Can you tow an uninsured car?
Discussion
Milstead v Sexton [1964]
Where a motor vehicle is towed by another motor vehicle it still falls into the category of a motor vehicle but can also be regarded as a trailer.
So, unless that which is towed has been rendered no longer a motor vehicle i.e. engine removal and there is no intention by the owner to put ut back on the road, rules of use on a Highway/Road apply e.g. Insurance, MOT and Excise.
In relation to Excise, whereas use on the road without would nullify SORN, submitting the vehicle for the purpose of, or returning from, a MOT Test providing a prior appointment has been made, then an exemption applies. Likewise in relation to MOT.
No such emption in relation to Insurance.
dvd
Where a motor vehicle is towed by another motor vehicle it still falls into the category of a motor vehicle but can also be regarded as a trailer.
So, unless that which is towed has been rendered no longer a motor vehicle i.e. engine removal and there is no intention by the owner to put ut back on the road, rules of use on a Highway/Road apply e.g. Insurance, MOT and Excise.
In relation to Excise, whereas use on the road without would nullify SORN, submitting the vehicle for the purpose of, or returning from, a MOT Test providing a prior appointment has been made, then an exemption applies. Likewise in relation to MOT.
No such emption in relation to Insurance.
dvd
To add a tiny amount to DVDs wisdom, if the car is being DRIVEN it needs insurance. Driving is basically defined as having control of the propulsion (this includes braking - engine does not have to be on) and steering. So a car being towed by another car, with a person steering and braking is being driven and therefore needs insurance.
Not sure about rigid towbars and the like where no driver is required. DVD?
Not sure about rigid towbars and the like where no driver is required. DVD?
A motor vehicle always requires insurance when it is on the public highway. The only exception is when it is totally on a trailer/other vehicle (so not really on the public highway). So if you were to tow it with a system that left the back wheels on the road it would still require insurance to be in force.
If you have cover for driving other vehicles on your policy this may cover your trip to the MOT station. Ask your insurer, sometimes they impose conditions on such cover. Some stipulate that the other car must be owned by/registered to someone else. If you stop for petrol on your way the car would still be covered, even when you go inside to pay, as you are still classed as driving when going in to pay for fuel.
If you have cover for driving other vehicles on your policy this may cover your trip to the MOT station. Ask your insurer, sometimes they impose conditions on such cover. Some stipulate that the other car must be owned by/registered to someone else. If you stop for petrol on your way the car would still be covered, even when you go inside to pay, as you are still classed as driving when going in to pay for fuel.
How does this work for the drivers of the lorries taking cars to a banger race? I see them from time to time - a beaver tail truck with one car on it, towing another banger to/from a race on a Sunday (with a spectacle lift, mostly). Clearly the towed vehicle has no MOT so what's the legal situation? What happens if the towed vehicle (which still has its engine) detaches and causes damage to a third party's property?
Long ago when I worked in insurance, any towed vehicle would automatically be covered as it formed part of the main (insured) vehicle. If that wasn't the case then there would be no trailers, caravans or good samaritans.
If the towed object became detached it was still insured if that detachment then caused an accident. It would not be insured if it was detached and then an accident occured later as a separate incident.
Confirmation of cover should be written on your certificate. If not look on your policy schedule.
None of this should be confused with a 'driver' steering a towed object. That person would be subject to RTA regulations. In particular, drink driving.
If the towed object became detached it was still insured if that detachment then caused an accident. It would not be insured if it was detached and then an accident occured later as a separate incident.
Confirmation of cover should be written on your certificate. If not look on your policy schedule.
None of this should be confused with a 'driver' steering a towed object. That person would be subject to RTA regulations. In particular, drink driving.
Dwight VanDriver]Milstead v Sexton [1964 said:
Where a motor vehicle is towed by another motor vehicle it still falls into the category of a motor vehicle but can also be regarded as a trailer.
So, unless that which is towed has been rendered no longer a motor vehicle i.e. engine removal and there is no intention by the owner to put ut back on the road, rules of use on a Highway/Road apply e.g. Insurance, MOT and Excise.
In relation to Excise, whereas use on the road without would nullify SORN, submitting the vehicle for the purpose of, or returning from, a MOT Test providing a prior appointment has been made, then an exemption applies. Likewise in relation to MOT.
No such emption in relation to Insurance.
dvd
But also Thomas V Hooper (1986). Another towing case. On appeal it was held that no insurance was required.So, unless that which is towed has been rendered no longer a motor vehicle i.e. engine removal and there is no intention by the owner to put ut back on the road, rules of use on a Highway/Road apply e.g. Insurance, MOT and Excise.
In relation to Excise, whereas use on the road without would nullify SORN, submitting the vehicle for the purpose of, or returning from, a MOT Test providing a prior appointment has been made, then an exemption applies. Likewise in relation to MOT.
