MOT expired 6 days before van break in
Discussion
Small update on this. I emailed the underwriters outlining the advice given here and they said they’d look into it. I chased them again today and whilst they say they’re still investigating the MOT issue they will send an engineer out to assess the damage. An improvement of the initial flat out refusal.
scottydoesntknow said:
Small update on this. I emailed the underwriters outlining the advice given here and they said they’d look into it. I chased them again today and whilst they say they’re still investigating the MOT issue they will send an engineer out to assess the damage. An improvement of the initial flat out refusal.
That’s some good news. I get the impression they try the no we’re not paying route hoping you will just role over and accept it. Once you show you have a modicum of understanding about the rules and regulations and your not going to accept it they start to play ball. Unfortunately I think you might get screwed over on the price a bit though. Factually a van with no MOT is worth less than one that does.
Dear OP
You were technically also breaking the law.
I can't see them paying you a penny but if a large firm, please accept the first offer as they own you
nothing as you clearly breached their conditions and ignorance is no excuse.
Be open, honest, apologetic, stick up your hands and possibly give them evidence that
you are not a f
kwit that forgot to mot your car/van every year and evidence that you like me got your car taxed, insured/renewed
every year well before the due date and they will offer you a goodwill payment.
I'm sure you won't dont lie, makeup story, cover story as you don't want a crim record. Just take it as an educational
episode and learn from it and be a better person.
Hope it goes well unless you are a serial forgetting to get vehicle mot/taxed and insured on time.
Good luck
You were technically also breaking the law.
I can't see them paying you a penny but if a large firm, please accept the first offer as they own you
nothing as you clearly breached their conditions and ignorance is no excuse.
Be open, honest, apologetic, stick up your hands and possibly give them evidence that
you are not a f
kwit that forgot to mot your car/van every year and evidence that you like me got your car taxed, insured/renewedevery year well before the due date and they will offer you a goodwill payment.
I'm sure you won't dont lie, makeup story, cover story as you don't want a crim record. Just take it as an educational
episode and learn from it and be a better person.
Hope it goes well unless you are a serial forgetting to get vehicle mot/taxed and insured on time.
Good luck
I would think the insurance act is there to prevent this type of situation.
If the OP was driving his van and drove into someone as his vehicle had faulty brakes etc and no MOT to highlight this then the UW is well within their rights to not settle the claim. When I was a Motor broker we had a case of a young lady in her AX GT who let the brake pads wear out, no MOT and drove into the back of someone at traffic lights. The Insurer was within their rights to not pay.
But what difference does it make if the MOT has expired and it's broken into? None in my opinion. I'm really surprised at NIG, they seem to be a little unreasonable here.
Good luck OP.
If the OP was driving his van and drove into someone as his vehicle had faulty brakes etc and no MOT to highlight this then the UW is well within their rights to not settle the claim. When I was a Motor broker we had a case of a young lady in her AX GT who let the brake pads wear out, no MOT and drove into the back of someone at traffic lights. The Insurer was within their rights to not pay.
But what difference does it make if the MOT has expired and it's broken into? None in my opinion. I'm really surprised at NIG, they seem to be a little unreasonable here.
Good luck OP.
Im seeing both sides of this.
We all forget things and we all make mistakes.
However, if say 5 million motorists 'forgot' to MOT their cars and all that happens is well lets face it basically nothing - whats the point in an MOT.
What if a car - with no MOT ploughed into your child, wife, parents - wouldnt you be a little miffed and question the legalities ? You have put my wife in hospital your car had no MOT - ' I forgot to MOT it' . ah thats OK then all is forgiven please go about your day.
Now there is the point that this is a theft from the non MOT'd vehicle, when was the vehicle last driven ? has it been used on the Public roads with no MOT ? if the OP had forgotten I would bet he wouldnt have hesitated to use the vehicle.
As I said im between and betwixt on this one.
We all forget things and we all make mistakes.
However, if say 5 million motorists 'forgot' to MOT their cars and all that happens is well lets face it basically nothing - whats the point in an MOT.
What if a car - with no MOT ploughed into your child, wife, parents - wouldnt you be a little miffed and question the legalities ? You have put my wife in hospital your car had no MOT - ' I forgot to MOT it' . ah thats OK then all is forgiven please go about your day.
