Forum Home» Motoring

Help with 3rd party without MOT - Page 4

New Post Advanced Search

Help with 3rd party without MOT

edited 30 November -1 at 1:00AM in Motoring
81 replies 2.9K views
1246789

Replies

  • ncfcfan wrote: »
    It could be why he collided with me.

    How can he prove otherwise without a valid MOT certificate?

    By producing a reciept for a new wiper blade.
  • Car_54Car_54 Forumite
    5.6K posts
    1,000 Posts Fifth Anniversary Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭
    ncfcfan wrote: »
    Correct.

    However there were 3 lanes.

    1 going left only (1st exit) and two going straight over. There isn't a 3rd exit.
    So you crossed from lane 2 into lane 1, and collided with the TP. Had you checked your mirrors? Were you signalling?
  • foxy-stoatfoxy-stoat Forumite
    6.4K posts
    Fifth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭
    ncfcfan wrote: »
    It could be why he collided with me.

    How can he prove otherwise without a valid MOT certificate?

    Or it could not, I think even Yodi with all his midichlorians would know. He could of bought a new wiper blade or it could of worked fine, it passed on MOT over a year ago.

    Your barking up the wrong tree if you think the fact there was an advisory on an MOT over 12 months ago for a wiper blade and it was raining when you collided while it was raining or the fact that there was no MOT would prove the other driver was negligent.

    It happened on a roundabout and you were in the middle lane = 50/50 at best.

    Report him to the police if it makes you feel better, they will do nothing.
  • ScrapitScrapit Forumite
    1.8K posts
    1,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker First Anniversary
    ✭✭✭
    No chance the mot is relevant here. Mumbles something about highway code and checking vehicles inside of you on roundabouts.
  • Joe_HornerJoe_Horner Forumite
    4.9K posts
    Eighth Anniversary Combo Breaker
    ✭✭✭✭
    Car_54 wrote: »
    So you crossed from lane 2 into lane 1, and collided with the TP. Had you checked your mirrors? Were you signalling?

    There's damage to the front of his car, suggesting mirrors probably weren't needed.... :beer:
  • QuentinQuentin Forumite
    40.4K posts
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ncfcfan wrote: »
    It could be why he collided with me.

    How can he prove otherwise without a valid MOT certificate?
    You are mistaken if you believe any car with a "valid" MOT means that car is roadworthy!


    There's no mileage in this angle at all for you!
  • AretnapAretnap Forumite
    3.8K posts
    Ninth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭
    ncfcfan wrote: »
    It could be why he collided with me.

    How can he prove otherwise without a valid MOT certificate?
    He doesn't have to prove otherwise.


    Either he drove into you - in which case he is liable regardless of whether his car was i perfect condition or whether it was a deathtrap. Or you drove into him - in which case you are liable regardless of whether his car was in perfect condition or a deathtrap. In other words, the condition of his car is a distraction. You need to concentrate on who drove into whom. - and if you can't prove that you're looking at 50/50. The fact that at some point over a year ago he might have had a slightly dodgy wiper blade (but not dodgy enough to fail an MOT0 is not going to help you in the slightest.


    Unfortunately roundabout accidents do have a habit of going 50/50. You claim that he encroached into your lane, he claims that you encroached into his lane, with no witnesses and no video it's very hard to prove who is right.
  • Car_54Car_54 Forumite
    5.6K posts
    1,000 Posts Fifth Anniversary Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭
    Aretnap wrote: »

    Unfortunately roundabout accidents do have a habit of going 50/50. You claim that he encroached into your lane, he claims that you encroached into his lane, with no witnesses and no video it's very hard to prove who is right.
    By the OP’s own account, he had to cross the other party’s lane to exit. It sounds as though 50/50 would be a lucky escape.
  • Joe_HornerJoe_Horner Forumite
    4.9K posts
    Eighth Anniversary Combo Breaker
    ✭✭✭✭
    Car_54 wrote: »
    By the OP’s own account, he had to cross the other party’s lane to exit. It sounds as though 50/50 would be a lucky escape.

    And had damage to the front of his car, suggesting the other car was more or less level when he did so.
  • edited 20 June 2019 at 12:12AM
    harz99harz99 Forumite
    3.2K posts
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Home Insurance Hacker!
    ✭✭✭✭
    edited 20 June 2019 at 12:12AM
    ncfcfan wrote: »
    No chance.

    I was in the inside lane going straight over a roundabout (as per the road markings). I indicated to come off and the vehicle on my outside cut across me.

    There is damage to the front of my car, corroborating these events.
    Car_54 wrote: »
    If I've understood you correctly, you were in lane 2 (right) and the TP in lane 1 (left). Is this correct?
    ncfcfan wrote: »
    Correct.

    However there were 3 lanes.

    1 going left only (1st exit) and two going straight over. There isn't a 3rd exit.

    Those statements of positioning don't add up to me, surely OP in centre of 3 lanes, the lane to the left of OP was to take first exit only, the centre lane (OPs), and the lane to the right of the OP both going straight ahead at 2nd exit, the 3rd party cut across the OP from the right not left.

    The only thing I think we don't know is whether there are still two lanes leaving the roundabout straight ahead where OP was intending to go, or was it a merge into one, which could have a bearing on the 3rd party move prior to the collision.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Quick links

Essential Money | Who & Where are you? | Work & Benefits | Household and travel | Shopping & Freebies | About MSE | The MoneySavers Arms | Covid-19 & Coronavirus Support