monkey104 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Rubbish!! Having no MOT does not invalidate your insurance! Tell you what, let your MOT run out, wait til you have an accident and see if those lovely, all helpful, insurance companies won't use it as an excuse not to pay out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkey104 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Doesn't that kind of depend what it failed on?..a noisy exhaust isn't a killer for example.. Faulty brakes may be! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubydazzler Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 You could have killed yourself, your partner, your kids or someone else in the general public. I would sooner go without Insurance than having a car tested, I think the system is all wrong where the concern is about money for an accident rather than prevention. If I crashed due to my negligence then lock me up, but if I crash through lack of a test of the vehicle then throw away the key. Drama, drama Have you read the rest of the thread? He's already said he'll scrap it. Although it was 'only' emissions according to an earlier post. Nothing likely to cause a major accident. You'd be foolish to drive without insurance. If you maimed someone, or even worse killed them, how would you expect to cover the compensation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Faulty brakes may be! Which is why I said it depends what it failed on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neeeeeeeeeek Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 You could have killed yourself, your partner, your kids or someone else in the general public. I would sooner go without Insurance than having a car tested, I think the system is all wrong where the concern is about money for an accident rather than prevention. If I crashed due to my negligence then lock me up, but if I crash through lack of a test of the vehicle then throw away the key. WON'T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN! So what about the proposals to change MOT testing to every 2 years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash.B Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 give me a ring, i will buy your scrap car Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xt500 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Yes it does you pillock. Having a valid MOT is one of the major conditions of the provision of the policy I guess you cant get your arguement over without name calling.Theres some proper thicko's on this forum who think they know it all and know sod all. Having no mot will NOT invalidate your policy at all nor would driving a vehicle that failed an mot,after all if that was the case then hows everybody get their failed vehicles home after an mot? If a vehicle failed an mot for say brakes and the brake problem caused an accident then the police would be very interested in that person,but even then they would still be insured! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xt500 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 You could have killed yourself, your partner, your kids or someone else in the general public. I would sooner go without Insurance than having a car tested, I think the system is all wrong where the concern is about money for an accident rather than prevention. If I crashed due to my negligence then lock me up, but if I crash through lack of a test of the vehicle then throw away the key. An mot isnt a guarantee that your vehicle is safe,its just a perodical and pretty basic check that has to be done once a year by law.JUst because a car has an mot doesnt mean the wheel cant fall off,or its brakes fail or anything else.Nor is a failed vehicle automatically dangerous and in very few cases they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neeeeeeeeeek Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I guess you cant get your arguement over without name calling.Theres some proper thicko's on this forum who think they know it all and know sod all. Having no mot will NOT invalidate your policy at all nor would driving a vehicle that failed an mot,after all if that was the case then hows everybody get their failed vehicles home after an mot? If a vehicle failed an mot for say brakes and the brake problem caused an accident then the police would be very interested in that person,but even then they would still be insured! I bet if you read the small print of most policies it will say you need to have an up-to-date MOT and TAX for the policy to be valid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Squirrel Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I guess you cant get your arguement over without name calling.Theres some proper thicko's on this forum who think they know it all and know sod all. Having no mot will NOT invalidate your policy at all nor would driving a vehicle that failed an mot,after all if that was the case then hows everybody get their failed vehicles home after an mot? If a vehicle failed an mot for say brakes and the brake problem caused an accident then the police would be very interested in that person,but even then they would still be insured! You are covered by insurance taking a vehicle to and from a registered MOT centre with prior booking only. And the vehicle will be covered for theft/damage from the registered keepers address providing the level of cover is adequate. However, I can assure you that the insurance policy will be invalidated on a vehicle with no current MOT certificate in the event of an RTA. Even the 'third party' cover is invalid. This is because the liability clause in all motor insurance stipulates that the vehicle must be in a roadworthy condition. A vehicle with an expired MOT certificate is deemed as unroadworthy. If a vehicle with full MOT certificate is involved in an accident, is investigated and found to have (for example) a faulty tyre.. The insurance companies can still decide to invalidate your cover if there is evidence to support that the keeper/driver knew of the fault before starting the journey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.