No such emption in relation to Insurance.
dvd
Bear in mind that nowhere does it state "driving" or "a vehicle must be insured".
"a person must not use a motor vehicle on a road unless there is in force in relation to the use of the vehicle by that person such a policy of insurance or such a security in respect of third party risks as complies with the requirements of this Part of this Act"
If a garage is towing your car (and one assumes are insured to do so) on a road and you as the Registered Keeper have no insurance, do you have "use of" the car at the time. Probably not. Otherwise no car would ever get towed anywhere !
The trailer question is interesting. Certainly most policies cover the trailer as part of the standard Third Party liabilty definition of "Your Car". "..includes trailer, caravan or broken down motor vehicle while they are attached to your car towing.." on one I have to hand.
However the extrapolation from "trailer" to "car on a trailer" is one I am not 100% convinced about. Have not seen anything that gives this impression, although it does seem reasonable. May have to do some digging.
Noger said:
Dwight VanDriver]Milstead v Sexton [1964 said:
Where a motor vehicle is towed by another motor vehicle it still falls into the category of a motor vehicle but can also be regarded as a trailer.
So, unless that which is towed has been rendered no longer a motor vehicle i.e. engine removal and there is no intention by the owner to put ut back on the road, rules of use on a Highway/Road apply e.g. Insurance, MOT and Excise.
In relation to Excise, whereas use on the road without would nullify SORN, submitting the vehicle for the purpose of, or returning from, a MOT Test providing a prior appointment has been made, then an exemption applies. Likewise in relation to MOT.
No such emption in relation to Insurance.
dvd
But also Thomas V Hooper (1986). Another towing case. On appeal it was held that no insurance was required.So, unless that which is towed has been rendered no longer a motor vehicle i.e. engine removal and there is no intention by the owner to put ut back on the road, rules of use on a Highway/Road apply e.g. Insurance, MOT and Excise.
In relation to Excise, whereas use on the road without would nullify SORN, submitting the vehicle for the purpose of, or returning from, a MOT Test providing a prior appointment has been made, then an exemption applies. Likewise in relation to MOT.
No such emption in relation to Insurance.
dvd
Bear in mind that nowhere does it state "driving" or "a vehicle must be insured".
"a person must not use a motor vehicle on a road unless there is in force in relation to the use of the vehicle by that person such a policy of insurance or such a security in respect of third party risks as complies with the requirements of this Part of this Act"
If a garage is towing your car (and one assumes are insured to do so) on a road and you as the Registered Keeper have no insurance, do you have "use of" the car at the time. Probably not. Otherwise no car would ever get towed anywhere !
The trailer question is interesting. Certainly most policies cover the trailer as part of the standard Third Party liabilty definition of "Your Car". "..includes trailer, caravan or broken down motor vehicle while they are attached to your car towing.." on one I have to hand.
However the extrapolation from "trailer" to "car on a trailer" is one I am not 100% convinced about. Have not seen anything that gives this impression, although it does seem reasonable. May have to do some digging.
How the hell do we get definitive answers on this, even the plod dont seem to know?
In relation to bona fide garages, they should have the legendary motor trade policy which used to (and hopefully still does) include the words 'any vehicle in the custody or control of the insured' (motor trader).
With regard to the police, they don't always know the law in regard to insurance which is why the wording on a certificate is so important. It should be clear to all. If you can show an officer that you are covered by producing your insurance certificate, then that usually concludes the matter.
However I do remember when as a raw 18 year old motor insurance clerk I was phoned by a local sergeant who wanted to prosecute one of our clients for not having insurance, because in the words of the sarge - 'He's only got a cover note'.
Said raw 18 year old had to advise said experienced law officer that if he looked at the bottom of the cover note it would have the words 'Certificate Of Motor Insurance' written on it.
Insured was more than pleased to renew his policy a few months later.
I often wondered what the sergeant thought the purpose of a cover note was.
With regard to the police, they don't always know the law in regard to insurance which is why the wording on a certificate is so important. It should be clear to all. If you can show an officer that you are covered by producing your insurance certificate, then that usually concludes the matter.
However I do remember when as a raw 18 year old motor insurance clerk I was phoned by a local sergeant who wanted to prosecute one of our clients for not having insurance, because in the words of the sarge - 'He's only got a cover note'.
Said raw 18 year old had to advise said experienced law officer that if he looked at the bottom of the cover note it would have the words 'Certificate Of Motor Insurance' written on it.
Insured was more than pleased to renew his policy a few months later.
I often wondered what the sergeant thought the purpose of a cover note was.
Uncle Wonko said:
.............
I often wondered what the sergeant thought the purpose of a cover note was.
