Car Accident With A Car With No MOT

Norman_Castle

St.Jimmy wrote: »

His car is a 2004 car worth about £600-£700.

With or without a mot? With a long mot £700, without a mot between £400 and scrap value.

AdrianC

St.Jimmy wrote: »

However, since coming home I've checked his car on the gov.uk website and can see that whilst it is taxed until 1st April, his MOT expired 9th September 2017, so over 4 months ago. Am I right in thinking this makes his TAX and insurance invalid and he was therefore driving illegally?

No.

Not having a current MOT is an offence, but it doesn't invalidate insurance or tax, and it doesn't alter culpability for the collision.

I'm just worried that he's going to use "his friend" to try and give me a big quote for repairs and try and get me to pay it.

So just pass it to your insurance, and let them deal with it. You need to inform them anyway, even if paying cash.

arcon5

sevenhills wrote: »

Nothing wrong with that, it might teach him a lesson.

Tell him you want to go through your insurance as you have seen he has no MOT and that he shouldn't have been on the road.

You could just offer him a small sum of money, if you wish, £100.

Do this and watch your own insurance go up when you have to declare the accident and claim as well as loosing your ncb.

His mot status invalidates nothing. You can try worm your way out of it if you like but it won't end well for you. And don't be in denial that's what your doing

r

martinsurrey

arcon5 wrote: »

Do this and watch your own insurance go up when you have to declare the accident and claim as well as loosing your ncb.

His mot status invalidates nothing. You can try worm your way out of it if you like but it won't end well for you. And don't be in denial that's what your doing

r

The OP HAS to declare this even if they pay cash, or its insurance fraud.

The OP may not lose their NCB if they reimburse the insurance company for any costs they pay.

OP has every right to involve their insurance company, and in fact I would advise them too, someone driving without an MOT with a "friend" who works in a body shop sounds like it could get messy (OP pays cash and then the driver claims more damage or injury), best to have someone on your side to make sure it doesn't get out of hand.

System

St.Jimmy wrote: »

Any ideas where I stand on this?

In exactly the same position as if his car had been MOTd. His car being untaxed, no MOT or even no insurance does not alter your liability in an accident nor does it affect whether the insurer will pay out or not.

A MOT is not an indication of roadworthiness at any time other than during the MOT test itself which is one of the reasons having one or not makes no difference.

AndyMc.....

martinsurrey wrote: »

The OP HAS to declare this even if they pay cash, or its insurance fraud.

The OP may not lose their NCB if they reimburse the insurance company for any costs they pay.

OP has every right to involve their insurance company, and in fact I would advise them too, someone driving without an MOT with a "friend" who works in a body shop sounds like it could get messy (OP pays cash and then the driver claims more damage or injury), best to have someone on your side to make sure it doesn't get out of hand.

That would be down to the wording on his policy.

Car_54

AndyMc..... wrote: »

That would be down to the wording on his policy.

True, but have you ever seen a policy which didn't require all accidents to be reported?

AndyMc.....

Car_54 wrote: »

True, but have you ever seen a policy which didn't require all accidents to be reported?

But until he’s asked about it he hasn’t made any false representation.

Car_54

AndyMc..... wrote: »

But until he’s asked about it he hasn’t made any false representation.

He doesn't need to make a false representation. "Fraud by failing to disclose information" is an offence under section 3 of the Fraud Act 2006.

AndyMc.....

Car_54 wrote: »

He doesn't need to make a false representation. "Fraud by failing to disclose information" is an offence under section 3 of the Fraud Act 2006.

Back to the wording on his policy.