Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • ncfcfan
    • By ncfcfan 17th Jun 19, 3:07 PM
    • 69Posts
    • 15Thanks
    ncfcfan
    Help with 3rd party without MOT
    • #1
    • 17th Jun 19, 3:07 PM
    Help with 3rd party without MOT 17th Jun 19 at 3:07 PM
    Hello.

    Early last week, I was involved in an RTC that wasn't my fault. Unfortunately, there were no witnesses or CCTV to this event.

    1hr after the incident, the other driver called me to say he had no valid MOT. He offered me money for repairs. I checked, and his MOT has indeed expired. I told him I wouldn't commit to anything on the phone. Unfortunately I didn't record this conversation. That was the last I heard from him.

    Late last week his insurers called me to hear my side of the story, as they couldn't get in touch with him. After I had given my side, they called me back 20 minutes later to say they would accept responsibility providing he didn't dispute the story.

    The latest update today (from my insurers) is that the other driver is now not accepting responsibility. My insurers have asked me for a diagram of what exactly happened, which I have provided today. I've been advised not to speak the 3rd party insurers again.

    The police, to my knowledge, don't know about his lack of MOT. Yet.

    Please do let me know what you think, and what I should do.
Page 2
    • ncfcfan
    • By ncfcfan 19th Jun 19, 9:28 AM
    • 69 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    ncfcfan
    Click on the link and enter his registration number. See how long he was without MOT and if there are any advisories, like brakes, that could have a bearing on the acident.


    https://www.gov.uk/check-mot-history
    Originally posted by sevenhills
    Hi folks.

    Many thanks for your replies.

    My fact finding mission has uncovered a couple of things.

    The 3rd party's vehicle passed it's last MOT with one advisory, a dodgy wiper blade. It was raining very heavily on the day of the collision.

    There is also an outstanding factory recall on the vehicle, I don't know what for.

    I might be clutching at straws a bit. But can I honestly use this information to my advantage?

    Thanks.
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 19th Jun 19, 9:39 AM
    • 39,806 Posts
    • 23,858 Thanks
    Quentin
    Forgets the lack of an MOT and all this information you have discovered

    It's irrelevant to the issue

    Let the insurers resolve the issue of liability

    If you want to pursue the claim directly against the third party insurer then comply with their request for details

    Have you reported this to your own insurer?
    Last edited by Quentin; 19-06-2019 at 9:43 AM.
    • ncfcfan
    • By ncfcfan 19th Jun 19, 9:55 AM
    • 69 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    ncfcfan
    Forgets the lack of an MOT and all this information you have discovered

    It's irrelevant to the issue

    Let the insurers resolve the issue of liability

    If you want to pursue the claim directly against the third party insurer then comply with their request for details

    Have you reported this to your own insurer?
    Originally posted by Quentin
    There were no witnesses and no CCTV. I have no other evidence as to the liability of this collision. There's nothing else I can do regarding this, I've provided my insurers with all I can regarding the actual collision.

    All I have is that fact that his car could be un-roadworthy. I've told my insurers that he has no MOT, but I've not told them about the advisories/recall yet.
    • DUTR
    • By DUTR 19th Jun 19, 10:03 AM
    • 12,037 Posts
    • 6,802 Thanks
    DUTR
    There were no witnesses and no CCTV. I have no other evidence as to the liability of this collision. There's nothing else I can do regarding this, I've provided my insurers with all I can regarding the actual collision.

    All I have is that fact that his car could be un-roadworthy. I've told my insurers that he has no MOT, but I've not told them about the advisories/recall yet.
    Originally posted by ncfcfan
    No nit picking as accused by another thread, irrespective of the 3rd party vehicle status, could the incident be deemed as shared liability?
    (take away the bias).
    • ncfcfan
    • By ncfcfan 19th Jun 19, 10:07 AM
    • 69 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    ncfcfan
    No nit picking as accused by another thread, irrespective of the 3rd party vehicle status, could the incident be deemed as shared liability?
    (take away the bias).
    Originally posted by DUTR
    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.
    • foxy-stoat
    • By foxy-stoat 19th Jun 19, 10:15 AM
    • 4,630 Posts
    • 2,743 Thanks
    foxy-stoat
    The 3rd party's vehicle passed it's last MOT with one advisory, a dodgy wiper blade. It was raining very heavily on the day of the collision.

    There is also an outstanding factory recall on the vehicle, I don't know what for.

    I might be clutching at straws a bit. But can I honestly use this information to my advantage?
    .
    Originally posted by ncfcfan
    Nope, nothing here will help you.

    The fact that the collision occurred on a roundabout is the reason why they are disputing liability. Dash cam would be very useful.

    It will either be 50/50 or if the balance of probabilities based on each account of events the insurers settle on 100% non fault.

