MOT expired the day of accident-help!

MartiMc

Just wondering if anyone knows whether my MOT expiration will affect my claim - the date of expiry was 19th Feb and the accident happened (total loss - no injuries - due to icy conditions so noone at fault) at 1.30 am ON 19th Feb - will my insurance still be valid?

The car had been fully serviced and prepped for MOT by a local garage a few days before so we were just waiting for an appointment but not intending to drive once the MOT cert ran out! Ironic or what? Now I'm not sure if the expiry date means the car was still covered by the MOT cert UNTIL 19th or whether it was in fact out of MOT on the 19th.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks

mikey72

Insurance would be valid either way, but they would reduce the price if the mot had actually expired.
If the expiry on the mot was the 19th, it was still valid, don't let them beat you down in any way.

If you don't get a fair offer, the FOS guide is worth a read.

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

Christopher7

Yes the MOT is valid.

Quentin

MartiMc wrote: »

due to icy conditions so noone at fault.....

In a case like this it will actually be recorded as a "fault" claim against you.

("Fault" is used by insurers when they have to pay out on a claim and cannot reclaim their outlay from anyone else)

raskazz

All that matters is whether the car was roadworthy (which is independent to whether the MOT had expired or not); and, if unroadworthy, whether this caused or contributed to the loss.

hugoshavez

MartiMc wrote: »

Just wondering if anyone knows whether my MOT expiration will affect my claim - the date of expiry was 19th Feb and the accident happened (total loss - no injuries - due to icy conditions so noone at fault) at 1.30 am ON 19th Feb - will my insurance still be valid?

The car had been fully serviced and prepped for MOT by a local garage a few days before so we were just waiting for an appointment but not intending to drive once the MOT cert ran out! Ironic or what? Now I'm not sure if the expiry date means the car was still covered by the MOT cert UNTIL 19th or whether it was in fact out of MOT on the 19th.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks

It'll flag up as a fraud indicator for them. What do you mean you were waiting for an MOT appointment? Did you have an MOT booked?

Quentin

hugoshavez wrote: »

It'll flag up as a fraud indicator for them. What do you mean you were waiting for an MOT appointment? Did you have an MOT booked?

Nonsense.

Having an MOT only means the paperwork is "legal"!

In this case it is.

But as already advised (raskazz), although having a current MOT cuts no ice with an insurer if the car is found to not be roadworthy, there is nothing "fraudulent" whatsoever about whether or not an MOT has been booked for a car holding a current MOT!

Ignore the scaremongering!

hugoshavez

Quentin wrote: »

Nonsense.

Having an MOT only means the paperwork is "legal"!

In this case it is.

But as already advised (raskazz), although having a current MOT cuts no ice with an insurer if the car is found to not be roadworthy, there is nothing "fraudulent" whatsoever about whether or not an MOT has been booked for a car holding a current MOT!

Ignore the scaremongering!

Of course it's an indicator! If the claim's honest of course the OP has no need to worry, but it's a coincidence that'll sharpen a motor engineer and claim handler's minds when looking at the damage and other details.

Quentin

hugoshavez wrote: »

Of course it's an indicator! If the claim's honest of course the OP has no need to worry, but it's a coincidence that'll sharpen a motor engineer and claim handler's minds when looking at the damage and other details.

What will "sharpen" these people's minds?

They are sharp enough to know a current MOT is meaningless when looking at a vehicle to see if the accident is a result of it not being roadworthy!

But the date the MOT expires is as relevant/irrelevant as the day the tax or insurance expires as far as a "fraudulent" claim is concerned.

And having a current MOT is irrelevant to whether or not the car was covered by the policy anyway! (Though in this case the MOT was current!)

hugoshavez

Quentin wrote: »

What will "sharpen" these people's minds?

They are sharp enough to know a current MOT is meaningless when looking at a vehicle to see if the accident is a result of it not being roadworthy!

But the date the MOT expires is as relevant/irrelevant as the day the tax or insurance expires as far as a "fraudulent" claim is concerned.

Correct! And an accident/theft/fire on or immediately prior to any of these would cause the insurers' staff to look a little closer than usual.

The OP asked if it would be a problem. He got an honest answer: it might cause them to take a closer than normal look at the accident/the vehicle/the OP.

If there aren't other concerning factors they'll see it for the coincidence that it is.

Your "nonsense" was a bit much, no?

Quentin

Where do you see the fraud indicator if an MOT has or hasn't been booked?

Having no MOT makes no difference!! If the car isn't roadworthy, then that makes the difference - and that is what the engineer is paid to check!