Daughter stopped for no mot

alastairq

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

I had a disagreement with an axe a few years ago which lead to me having one of my toes amputated so it's extremely easy to prove that this toe doesn't exist any more!

Maybe not in a recognised form, at any rate?

kelevraz

the way people argue over the most silly things on forums

alastairq

2. Precautions: You must take all reasonable
precautions to keep the Insured Vehicle in a
proper state of repair and to reduce or remove the
risk of damage, loss or Injury.
3. N

http://www.co-operativeinsurance.co.uk/assets/pdfs/insurance/carinsurance/policy-document.pdf

Above is the direct quote from the link just above , of the T&Cs of Co-operative motor insurance.

A reputable insurer?

No doubt similar can be extracted from on-line T&Cs of other [more, or less?] reputable insurers.

Nowhere else in the Co-p T&Cs can I find mention of MoT requirements.

[Highly irrelevant if the vehicle is less than 3 years old, or, pre-1960?}

I guess, like many other insurers, there is an expectation placed upon the RK to comply with the Law?

Whether that LAw requires a valid MoT or not isn't relevant.

What is relevant is the vehicle being kept 'in good order?'

Blackpool_Saver

I can't believe you are all arguing over whether it is OK to have an MOT or not !!!!! for goodness sake when did we get to this point, cars have to have MOT's trying to not have isn't MSE it's blooming crackers

Aretnap

Blackpool_Saver wrote: »

I can't believe you are all arguing over whether it is OK to have an MOT or not !!!!! for goodness sake when did we get to this point, cars have to have MOT's trying to not have isn't MSE it's blooming crackers

I din;t think anyone's arguing that it's OK to drive without an MOT (assuming your car needs one). They're just saying that contrary to popular belief, the lack of an MOT does not invalidate your insurance. Even if the policy did include a requirement that the car had an MOT the condition of the vehicle can only be grounds for refusing a claim if it caused or contributed to the accident* - and there are no circumstances in which the lack of an MOT certificate could cause an accident by itself.

Similarly it's not OK to drive carelessly, dangerously, drunk or over he speed limit - but none of those things mean you're driving without insurance either.

*And it can never be grounds for refusing a third party claim because of Section 148 of the Road Traffic Act - though the insurer could in theory try to recover the money from you if it did have to pay out. In practice they don't do this very often, and you're not going to have your cover voided because of a slightly bald tyre or a broken tail-light. You might have it voided if your car had four bald tyres, no headlights, dodgy brakes and hadn't been MOTed for 3 years... but cars like that tend not to have insurance in the first place.

Jamie_Carter

GAZ237 wrote: »

Yes we do.

You was/are employed as a Know It All.

Which is surprizing as 95% of your posts on MSE are worth sweet FA

Have I started throwing insults at you???

No I haven't. So just because you might not agree with someone, it's no reason to lower yourself to that immature level.

Jamie_Carter

kelevraz wrote: »

the way people argue over the most silly things on forums

I'm afraid that's what often happens on forums. Some people will argue just because they think they know something, regardless of facts. And then there are trolls who get a kick out of arguing for the sake of it. The following thread is a prime example of that:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4689713

smashingyour...

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

I'm afraid that's what often happens on forums. Some people will argue just because they think they know something, regardless of facts. And then there are trolls who get a kick out of arguing for the sake of it. The following thread is a prime example of that:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4689713

Is that another thread you were wrong in and argued for the sake of it?

smashingyour...

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

Have I started throwing insults at you???

No I haven't. So just because you might not agree with someone, it's no reason to lower yourself to that immature level.

Give him some credit it was funny.

paddedjohn

How did this thread start off as 'my daughter has been fined for no mot' and descended into a game of stick and stones? everyone knows by now that mot has nothing to do with insurance, its been done to death on here loads of times.