no tax means insurance is void?

Frankzp

MaximumImpact wrote: »

Having no tax does not invalidate insurance. All insurance companies will try and go 50/50 because it makes their lives easier!!!! Get in touch with your insurance quickly and give them the details..it's what they are paid for!!!

good luck!!

I have been reading this thread with interest because a friend of mine is driving without road tax and he believes that it does not affect his insurance, well I found this article on the net this morning so I think that there is a possibility that there might be some misinformation going around.

Go to the website=== nopenaltypoints.co.uk/legal-implications-avoiding-car-tax-insurance.html

Cheers Frank

vaio

Your friend is right, lack of tax (or MOT) does not affect insurance

As for the link you posted, b0llocks is not magically transformed into non-b0llocks just by being published on the web, interestingly the same site also informs us that you can have your licence taken away for not having an MOT.

Frankzp

vaio, I agree with what you say about the web "b0llocks is not transformed into non-b0llocks just by being published on the web". Would that same statement not equally apply to your assertion that your insurance is valid when you do not have road tax, unless what you say is backed up with some evidence. Cheers Frank

pendulum

Frankzp wrote: »

nopenaltypoints.co.uk/legal-implications-avoiding-car-tax-insurance.html

Wow, that site's an absolute joke, it keeps claiming that the content has been written by experts and that they want to provide the highest quality advice, yet its absolutely littered with mistakes and tries to be very alarmist, steer clear of "amateur DIY" sites like this that try to be more than they are.

vaio

Frankzp wrote: »

vaio, I agree with what you say about the web "b0llocks is not transformed into non-b0llocks just by being published on the web". Would that same statement not equally apply to your assertion that your insurance is valid when you do not have road tax, unless what you say is backed up with some evidence. Cheers Frank

Fair point, but I’m sure you’ll understand the difficulty of finding reliable evidence to prove a negative, it’s like me asserting that your insurance is void if you have a tattoo & ginger hair and then expecting you to find some insurance T&C or legislation which clearly states that tattoos & ginger hair don’t void your insurance.

The other mistake I noticed on the site you linked to……

“Driving without an MOT
If your vehicle is at least three years old, it needs to pass an MOT test before it can be considered roadworthy. Driving a vehicle that has not successfully passed an MOT test can land you a fine, but will not usually result in penalty points. You may also have your driving license taken away…….”

is easier as there are lots of government/legislative sites that lay out the available penalties for not having an MOT and these don’t include points or disqualification.

bryanb

You MUST have insurance BEFORE you can pay Vehicle Excise Duty (Tax)
End of discussion?

Gloomendoom

bryanb wrote: »

You MUST have insurance BEFORE you can pay Vehicle Excise Duty (Tax)
End of discussion?

Maybe, but I'm not sure which discussion.

It is perfectly possible to have insurance but no tax, or tax with no insurance. You only need the insurance (and MOT) to be valid at the time you purchase the tax disc. I have bought a 12 month
tax disc with an insurance certificate that ran out the following day.

bryanb

Gloomendoom wrote: »

Maybe, but I'm not sure which discussion.

It is perfectly possible to have insurance but no tax, or tax with no insurance. You only need the insurance (and MOT) to be valid at the time you purchase the tax disc. I have bought a 12 month
tax disc with an insurance certificate that ran out the following day.

No tax means insurance void? was the OP's query
Therefore if that were the case you would be buying tax with an invalid insurance (because you had no tax)
Lateral thinking see?

As per you 2nd sentence insurance must be valid at the time of purchasing tax, which it could not be if the OP's Q was answered yes.

Gloomendoom

Ah, I see.

That is a bit too lateral for me, and I doubt I'm alone either!

dacouch

Here is the evidence from a bona fide source (The Insurance Ombudsman) that not having an MOT does not invalidate your Insurance.


13. roadworthiness

Most motor policies contain an express requirement that the vehicle must be maintained in a roadworthy state. If so, where there is good evidence that the loss or damage was caused (or substantially contributed to) because the vehicle was unroadworthy, we are likely to consider it fair for the insurer to reject the claim.

In other cases, the insurer might reduce the payout on the basis that the vehicle was not in good condition. If so, where there is good evidence that the vehicle would have failed an MOT test, we are likely to consider it fair for the insurer to take this into account in assessing its value.

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/motor-valuation.html#13

If you do a search of MSE you will find a few people whose MOTs had expired and they were with the one of the small minority (Cheap and Cheerful) Insurers that include a note that the car has to have a current MOT even though the Ombudsman will through out this exclusion. If you find them you will see the Insurers backed down following the MSE members seeking advice on MSE and their claims were paid, some of them were on a reduced valuation for a written off car as a car without an MOT is worth less.