Driving without insurance

emsywoo123

iamana1ias wrote: »

Not even slightly. Would you let someone drive when drunk? No? Then why let someone drive without insurance?

What? What?. ridiculous.

dizzybuff

It is a legal requirement that you have insurance or are insured for any time you get behind the wheel of a car . People are in the knowledge that if driving from a purchase or to an MOT you are covered ( as long as MOT is still in date ). I understand your popint , a short term insurance would have been fine , but you would have had to ensure a valid MOT and tax was also in place as if any of these are not it invalidates your insurance. I personally would have asked the owner to drive it back to your street . Then paid for a taxi back for them .

Legal requirements are legal requirements . Im not having a go but criminals use pool cars which are uninsured, un taxed and have no MOTs to committ crimes . It is the start of a chain and the police were right in what they did .

An expensive lesson , Im sorry it happened like that but IMHO . I am not sorry you got caught , a lesson learnt is a lesson gained so to speak. next time ask advise of your insurance company before even getting behinfd the wheel of an unisured car

Sorry K XXXX

Inactive

dizzybuff wrote: »

, but you would have had to ensure a valid MOT and tax was also in place as if any of these are not it invalidates your insurance.

You can of course support that statement with some facts.:rolleyes:

iamana1ias

dizzybuff wrote: »

It is a legal requirement that you have insurance or are insured for any time you get behind the wheel of a car . People are in the knowledge that if driving from a purchase or to an MOT you are covered ( as long as MOT is still in date ). I understand your popint , a short term insurance would have been fine , but you would have had to ensure a valid MOT and tax was also in place as if any of these are not it invalidates your insurance. I personally would have asked the owner to drive it back to your street . Then paid for a taxi back for them .

Legal requirements are legal requirements . Im not having a go but criminals use pool cars which are uninsured, un taxed and have no MOTs to committ crimes . It is the start of a chain and the police were right in what they did .

An expensive lesson , Im sorry it happened like that but IMHO . I am not sorry you got caught , a lesson learnt is a lesson gained so to speak. next time ask advise of your insurance company before even getting behinfd the wheel of an unisured car

Sorry K XXXX

Not true that no MOT would invalidate the insurance. That would depend entirely on the insurance policy wording.

emsywoo123

dizzybuff wrote: »

It is a legal requirement that you have insurance or are insured for any time you get behind the wheel of a car . People are in the knowledge that if driving from a purchase or to an MOT you are covered ( as long as MOT is still in date ). I understand your popint , a short term insurance would have been fine , but you would have had to ensure a valid MOT and tax was also in place as if any of these are not it invalidates your insurance. I personally would have asked the owner to drive it back to your street . Then paid for a taxi back for them .

Legal requirements are legal requirements . Im not having a go but criminals use pool cars which are uninsured, un taxed and have no MOTs to committ crimes . It is the start of a chain and the police were right in what they did .

An expensive lesson , Im sorry it happened like that but IMHO . I am not sorry you got caught , a lesson learnt is a lesson gained so to speak. next time ask advise of your insurance company before even getting behinfd the wheel of an unisured car

Sorry K XXXX

Thank you, well phrased, made your point politely.
p.S. It was not me:D
Oh, and the car was 90 miles away

dizzybuff

iamana1ias wrote: »

Not true that no MOT would invalidate the insurance. That would depend entirely on the insurance policy wording.

Im afraid in the eyes of the the law no valid MOT on a car that needs an MOT is "usually" an insurance requirement , the car tax is given on the pretense that the MOT is valid or an MOT excemption certificate is in place.

If one of the componants is missing you are breaking the law.

Thats why seizure of the car is there , and you have the time to present the relevant documents.

Plus Im not sure how manuy people actually read insurance docs (appart from me and oh)

Anyhoos back to the point

Inactive

dizzybuff wrote: »

Im afraid in the eyes of the the law no valid MOT on a car that needs an MOT is "usually" an insurance requirement , the car tax is given on the pretense that the MOT is valid or an MOT excemption certificate is in place.

That simply isn't true, I have checked this with my insurers, I note that you have added the word " usually " to your terminology now, but it still isn't true in many cases.

dizzybuff

better all make sure we read our insurance docs then LOL

Ebe_Scrooge

Oh please, not this debate again ! Here are the main points :

1. No MOT does not automatically invalidate an insurance policy - you must check your particular policy for terms and conditions.
2. Driving with no MOT is illegal ( except driving to a pre-booked MOT test ).
3. Driving with no Insurance is illegal.
4. Driving with no tax is illegal.
5. You must have valid insurance and MOT in order to buy a tax disc.

So if you have no MOT and get stopped, you will be prosecuted for having no MOT, and MAY OR MAY NOT be prosecuted for having no insurance - depending upon the terms and conditions of your particular policy.

Inactive

Ebe_Scrooge wrote: »

So if you have no MOT and get stopped, you will be prosecuted for having no MOT.

Also wrong, doesn't apply to a car under 3 years old.;)