their polices always have the caveat "where required by regulations".

The people who say it (and the insurers who have it in their policy) are wrong because (thanks to rasskaz) the FSA regulations say they are not allowed to do it. Which bears out what I have said previously on this issue (on other threads) that such a policy condition could be challenged to the ombudsman as being unreasonable.

Motmac

Conor wrote: »

You are 100% correct and this also illustrates why those who say their insurance is invalid without an MOT are wrong.

I agree.also,if you get caught with no MOT by the police its only a £60 fine i think at the moment...they dont seem too bothered tbh.