Horsebox Sale

km1500

If the new owner has bought and paid for it thrn legally it is theirs and you have zero responsibility - it is not your property.

They gave you permission to drive it and should have insured it.

goater78

Have you phoned the police to report the hit and run? The driver who hit you should be resolving this 

MarvinDay

goater78 said:

Have you phoned the police to report the hit and run? The driver who hit you should be resolving this 

The first thing that the police will probably do is to check the MOT and insurance status of the horsebox so all that the OP's phone call will do is to end up with them being prosecuted for no insurance. 

MarvinDay

km1500 said:

If the new owner has bought and paid for it thrn legally it is theirs and you have zero responsibility - it is not your property.

They gave you permission to drive it and should have insured it.

Permission given or not, it is still the responsibility of the driver to ensure that they are insured before setting off and if the new owner decided to take legal action against the OP to recover their losses, I can't see any reason why they wouldn't win the case.

TadleyBaggie

jess882023 said:

No one said it was “ Smashed up “ 

So what exactly is the damage? 

The new owner has every right to expect the item to be in the condition it was when they agreed to the sale. Due to no fault of them it apparently now isn't. So either you:

 - Fix the damage
 - Cancel the sale
 - See if the new owner will accept the item as is, with a reduction in price 

Not sure what other options you think there are?

Alderbank

TadleyBaggie said:

jess882023 said:

No one said it was “ Smashed up “ 

So what exactly is the damage? 

The new owner has every right to expect the item to be in the condition it was when they agreed to the sale. Due to no fault of them it apparently now isn't. 

That doesn't fit the facts as told to us by the OP.
The horsebox was in the condition agreed when the sale was concluded and title (and risk) passed to the purchaser. Subsequently the new owner requested the former owner to take it for MOT. This wasn't a condition of sale - the sale had already taken place.

Who was the registered owner at the time of the accident? It is not the same as ownership but if the seller had sent off the V5C it would be evidence that change of ownership had taken place.

There are no written T&Cs for the contract of the OP taking a horsebox owned by a third party out on the road for MOT. There is an implied contract term for them to take reasonable care of the horsebox.
I think therefore that the OP's liability depends on the extent to which they were at fault in the RTA. If they were not driving dangerously or carelessly when someone drove into them then they were taking reasonable care.
No liability.

TadleyBaggie

pulliptears said:

I have a sneaking suspicion the OP will not like this factual, entirely correct response...

Indeed, there is no circumstance where an uninsured vehicle can be legally driven on a public road. So if no insurance could be taken out, the only sensible way to get it to the MOT test would be to put it on the back of a flat bed/trailer.

NBLondon

Alderbank said:

There are no written T&Cs for the contract of the OP taking a horsebox owned by a third party out on the road for MOT. There is an implied contract term for them to take reasonable care of the horsebox.

I think therefore that the OP's liability depends on the extent to which they were at fault in the RTA. If they were not driving dangerously or carelessly when someone drove into them then they were taking reasonable care.
No liability.

The new owner knew they hadn't insured it.   They may have assumed that jess (OP) still had some form of valid insurance but that's going to be debated over whether it is a reasonable assumption  if it ends up in court.

OP knew they were no longer insured on that vehicle and drove it anyway.  They may have mistakenly thought it didn't apply when going for an MoT but that's not a defence.  If they told the new owner that at any point then it helps the new owner's case.

If new owner sues - I'd expect them to win.

km1500

Why would the new owner win? Following the sale, title of the trailer passed to the purchaser. They (the purchaser) asked the OP to take their property for a MOT. No different to you asking a friend to take your car for MOT - if the friend crashes the car then they are not liable to repay you for repairs.

"They may have assumed that jess (OP) still had some form of valid insurance" - the is no way the OP could have insurance they no longer owner the trailer and thus do not have an insurable interest.

soolin

km1500 said:

Why would the new owner win? Following the sale, title of the trailer passed to the purchaser. They (the purchaser) asked the OP to take their property for a MOT. No different to you asking a friend to take your car for MOT - if the friend crashes the car then they are not liable to repay you for repairs.

"They may have assumed that jess (OP) still had some form of valid insurance" - the is no way the OP could have insurance they no longer owner the trailer and thus do not have an insurable interest.

Whoever ends up footing the bill, the OP is still at risk in this scenario for driving without insurance as that is a slam dunk offence, if the police notice or if this ends up in a court case. Personally I would be wanting to stay under the radar if I had made an error with driving uninsured.

As above though we won't ever know the outcome as I doubt OP will be back.