We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are - or become - political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
your son , was driving his car with no mot and no insurance
there was no theft or extortion by the insurance company they had reason to believe you had a valid mot certificate , you informed them you hadn't they won't pay out .
you have terms and condiditons for a reason - NO MOT No insurance No payout simples .
So many things wrong with this post.
No MOT does not equal no insurance!!! :mad:
That stupid 'simples' word :mad: Is anyone else getting as tired of it as I am?
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
However not declaring (extensive) mods to the car doesnt help does it?
:p
for the simpletons within this thread How may more times NO MOT DOES NOT INVALIDATE ONES INSURANCE [comprende??]and as for not declaring [extensive] mods to the car, please reread original thread where you will find that the mods were declared to the broker by myself have got the persons name to whom I gave this information and also a rise in the value of the car can provide evidence of mods being disclosed, in 2007 along with the disclosure of a THATCHEM TOAD ALARM CAT 1 being fitted.
It appears that after discussing the above with the brokers, and after offering them proof of the disclosure their answer to this was simply, the previous broker never passed these details over to the new brokers.
It was the new brokers "Motor Direct" who have admitted to Zenith that it was disclosed re: no mot during the 1st initial telephone call re; accident , but have admitted to zenith that this information was not passed to zenith at all, as it was overlooked.
:p
