Transporting a SORN car with no MOT

Joe_Horner

Silver-Surfer wrote: »

Why should false details be a concern if his cash is good?

So it's ok to potentially break the law yourself, and make it easy for someone else to join the ranks of un-MOTd, uninsured, untraceable drivers* as long as his cash is good?

Glad to see that social responsibility is still alive and well in this capitalist world!



* No, I'm not saying that IS what the buyer intends to do, but he's already shown he's happy enough to drive away illegally and, if it is what he intends, then it makes it easy for him.

Silver-Surfer_2

Joe_Horner wrote: »

So it's ok to potentially break the law yourself, and make it easy for someone else to join the ranks of un-MOTd, uninsured, untraceable drivers* as long as his cash is good?

Glad to see that social responsibility is still alive and well in this capitalist world!



* No, I'm not saying that IS what the buyer intends to do, but he's already shown he's happy enough to drive away illegally and, if it is what he intends, then it makes it easy for him.

Where is your requirement to check the new owner has insurance?

What the new keeper does regarding documents is down to him. I bet there are plenty of upstanding members on here who under the old system have driven without tax or an mot having bought a new car.

Use cause and permit offences will not apply to the last owner. But then maybe you're suggesting you do a full security vetting on anyone you sell to?

Joe_Horner

Really not sure why I'm bothering with you, but:

Silver-Surfer wrote: »

Why should false details be a concern if his cash is good?

So you consider that allowing someone to drive off in a car that (by the OPs own post) is otherwise scrap, having possibly given false details - so making himself untraceable after he hits those kitten-carrying nuns - is no concern as long as you get a few pounds over scrap value out of him. Frankly, that attitude makes your opinion on any of this worthless.

What others may or may not have done in the past has no bearing on the situation - we used to sell dark skinned gentlemen as slaves and the local bobby used to come into my local and tell us where the breath traps were around closing time, but neither of those are acceptable now either.

And, from the legal POV, use cause and permit offences have nothing to do with it, so stop with the strawman please. Assuming this "otherwise scrap" car isn't roadworthy according to the RTA definition, the offence by the seller is committed simply by going ahead with the sale to someone who hasn't arrived with some means of recovering it.

Silver-Surfer_2

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Really not sure why I'm bothering with you, but:



So you consider that allowing someone to drive off in a car that (by the OPs own post) is otherwise scrap, having possibly given false details - so making himself untraceable after he hits those kitten-carrying nuns - is no concern as long as you get a few pounds over scrap value out of him. Frankly, that attitude makes your opinion on any of this worthless.

What others may or may not have done in the past has no bearing on the situation - we used to sell dark skinned gentlemen as slaves and the local bobby used to come into my local and tell us where the breath traps were around closing time, but neither of those are acceptable now either.

And, from the legal POV, use cause and permit offences have nothing to do with it, so stop with the strawman please. Assuming this "otherwise scrap" car isn't roadworthy according to the RTA definition, the offence by the seller is committed simply by going ahead with the sale to someone who hasn't arrived with some means of recovering it.

You assume that.

He said he has an old car with no mot. He was offered peanuts for but more than scrap value. The someone keeps harping on about an unroadworthy vehicle.

[Deleted User]

The "someone " could well be an immigrant or non driver with no idea how even to drive a car . I would nt want it on my mind that Id let a car go to morons just to trouser an extra £50 quid..Shame on OP for even considering it.Dump it to the scrap yard and sleep easy.If the car was roadworthy it was also worth upping the value by a years MOT ticket.That alone adds £200 to the value.

Joe_Horner

Silver-Surfer wrote: »

You assume that.

He said he has an old car with no mot. He was offered peanuts for but more than scrap value. The someone keeps harping on about an unroadworthy vehicle.

Is that really the best you've got?

Yes, I am assuming that this non-MOTd car which is otherwise worth scrap value isn't roadworthy. I've also made it very clear that what I've posted is based on that assumption.

Obviously, if the OP has a car that's fully up to MOT standard but has decided (for whatever reason) not to stick a 50 quid ticket on it and instantly add a few hundred to its value then my advice doesn't apply. But that's a little unlikely, as you (should) perfectly well know.

So the assumption is a fair one, especially seeing as it's been stated absolutely clearly from the start, and if the assumption is right then so is my advice.

Meanwhile, you've stated, in as many words, that it shouldn't be any concern what the buyer does "as long as his cash is good".

We replaced a car last week and one of the locals today asked if the old one was going cheap, "doesn't need MOT or tax because they can just crush it if they catch me". As it happens, it does have (quite a long) MOT, but would I be "right" to sell it to him knowing that he's planning to drive it like that (and undoubtedly uninsured as well)?

Actually, don't bother answering that because it's already clear from your comment above that you wouldn't see a problem as long as his cash was good :mad:

foxy-stoat

swanny_1 wrote: »

I have an old car for sale which someone has offered to pay peanuts for (but better than scrap value). They know it has no MOT or tax but want to drive the car away. I have told then they should have it towed or trailered but they still want to drive it. What implications does this have on me? Presumably if they are in possession of the new keeper slip then it's their call and therefore not my problem if they are pulled over? They are also asking for a postcode now before picking up on the 2nd March (they are paying cash on collection). I'm assuming it would be wiser to wait to give it to them until the day of collection?

OP, is there anything wrong with the components of your car, or are they in an unroadwortly condition, tyres, brakes or steering etc, or is the car in an unroadworthly condition?

Retrogamer

There's a lot of talk about private sellers not being able to sell a car that's "unroadworthy" as it's illegal.

How common are prosecutions for the above and when was the last time someone was prosecuted for it? I can't find anything recent.

foxy-stoat

I would think that a few things need to of happened in order for the seller to be sucessfully prosecuted;

Car is unroadworthy,
Seller needed to know that it was or was reasonable to assume that it was,
The buyer had a serious accident on the way home and someone was injuried,
Component fault was a factor in the accident,
VOSA/Trading Standards are informed and
VOSA/Trading Standards are bothered to bring a prosecution to court
Seller cannot mount a good enough defense
Judge has a bad day and possibly bought a rubbish secondhand banger in the past and wants to make an example of the seller and finds them guilty

What about if I sell my unroadworthy car, buyer collects on a trailer, then when he gets back home he drives the unroadworthy car to the shops and has a serious accident.

Would I need to have him sign a piece of paper to say that they will not drive it until it is roadworthy, take a photo/video of the car on the trailer when they take it away for me to avoid prosecution?

Retrogamer

Meanwhile in the real world thousands of cars which faults that would make them un roadworthy are sold every day and no one (to my knowledge) gets prosecuted.

I'd sell the car and have them sign a receipt with the date and time it was sold then i'd stop thinking about it.