91 Days to State "NO MOT, NO PAYOUT"

CPJames19

How can people drive without a valid tax disc? "But I didn't know I was driving without a valid tax disc" - Don't we get a reminder from the DVLA to notify us of the expiry date. I always get sent a reminder from the DVLA but I don't need to be sent a reminder since I take a periodic look at the tax disc on my car and renew it about 2 weeks online/by phone/at the Post Office before the expiry date.

forgotmyname

Unless you had an agreed value policy that covers all the extra money spent then you wont get a penny back for any of that.

Recently read a post on another forum, Driver had tinted headlight surrounds, After an accident the insurance fitted a standard headlight
because they could not be bought from the manufacturer.

Agreed value would have covered you better, But without an MOT, I dont know if there is anything to stop them offering you a couple of hundred
pounds saying thats what it would fetch at auction. without an MOT.


Expensive lesson.

Hammyman

OK...

Under contractual law, the contract of insurance states no MOT, no payout. The contract wasn't adhered to, hence no payout.

As regards the law, insurance companies have to pay out to third parties when there is no MOT (previously they refused to and it was this that was ruled on) and then they usually recover the money from the policyholder if they're in breach of the contract. Previously they'd have washed their hands completely and you'd have to sue the person responsible yourself.

As regards to the modifications:
If its a mainstream insurance company, they don't pay out on the cost of mods, merely the market value of a standard car in the condition it was in at the time of the accident. You need to go to a specialist broker offering "agreed value" if you want payout for the money spent on the mods. If he's offered £1500, that's because that is what Glass's say a car in the condition it was is worth. Classic car owners are in the same boat and I've seen more than one Capri owner being paid £100 for a car worth £5k in the classic car world because they took a standard policy which paid out based on Glass's Guide rather than an agreed value policy. What makes it worse is that the specialist policies are usually £100's cheaper.

judy_

I had a car stolen in 2007. The MOT had ran out and I hadn't realised.
Insurance company paid out, minus the cost of an MOT.

molerat

Hammyman wrote: »

OK...

Under contractual law, the contract of insurance states no MOT, no payout. The contract wasn't adhered to, hence no payout.

Fortunately, as has been proven by several posters on here, the insurance regulators take an entirely different view of that unfair contract clause so please stop repeating that unfounded drivel.

motorguy

Hammyman wrote: »

OK...

Under contractual law, the contract of insurance states no MOT, no payout. The contract wasn't adhered to, hence no payout.

As regards the law, insurance companies have to pay out to third parties when there is no MOT (previously they refused to and it was this that was ruled on) and then they usually recover the money from the policyholder if they're in breach of the contract. Previously they'd have washed their hands completely and you'd have to sue the person responsible yourself.

As regards to the modifications:
If its a mainstream insurance company, they don't pay out on the cost of mods, merely the market value of a standard car in the condition it was in at the time of the accident. You need to go to a specialist broker offering "agreed value" if you want payout for the money spent on the mods. If he's offered £1500, that's because that is what Glass's say a car in the condition it was is worth. Classic car owners are in the same boat and I've seen more than one Capri owner being paid £100 for a car worth £5k in the classic car world because they took a standard policy which paid out based on Glass's Guide rather than an agreed value policy. What makes it worse is that the specialist policies are usually £100's cheaper.

+1

This is my understanding too. The 'insurance companies must pay' clause only applies to third parties.

I would say driving what sounds like a heavily modded car without being absolutely certain the insurance company is aware of this AND driving with no MOT is hardly a good way to generate any goodwill on the part of the insurer.

BillScarab

I've been involved in an accident when the MOT on my car had expired. The insurance company paid for the damage to the third party and to my car. They only stipulated that I get it tested as asoon as it was repaired.

Not having an MOT does not invalidate your insurance.

highet

just received my wifes insurance renewal quote from ''sheilas wheels'' and one of the new clauses they have inserted this year is that lack of a valid mot will automatically invalidate the insurance

mikey72

highet wrote: »

just received my wifes insurance renewal quote from ''sheilas wheels'' and one of the new clauses they have inserted this year is that lack of a valid mot will automatically invalidate the insurance

That could be awkward as you are allowed to drive it to a pre booked MOT, so if we assume you leave it late, then take it and fail, go back a week later for the re-test when the old MOT has now expired, you aren't insured any more, even if the car will pass?
Doen't seem to be enforcable, more like the insurance companies making up their own reasons to try to avoid paying out.

neilmcl

highet wrote: »

just received my wifes insurance renewal quote from ''sheilas wheels'' and one of the new clauses they have inserted this year is that lack of a valid mot will automatically invalidate the insurance

As the earlier poster mentioned, there are strict guidelines from the financial ombudsman as to clauses like this being unenforceable.