SORN and Insurance Palava

[anonymous-user]

[redacted]

[phumy]

Im sure it will be written in the T&C`s, didnt you read them?

[Dingu]

It’s not a legal issue in respect of the insurance. It’s the fact that the company you are speaking to aren’t willing to insure “laid up” risks. Unfortunately for you that is their prerogative to determine the risks they wish to take on.

[P. ONeill]

I was going to SORN mine at the end of the month, it’s unlikely it will see any use until the spring. Don’t think I’ll bother now, not worth the hassle over the price of six months rfl.

[ReverendCounter]

Maybe next time it might be worth comparing the cost of 6 months RFL versus laid up cover from a specialist insurer.

[carl_w]

I've SORNd our road-legal track car over the winter for the last few years and never thought to inform the insurance company.

[Riley Blue]

I SORN'd my A8 three years ago, it's been insured with Aviva. At the last renewal I phoned and enquired about a reduced premium due to the reduced the risk. There was no problem insuring it but 'no reduction' was their response.

[Decky_Q]

This is pretty common in my experience, they dont want to leave themselves open to insuring a wreck, then paying out for a proper road legal car. Anything unusual like that means potential scammers for them. Laid up cover is specifically for this scenario and again in my experience is about 200/year, compared with my usual 450/year.

[solo2]

What your insurance company are probably talking about is Continuous Insurance Enforcement. Meaning a car should be taxed and insured or not taxed and not insured. If it is not taxed you do not need road going insurance but you could have laid up cover insurance.

It's a little known piece of legislation that came out some years ago that many people fall foul of and can cost up to £100 per time.

Copied for the lv.com website 'What is Continuous Insurance Enforcement? Continuous Insurance Enforcement (CIE) means that a car must be kept insured unless it is declared 'off road' through making a Statutory Off Road Notification (SORN). If your car is not insured and you haven't made a SORN you could face a penalty from the DVLA.'

[OutInTheShed]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

You'd theoretically need to tax it to cover driving it to the garage anyway?

[Percy Cushion]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

There’s a flaw in your cunning plan, how will you drive it to the MOT without being taxed?

[deggles]

OutInTheShed said:

You'd theoretically need to tax it to cover driving it to the garage anyway?

Percy Cushion said:

There’s a flaw in your cunning plan, how will you drive it to the MOT without being taxed?

You don't need to be taxed to drive to or from a pre-booked MoT test.

[tvrfan007]

Not to mention tax isn't transferable so you'll get a refund for unused months anyway, so not 6 months of cost really.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

solo2 said:

What your insurance company are probably talking about is Continuous Insurance Enforcement. Meaning a car should be taxed and insured or not taxed and not insured.

Only half of that is true. CIE says that if the car is taxed, it must be insured. That's the bit you got right. But that's all it says. It does not say that if the car is not taxed, it shouldn't be insured.

[Oceanrower]

deggles said:

OutInTheShed said:

You'd theoretically need to tax it to cover driving it to the garage anyway?

Percy Cushion said:

There’s a flaw in your cunning plan, how will you drive it to the MOT without being taxed?

You don't need to be taxed to drive to or from a pre-booked MoT test.

Oh Christ. Here we go again!

Shed and Cushion (and anybody else. There seems to be a stload of you). Sorry for shouting but YOU DO NOT NEED A TAX OR MOT TO DRIVE TO A PRE-ARRANGED MOT.

Any chance of a stickie on this? Please!!!!!!

[sixor8]

I regularly have cars SORN. You don't have to inform your insurance company, that was a major error IMHO. They have misunderstood the OP's intention it seems. Laid up insurance is very common for classic cars, but it is strictly theft / fire only, you need a 'normal' policy for on-road risk in driving the car to a MoT test.

I can't believe the old chestnut about needing VED to go for a MoT test has come up again.

[martinbiz]

solo2 said:

What your insurance company are probably talking about is Continuous Insurance Enforcement. Meaning a car should be taxed and insured or not taxed and not insured. If it is not taxed you do not need road going insurance but you could have laid up cover insurance.

It's a little known piece of legislation that came out some years ago that many people fall foul of and can cost up to £100 per time.

Copied for the lv.com website 'What is Continuous Insurance Enforcement? Continuous Insurance Enforcement (CIE) means that a car must be kept insured unless it is declared 'off road' through making a Statutory Off Road Notification (SORN). If your car is not insured and you haven't made a SORN you could face a penalty from the DVLA.'

Not completely correct, the requirement for CI is that if the vehicle is taxed it must also have a current insurance policy in force, if it's not taxed it must be SORN, but it's insurance status is irrelevant

Edit to say I see Twig has already clarified this. Note to self, don't skip read threads and miss posts

This subject of insurance while on SORN came up on here a while ago and I've never had or heard of an issue, I have 3 vintage Jap bikes that are SORN for 6 months every winter without any problem keeping them insured. A couple of years ago the Missus had her Zafira sitting on the drive for more than a month due to a new car turning up early, it was SORN but still insured

Edited by martinbiz on Friday 2nd September 23:33

[Zarco]

carl_w said:

I've SORNd our road-legal track car over the winter for the last few years and never thought to inform the insurance company.

Same for my motorbike. Never thought this was a thing.

[BertBert]

I can't imagine why the op felt the need to discuss it with his ins co. Gazillions of cars are insured and then sorned for periods without anyone feeling the need to tell their insurers.

If the insurance companies didn't want that to happen they'd write that in their policy docs.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

sixor8 said:

I regularly have cars SORN. You don't have to inform your insurance company, that was a major error IMHO.

Any insurance company is perfectly entitled to include in their contract that they won't insure cars that are sorned. So if your car gets stolen whilst sorned, your policy excludes cover, and you haven't phoned them to advise them of the position and get their agreement to continue cover, you're stuffed.

That's entirely different from forgetting to tax your car. Insurers would have a hard job refusing a claim for an innocent oversight. But sorn, they don't have to cover it if they choose not to. Perhaps they have stats to show cars on sorn have a far higher theft rate than taxed cars, for reasons explained upthread (car is sorned because it isn't running, owner can't afford to fix it, and can't sell it, so arranges to have it nicked)