Now there is the point that this is a theft from the non MOT'd vehicle, when was the vehicle last driven ? has it been used on the Public roads with no MOT ? if the OP had forgotten I would bet he wouldnt have hesitated to use the vehicle.
As I said im between and betwixt on this one.
It's happened to us at work with one of our Transits. I missed its first MOT, and at 3 years and four days old it was involved in a fairly heavy accident on a dual carriageway - effectively joining an accident that happened right in front of it.
I had to go with our driver, who had to produce documents at the local constabulary... Gave me a few sleepless nights that.
Our insurer sent an inspector to look at the remains of the Transit, who deemed that there were no mechanical faults that contributed to the collision (basically just checked the brakes), and the insurance was upheld - that was apparently their standard practice.
I had to go with our driver, who had to produce documents at the local constabulary... Gave me a few sleepless nights that.
Our insurer sent an inspector to look at the remains of the Transit, who deemed that there were no mechanical faults that contributed to the collision (basically just checked the brakes), and the insurance was upheld - that was apparently their standard practice.
I had a motorbike nicked - SORNED and MOT had run out - no questions asked.
IMO your insurers are being absolute snakes about this. If your vehicle had been in an accident I could perhaps give them some leeway with this "get out clause", but it's been broken in to. It could have had no wheels for all they care - the MOT status is irrelevant. You paid them to insure the vehicle. Absolute cocksuckers!
IMO your insurers are being absolute snakes about this. If your vehicle had been in an accident I could perhaps give them some leeway with this "get out clause", but it's been broken in to. It could have had no wheels for all they care - the MOT status is irrelevant. You paid them to insure the vehicle. Absolute cocksuckers!
Thesprucegoose said:
swagmeister said:
As I said im between and betwixt on this one.
fromkentgent said:
Dear OP
You were technically also breaking the law.
I can't see them paying you a penny but if a large firm, please accept the first offer as they own you
nothing as you clearly breached their conditions and ignorance is no excuse.
and the firm, you know professional people experts in their field and who definitely shouldn't be ignorant of the law/terms and conditions under which they operate are trying to actively get round their responsibilities via conditions that are known not to be upheld in court hence the reference to the early document. You were technically also breaking the law.
I can't see them paying you a penny but if a large firm, please accept the first offer as they own you
nothing as you clearly breached their conditions and ignorance is no excuse.
So tell me who's more pulling a fast one, the guy who's let his MOT renewal slip and been up front about it or the company who are trying to pay nothing but 100% know if the guy pursues the case he will get something? (even you think that)
Ok an MOT gives a roadworthyness snapshot, but a week later and a fault might develop, lets say the ABS light comes on, that person is then covered and the insurers take on/account for such risk spread all the time ie any car that fails an MOT with a serious fault/repair immediately status item will have been driving around with a valid MOT for weeks perhaps months. When, yes, a car with an expired MOT might also have these faults but also might be advisory free.
Edited by Scootersp on Thursday 5th December 10:21
Scootersp said:
fromkentgent said:
Dear OP
You were technically also breaking the law.
I can't see them paying you a penny but if a large firm, please accept the first offer as they own you
nothing as you clearly breached their conditions and ignorance is no excuse.
and the firm, you know professional people experts in their field and who definitely shouldn't be ignorant of the law/terms and conditions under which they operate are trying to actively get round their responsibilities via conditions that are known not to be upheld in court hence the reference to the early document. You were technically also breaking the law.
I can't see them paying you a penny but if a large firm, please accept the first offer as they own you
nothing as you clearly breached their conditions and ignorance is no excuse.
So tell me who's more pulling a fast one, the guy who's let his MOT renewal slip and been up front about it or the company who are trying to pay nothing but 100% know if the guy pursues the case he will get something? (even you think that)
Ok an MOT gives a roadworthyness snapshot, but a week later and a fault might develop, lets say the ABS light comes on, that person is then covered and the insurers take on/account for such risk spread all the time ie any car that fails an MOT with a serious fault/repair immediately status item will have been driving around with a valid MOT for weeks perhaps months. When, yes, a car with an expired MOT might also have these faults but also might be advisory free.
