help! caught with no mot, dealer at fault

tberry6686

No MOT is pretty much an absolute offence. The only get out is if you are driving to a prebooked MOT.

Surprised you were not given a FPN at the time as that is the norm (around here anyway).

Don't beat yourself up to much, in the grand scheme of things it's a pretty minor mistake.

Just to clarify, the car having no MOT will not invalidate your insurance - the ombudsman has been very clear on this several times.

s_b

tberry6686 wrote: »

Just to clarify, the car having no MOT will not invalidate your insurance - the ombudsman has been very clear on this several times.

i wouldnt go with this as my latest insurance document has a specific clause that says car has to be road worthy and have a current mot if one is needed otherwise my insurance is void

s_b

hi ~Linzi~
i appreciate where you are coming from,i sell cars for a living and can see its entirely possible to have moted the wrong car by error as ive done it myself
if you came back to me i would be devastated i had let you drive round with no mot and i would go to court to plead your case for you if you wished or pay the fine put a fresh mot on it service it and send your wife? some flowers as a way of recompense, so please go see the dealer tomorrow but as said dont go in the car but do take your invoice showing full mot at point of sale

we all make errors ,i wouldnt let the doom ers on here put you down

Astronaughtwannabe

s_b wrote: »

i wouldnt go with this as my latest insurance document has a specific clause that says car has to be road worthy and have a current mot if one is needed otherwise my insurance is void

It's a bit more complex than that. Third party cover cannot be 'void' regardless of vehicle status. There might be an issue of reduced settlement on the insured's own vehicle though.


I've yet to see a sucsessful case where an insurer claims back monies paid to a third party, from the insured (for MOT issue). Takers...anyone?

s_b

Astronaughtwannabe wrote: »

It's a bit more complex than that. Third party cover cannot be 'void' regardless of vehicle status. There might be an issue of reduced settlement on the insured's own vehicle though.


I've yet to see a sucsessful case where an insurer claims back monies paid to a third party, from the insured (for MOT issue). Takers...anyone?

i agreed the terms offered by my proposer so would expect them to use it against me if they needed to
another clause was they can inspect my vehicle at any reasonable time if they so wish
i have to add this is a motor trade policy with a large named insurer not an offshore scammer

enfield_freddy

motor traders policies are a different kettle of fish , they are not the normal retail type policy

s_b

enfield_freddy wrote: »

motor traders policies are a different kettle of fish , they are not the normal retail type policy

no
its still has to have sdp on it and the car i drive has to have full details and be in my name ,its a standard car policy but with trade added if you like
trust me its more complicated than a retail policy but the details are in the wording as i said and maybe more people should be reading their wordings rather than trusting the internet for a full and proper answer

molerat

Check to see when the MOT expired
https://www.vehicleenquiry.service.gov.uk/Default.aspx

Get dealer to MOT the car at their expense
Get dealer to pay fine

Move on.

straighttalker

Astronaughtwannabe wrote: »

It's a bit more complex than that. Third party cover cannot be 'void' regardless of vehicle status. There might be an issue of reduced settlement on the insured's own vehicle though.


I've yet to see a sucsessful case where an insurer claims back monies paid to a third party, from the insured (for MOT issue). Takers...anyone?

I'm with Astro on this. I've handled claims for Insurers where there have been previous non disclosures ie points and they've just asked for the difference in premium. I think things have tightened up a little now though.

Rover_Driver

s_b wrote: »

i wouldnt go with this as my latest insurance document has a specific clause that says car has to be road worthy and have a current mot if one is needed otherwise my insurance is void

It's in s.151,(5), Road Traffic Act 1988. They may void the policy, but they have to pay out to the third party for injury or damage - which is the legal requirement for road traffic insurance.