    Good lucks, you will need all of them.
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 19th Jun 19, 10:37 AM
    • 4,246 Posts
    • 2,667 Thanks
    Car 54
    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.
    Originally posted by ncfcfan
    If I've understood you correctly, you were in lane 2 (right) and the TP in lane 1 (left). Is this correct?
    • ncfcfan
    • By ncfcfan 19th Jun 19, 10:41 AM
    • 69 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    ncfcfan
    If I've understood you correctly, you were in lane 2 (right) and the TP in lane 1 (left). Is this correct?
    Originally posted by Car 54
    Correct.

    However there were 3 lanes.

    1 going left only (1st exit) and two going straight over. There isn't a 3rd exit.
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 19th Jun 19, 10:50 AM
    • 39,806 Posts
    • 23,858 Thanks
    Quentin
    There were no witnesses and no CCTV. I have no other evidence as to the liability of this collision. There's nothing else I can do regarding this, I've provided my insurers with all I can regarding the actual collision.

    All I have is that fact that his car could be un-roadworthy. I've told my insurers that he has no MOT, but I've not told them about the advisories/recall yet.
    Originally posted by ncfcfan
    The road worthiness is irrelevant ( unless you are saying that this is why it collided with you!)

    Just leave it to the insurers to resolve
    • ncfcfan
    • By ncfcfan 19th Jun 19, 10:52 AM
    • 69 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    ncfcfan
    The road worthiness is irrelevant ( unless you are saying that this is why it collided with you!)

    Just leave it to the insurers to resolve
    Originally posted by Quentin
    It could be why he collided with me.

    How can he prove otherwise without a valid MOT certificate?
    • DUTR
    • By DUTR 19th Jun 19, 10:55 AM
    • 12,037 Posts
    • 6,802 Thanks
    DUTR
    It could be why he collided with me.

    How can he prove otherwise without a valid MOT certificate?
    Originally posted by ncfcfan
    Or....how can you prove that is the reason the collision occurred?
    These are the sort of questions that may be raised whilst the two parties debate whether shared liability is the final conclusion.
    • a.turner
    • By a.turner 19th Jun 19, 10:59 AM
    • 623 Posts
    • 257 Thanks
    a.turner
    It could be why he collided with me.

    How can he prove otherwise without a valid MOT certificate?
    Originally posted by ncfcfan
    By producing a reciept for a new wiper blade.
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 19th Jun 19, 11:23 AM
    • 4,246 Posts
    • 2,667 Thanks
    Car 54
    Correct.

    However there were 3 lanes.

    1 going left only (1st exit) and two going straight over. There isn't a 3rd exit.
    Originally posted by ncfcfan
    So you crossed from lane 2 into lane 1, and collided with the TP. Had you checked your mirrors? Were you signalling?
    • foxy-stoat
    • By foxy-stoat 19th Jun 19, 11:36 AM
    • 4,630 Posts
    • 2,743 Thanks
    foxy-stoat
    It could be why he collided with me.

    How can he prove otherwise without a valid MOT certificate?
    Originally posted by ncfcfan
    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.
    • Scrapit
    • By Scrapit 19th Jun 19, 6:05 PM
    • 595 Posts
    • 215 Thanks
    Scrapit
    No chance the mot is relevant here. Mumbles something about highway code and checking vehicles inside of you on roundabouts.
    • Joe Horner
    • By Joe Horner 19th Jun 19, 6:07 PM
    • 4,649 Posts
    • 4,126 Thanks
    Joe Horner
    So you crossed from lane 2 into lane 1, and collided with the TP. Had you checked your mirrors? Were you signalling?
    Originally posted by Car 54
    There's damage to the front of his car, suggesting mirrors probably weren't needed....
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 19th Jun 19, 8:38 PM
    • 39,806 Posts
    • 23,858 Thanks
    Quentin
    It could be why he collided with me.

    How can he prove otherwise without a valid MOT certificate?
    Originally posted by ncfcfan
    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!
    • Aretnap
    • By Aretnap 19th Jun 19, 10:05 PM
    • 3,319 Posts
    • 2,912 Thanks
    Aretnap
    It could be why he collided with me.

    How can he prove otherwise without a valid MOT certificate?
    Originally posted by ncfcfan
    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 54
    • By Car 54 19th Jun 19, 10:18 PM
    • 4,246 Posts
    • 2,667 Thanks
    Car 54

    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.
    Originally posted by Aretnap
    By the OPís own account, he had to cross the other partyís lane to exit. It sounds as though 50/50 would be a lucky escape.
    • Joe Horner
    • By Joe Horner 19th Jun 19, 10:47 PM
    • 4,649 Posts
    • 4,126 Thanks
    Joe Horner
    By the OPís own account, he had to cross the other partyís lane to exit. It sounds as though 50/50 would be a lucky escape.
    Originally posted by Car 54
    And had damage to the front of his car, suggesting the other car was more or less level when he did so.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

665Posts Today

5,855Users online

Martin's Twitter