Edited by Scootersp on Thursday 5th December 10:21
Therefore, the op broke the contract. In his favour, he is a good, hard-working guy and made a minor oversight mistake 20 years ago so imo, if i was at the insurance co, I'd look at the vans condition and pay him as though he was fully road legal.
As I said, techically he's breaking the lw and that is a fact. EG parked on the Queens highway without mot invalidates insurance, fact.
fromkentgent said:
Mate, its not and never a question of a "fast one" and who the heck said that? Bottom line is insurance co's deal with millions of people and in contracts have red lines set and up to them if they want to show good will and that is a fact.
Therefore, the op broke the contract. In his favour, he is a good, hard-working guy and made a minor oversight mistake 20 years ago so imo, if i was at the insurance co, I'd look at the vans condition and pay him as though he was fully road legal.
As I said, techically he's breaking the lw and that is a fact. EG parked on the Queens highway without mot invalidates insurance, fact.
Fact ? Therefore, the op broke the contract. In his favour, he is a good, hard-working guy and made a minor oversight mistake 20 years ago so imo, if i was at the insurance co, I'd look at the vans condition and pay him as though he was fully road legal.
As I said, techically he's breaking the lw and that is a fact. EG parked on the Queens highway without mot invalidates insurance, fact.
Don't give up the day job..
Appreciate the feedback gents, to reiterate I’m in no way trying to pull a fast one. I’ve been completely open and honest with my insurers. I pay my taxes, insure, service and (usually) MOT my vehicles. Just trying to salvage something from a silly mistake and a bad situation. Whilst my tools are no doubt being sold for profit by thieves on eBay, Facebook Marketplace and Gumtree I’m left with a vandalised van I can’t drive and no ability to earn a living in the run up to Christmas.
fromkentgent said:
Mate, its not and never a question of a "fast one" and who the heck said that? Bottom line is insurance co's deal with millions of people and in contracts have red lines set and up to them if they want to show good will and that is a fact.
Therefore, the op broke the contract. In his favour, he is a good, hard-working guy and made a minor oversight mistake 20 years ago so imo, if i was at the insurance co, I'd look at the vans condition and pay him as though he was fully road legal.
As I said, techically he's breaking the lw and that is a fact. EG parked on the Queens highway without mot invalidates insurance, fact.
How many years have you worked in motor insurance to have developed this degree of knowledge ?Therefore, the op broke the contract. In his favour, he is a good, hard-working guy and made a minor oversight mistake 20 years ago so imo, if i was at the insurance co, I'd look at the vans condition and pay him as though he was fully road legal.
As I said, techically he's breaking the lw and that is a fact. EG parked on the Queens highway without mot invalidates insurance, fact.
If you do indeed work in motor vehicle insurance and this is your level of knowledge then please do bo speak to your L&D dept and ask them that put you on some Insurance fundamentals training, for all our sakes.
If allowing the MOT to expire when a vehicle is parked on the road invalidates insurance,
what about when I exceed the speed limit by x mph?
Does my insurance become immediately invalid as I trundle down the road at 31mph, 51, 90 mph?
No of course it doesn't even though it's a more serious offence.
Insurance companies could start putting conditions in that say if you exceed the speed limit your insurance becomes invalid.
Or if you break any road traffic regulations/law etc your insurance immediately becomes invalid.
Parking on double yellow lines, fail to keep left/right bla bla bla.
They are trying it on with unreasonable conditions in these circumstances. Stand up to them
what about when I exceed the speed limit by x mph?
Does my insurance become immediately invalid as I trundle down the road at 31mph, 51, 90 mph?
No of course it doesn't even though it's a more serious offence.
Insurance companies could start putting conditions in that say if you exceed the speed limit your insurance becomes invalid.
Or if you break any road traffic regulations/law etc your insurance immediately becomes invalid.
Parking on double yellow lines, fail to keep left/right bla bla bla.
They are trying it on with unreasonable conditions in these circumstances. Stand up to them
Cold said:
If you're on your way to or from an MOT test you don't even need a valid MOT certificate either. Strange that the insurance company will not cover you for this legal bit of driving.
This, i would cite this to your insurance and see what they say. As surely if that is the case they would be in breach of the law. Imagine getting into an accident on your way to get an MOT on the day it ran out and your insurance company telling you to do one? I'm fairly sure they can't do that.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff