No MOT - Invalidates insurance?

[bobt]

Any one know the situation here. Was arguing it in a bar the other day.

If you can show insurance to the BiB, but have no MOT, you do not get prosecuted for no insurance.........correct?
If you then have an accident with no MOT, can the insurers say your insurance is not valid?The MOT certificate only really says the car met the criteria when it was tested. It could fail the next day, and be "in a not roadworthy" condition. So if you could demonstrate to an insurance company that the car was roadworthy a the time of the accident, can they get out of not paying. Any ombudsmen here?

[Plotloss]

3rd party liability cover is not dependant on road worthyness.

No MOT, you hit someone, your insurance pays out to the other party but not your own (if comp)

[Noger]

I don't know of any of the major insurers who put MOT in as a general policy condition. There are quite a few however, who will exclude legal cover if you have not got an MOT.

What do put in is a general requirement to keep the car "roadworthy" - but you are not expected to be a mechanic. It is only when you could have been reasonably expected to know the car was in an unroadworthy condition.

[Cooperman]

Having or not having an MoT is nothing whatsoever to do with your insurance cover. Insurance is a civil contract between yourself and the insurer. However, if the car is demonstrably unroadworthy and the insured could and should have known this fact e.g. it had bad brakes (not brakes that had just failed), then the insurer could decline to pay the insured's losses, but would still have to pay the 3rd party losses, attempting to recover these in a civil court if it so wished.
Similarly, having no tax does not have any effect on insurance.