help, my mot is overdue

goldspanners

jeannieblue wrote: »

Here we go again (sing to the tune of Dolly Parton) - you know who she is - similar build to me but a hell of alot older......

same airbags?

jeannieblue

goldspanners wrote: »

same airbags?

Mine are natural ... as you well know

goldspanners

jeannieblue wrote: »

Mine are natural ... as you well know

i don't,because you keep putting the lights off

jeannieblue

goldspanners wrote: »

i don't,because you keep putting the lights off

Sight is only one of the senses......

But then, you're not sober much of the time..

BillScarab

Norbertsmum wrote: »

So does it or doesn't it?

No it does not. Do a seach for MOT and you'll find hundreds of threads about it. It seems to be asked at least once a week lately.

I know from personal experience that making a claim on your insurance when you have a very expired MOT is possible.

vaio

BillScarab wrote: »

No it does not. Do a seach for MOT and you'll find hundreds of threads about it. It seems to be asked at least once a week lately.

I know from personal experience that making a claim on your insurance when you have a very expired MOT is possible.

Lack of MOT can invalidate yours insurance IF your policy says it does

raskazz

vaio wrote: »

Lack of MOT can invalidate yours insurance IF your policy says it does

No it can't, such a term is unenforceable. I wrote a long post about this here:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=13311485&postcount=24

vaio

raskazz wrote: »

No it can't, such a term is unenforceable. I wrote a long post about this here:


……….Under FSA regulation (The Insurance Conduct of Business Sourcebook, rule 8.1.2 to be precise) an insurer can only repudiate a claim from a consumer on grounds of breach of warranty or condition if the breach actually caused or contributed to the loss (unless there is an element of fraud). Thus an insurer can only reject a claim on the grounds of a car being unroadworthy if that unroadworthiness actually caused or contributed to the accident or loss. To do that they would have to prove (i) that the car was unroadworthy and (ii) that the unroadworthiness caused or contributed to the accident or loss. A lack of MOT will not help them prove this either way, for the reasons given previously……..

If the policy explicitly states that cover is only operative IF the car has a current MOT (as some do) then I don’t see the above applies. I would have thought an insurance company can stipulate exclusions, limitations and conditions and the consumer can choose whether or not to place their business with that particular company.

If a consumer chooses to place their business with a particular company and then operates outside the stated & agreed exclusions, limitations and conditions then I don’t see how they can complain if the insurance company sticks to the agreement and refuses to pay.

jeannieblue

It is quite simple really.

Some insurance policies cover you if MOT has run out and some don't..

You need to read the VERY small print of your own policy - but I reckon that if you had an accident and your MOT had expired, then you are probably bu**ered. If they can find an 'out', then they will. The little people don't win

raskazz

vaio wrote: »

If the policy explicitly states that cover is only operative IF the car has a current MOT (as some do) then I don’t see the above applies. I would have thought an insurance company can stipulate exclusions, limitations and conditions and the consumer can choose whether or not to place their business with that particular company.

If a consumer chooses to place their business with a particular company and then operates outside the stated & agreed exclusions, limitations and conditions then I don’t see how they can complain if the insurance company sticks to the agreement and refuses to pay.

You need to reread the linked to post then. All motor insurers are subject to FSA rules.