He probably thought they were scraps of paper that are easily stolen from Insurance broker offices and often waved as 'proof of insurance' by the odd scrote and wanted confirmation that the one he was looking at was kosher.I often wondered what the sergeant thought the purpose of a cover note was.
I can remember being approached in a pub by an unsavoury looking cove who was selling 'cover notes' for a fiver a pop.....
Noger said:
Ask your insurer if the Third Party cover on your towing vehicle extends to the towed vehicle.
Seems the only way I agree. But if the vehicle is SORNed could you be prosecuted for being without excise?Common sense tells me that if a car is being taken to a place of rectification then no excise licence is required, but the only thing I have read on this is to do with pre-booking a MOT. The car has to be investigated first before contemplating getting an MOT. So what is the position?
Noger
Cannot find that case you state.
In Pumbien v Vies [1995]it was held that motor vehicle, even in dilapidated state, on a road needs Insurance and MOT. This would seem to support Milstead v Sexton[1964]. The case for a towed vehicle to be so covered is advanced in Blackstone's Road Policing 2007.
In relation to Excise exemption for testing then the VERA 94 states:
A vehicle is an exempt vehicle when it is being used solely for the purpose of—
(a) submitting it (by previous arrangement for a specified time on a specified date) for a compulsory test, or
(b) bringing it away from a compulsory test.
It is the submission FOR THE TEST and not repairs before the test that gains the exemption. There is a further exemption in relation that having failed a test vehicle can be removed to a place for repair.
dvd
Cannot find that case you state.
In Pumbien v Vies [1995]it was held that motor vehicle, even in dilapidated state, on a road needs Insurance and MOT. This would seem to support Milstead v Sexton[1964]. The case for a towed vehicle to be so covered is advanced in Blackstone's Road Policing 2007.
In relation to Excise exemption for testing then the VERA 94 states:
A vehicle is an exempt vehicle when it is being used solely for the purpose of—
(a) submitting it (by previous arrangement for a specified time on a specified date) for a compulsory test, or
(b) bringing it away from a compulsory test.
It is the submission FOR THE TEST and not repairs before the test that gains the exemption. There is a further exemption in relation that having failed a test vehicle can be removed to a place for repair.
dvd
Uncle Wonko said:
Now Now Oldsoak.......
I was often contacted by people who wanted me to back date cover. There was only ever one reason why and I always declined politely.
No need for them to do that if they ran across old Mr Unsavoury.I was often contacted by people who wanted me to back date cover. There was only ever one reason why and I always declined politely.
I'm sure you too can remember time when if it was made of paper and needed for you to be legal on the road, there would be someone who just happened to have that piece of paper for sale...Like I said...your Sergeant was probably just making sure that the one presented was a bona-fide one and not one of Mr Unsavoury's wares.
Dwight VanDriver said:
Noger
Cannot find that case you state.
In Pumbien v Vies [1995]it was held that motor vehicle, even in dilapidated state, on a road needs Insurance and MOT. This would seem to support Milstead v Sexton[1964]. The case for a towed vehicle to be so covered is advanced in Blackstone's Road Policing 2007.
In relation to Excise exemption for testing then the VERA 94 states:
A vehicle is an exempt vehicle when it is being used solely for the purpose of—
(a) submitting it (by previous arrangement for a specified time on a specified date) for a compulsory test, or
(b) bringing it away from a compulsory test.
It is the submission FOR THE TEST and not repairs before the test that gains the exemption. There is a further exemption in relation that having failed a test vehicle can be removed to a place for repair.
dvd
it depends a great deal on whether the vehicle can still be classified as a motor vehicle. If some substantial modification turns it into something that cannot be driven - having your keys in your other pair of trousers would not, I would suggest, be sufficient - then none of the requirements apply. However a temporary modification, such as removing the gearbox solely in order to make the vehicle undrivable, would not be sufficient. The case revolved around a car that had something done to the engine - removal of the head I seem to remember - so the defendant was fined. How far would you have to go? Well, someone quoted banger racing. I would suggest that some, such as the funny cars, would fall into the category of non motor-vehicles as they have been substantially modded and are no longer intended for use on the road. But I could be well off the mark.Cannot find that case you state.
In Pumbien v Vies [1995]it was held that motor vehicle, even in dilapidated state, on a road needs Insurance and MOT. This would seem to support Milstead v Sexton[1964]. The case for a towed vehicle to be so covered is advanced in Blackstone's Road Policing 2007.
In relation to Excise exemption for testing then the VERA 94 states:
A vehicle is an exempt vehicle when it is being used solely for the purpose of—
(a) submitting it (by previous arrangement for a specified time on a specified date) for a compulsory test, or
(b) bringing it away from a compulsory test.
It is the submission FOR THE TEST and not repairs before the test that gains the exemption. There is a further exemption in relation that having failed a test vehicle can be removed to a place for repair.
dvd
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff