Showing as uninsured on askMID

Quentin

teabelly wrote: »

You have to check the small print. Just because it doesn't say explicitly driving without tax invalidates insurance doesn't mean that it is ok to do as there could be other conditions which would catch this due to the deliberately vague wording........

No

However "vague" you find the policy wording to be, your insurance will not be void if the vehicle is untaxed.

You are scare mongering unneccessarily.

Rover_Driver

Quentin wrote: »

No

However "vague" you find the policy wording to be, your insurance will not be void if the vehicle is untaxed.

You are scare mongering unneccessarily.

The legal third party cover would not be affected, but depending on the wording of the policy, other benefits may be declined.

Quentin

Rover_Driver wrote: »

The legal third party cover would not be affected, but depending on the wording of the policy, other benefits may be declined.

Not for having no tax.

Irrespective of what a policy says your insurance won't be affected by no tax!

Just uninformed scare mongering

Aretnap

A breach of an insurance policy's terms and conditions can only be grounds to refuse a claim if the claim itself is connected to the breach. So for example if your policy had a clause which required your car to be roadworthy and you had no working headlights your insurer would be able to refuse to pay for an accident you caused by driving into something in the dark - but they would still have to over you fully for an accident which happened in daylight. In the case of tax, it's difficult to imagine any circumstances in which an accident could be caused by the lack of a tax disc, so even if taxing the car was a condition of your policy, failing to tax it could never be grounds to refuse to pay a claim.

Rover_Driver

It all depends on the wording of the policy and the insurance company.

Although they are liable for third party claims, some companies will find reasons where they can avoid paying out for some other liabilities.

eg. Not licensed - not roadworthy? (should not be on the road)

Quentin

Rover_Driver wrote: »

It all depends on the wording of the policy and the insurance company.

Although they are liable for third party claims, some companies will find reasons where they can avoid paying out for some other liabilities.

eg. Not licensed - not roadworthy? (should not be on the road)

It doesn't depend on the wording of the policy!

As posted irrespective of the policy wording your insurance cannot be invalid for no tax!

And "roadworthy" refers to it's mechanical state.

Give up and stand corrected!

Rover_Driver

It's the same as not declaring modifications - the modification may not have had any relevance to the claim, but it can affect how some companies reduce their settlement.

sinbad182

For Christ's sake Quentin is right, stop chatting rubbish and accept you're wrong - insurance will be unaffected by tax status

Aretnap

Rover_Driver wrote: »

It's the same as not declaring modifications - the modification may not have had any relevance to the claim, but it can affect how some companies reduce their settlement.

Modifications are completely different - they're a matter of disclosure at the time you take out the policy, rather than anything related to the terms and conditions of the policy.

If you don;t tell the truth at the time you take out the policy then a claim can always be refused (subject to the Consumer Insurance Act), but if you subsequently don't comply with the terms and conditions they can only refuse a claim if it is directly related to the breach.

Hypothetically if the insurer asked "is the car taxed?" at inception, and charged different rates for taxed and untaxed cars, they could void the policy for non-disclosure if you didn't answer the question truthfully. But I've never come across one which does ask that. If they just put a clause in the terms and conditions saying that the car must be taxed, they can only refuse a claim when the lack of tax actually causes an accident (ie never).

Rover_Driver wrote: »

eg. Not licensed - not roadworthy? (should not be on the road)

Nope. Even when the issue is actual roadworthiness (ie mechanical defects) the insurer can only refuse a claim if the defect itself causes, or at least contributes to, the accident. the fact that the car shouldn't really have been on the road isn't enough. See here, point 13.

Quentin

Rover_Driver wrote: »

It's the same as not declaring modifications - the modification may not have had any relevance to the claim, but it can affect how some companies reduce their settlement.

It's not the same thing at all.

If you don't declare modifications that's an issue over your fraudulent application!