insurance without tax and mot

[wizzbilly]

just a quick questions for the pepole that no about insurance .

my brother has been storing his motorbike at my house ound the back , but now some theiving little st has been round and stolen it .

now due to him passing his car licence few months back he hasnt been using the bike so hasnt botherd putting it throught its mot or putting tax on it for that reson .

would it still be possible to claim for this of his insurance , its not up for renewal untill next year and has been with same insurance compant for 3or 4yrs .

just unsure weather insurance is void because having no tax or test ?

sorry about poor english

many thanks

[anonymous-user]

Is it SORN'd?

[normalbloke]

I guess the insurance company will give him a definitive!

[Pat H]

The insurance should be valid.

Just check to make sure that it is not conditional upon the bike being garaged overnight.

Lack of tax and MOT are not relevant.

[wizzbilly]

Symbolica said:

Is it SORN'd?

yes it is just done it few days ago as tax only ran out end of last month .

[Cooperman]

Yes, he'll be covered. Insurance is a civil contract and, as such, it has no linkage with MoT or tax. If a vehicle is insured and used on the road, it must be roadworthy but, again, this is nothing to do with the MoT. A vehicle with an MoT may be unroadworthy whilst a vehicle without may well be roadworthy.

[wizzbilly]

thanks all for the help .

much appreciated

[Noger]

Cooperman said:

Yes, he'll be covered. Insurance is a civil contract and, as such, it has no linkage with MoT or tax. If a vehicle is insured and used on the road, it must be roadworthy but, again, this is nothing to do with the MoT. A vehicle with an MoT may be unroadworthy whilst a vehicle without may well be roadworthy.

Actually I think you will find that you can put whatever warranty in the policy you like. I came across one recently that refers to MOT and tax. Bit rubbish IMHO, however ...

It isn't the law that makes the breach of warranty not a valid reason to refuse to pay them claim, it is the FSA.

Lack of Tax and MOT are not material to the loss, so they can't refuse to pay. ICOB(S)8 refers.

"A rejection of a consumer policyholder's claim is unreasonable if it is for....breach of warranty or condition unless the circumstances of the claim are connected to the breach "

[TPS]

Was his insurance company aware it was going to be kept at your address and not his?

[wizzbilly]

TPS said:

Was his insurance company aware it was going to be kept at your address and not his?

its always been insured at my adress mate as he didnt have garage so left it with me and collected it each day so it is kept where it is stated on insurance docs yes

[bimsb6]

you may find value is down due to having no mot typically 10% i believe .but please prove me wrong .

[TPS]

wizzbilly said:

TPS said:

Was his insurance company aware it was going to be kept at your address and not his?

its always been insured at my adress mate as he didnt have garage so left it with me and collected it each day so it is kept where it is stated on insurance docs yes

I would agree then that the insurance should pay out with no issues over it not having mot or tax.

[jondude]

The MOT clause is weird as you can have a valid MOT and the insurers will not pay out if you have bald tyres - especially if they contributed to the accident.

The latter there is what is relevant - did not having a MOT or tax contribute in any way to the claim for theft?

No, it did not - clearly.

They will (have to)pay.

• Make sure the inevitable excess and loss of bonus makes economical sense....rarely does on used bikes or cars valued less than 2,000 pounds...