Car parked on roadside without MOT

Post by b***@googlemail.com
My Fiesta is about 6 weeks away from MOT crunch time, with the insurance
due in November, and the VED due at the end of September. It's parked by
the roadside- have I got the details straight...
It *must* have VED.
It *must* have insurance.
It *needn't* have an MOT to sit stationary by the roadside, or be driven
to or from repairs or testing

But it mustn't be in a dangerous condition, so for instance if it was
leaking petrol or had a defective hand brake and was parked at the top of a
hill...

Reentrant

2014-08-25 16:14:13 UTC

Post by b***@googlemail.com
My Fiesta is about 6 weeks away from MOT crunch time, with the insurance due in November, and the VED due at the end of September. It's parked by the roadside- have I got the details straight...
It *must* have VED.
It *must* have insurance.
It *needn't* have an MOT to sit stationary by the roadside, or be driven to or from repairs or testing

After the MOT expires you can drive to a pre-booked test. If it fails
you can drive home, or elsewhere to have it repaired (but it must be
roadworthy).

However you can't drive to have it repaired if it hasn't just failed a test.

There are "no pass, no fee" test centres so that would avoid that problem.

--
Reentrant

Fredxxx

2014-08-25 17:13:03 UTC

On 25/08/2014 17:14, Reentrant wrote:

<snip>

Post by Reentrant
However you can't drive to have it repaired if it hasn't just failed a test.

Can you cite a reference for that?

Post by Reentrant
There are "no pass, no fee" test centres so that would avoid that problem.

Reentrant

2014-08-25 22:26:29 UTC

Post by Fredxxx
<snip>

Post by Reentrant
However you can't drive to have it repaired if it hasn't just failed a test.

Can you cite a reference for that?

The ONLY exemptions are driving to a pre-booked MOT test and then home
or to a repairer if it fails. Just Google on the question and you'll see
plenty of corroboration that you can't otherwise drive to have a repair
done; whether pre-booked or not.

Obviously I can't cite the absence of an exemption.

As to the other question - suppose you have a helpful mate or know a
good/cheap repairer that doesn't do MOT tests. You can't drive to them
legally, but you could book a no pass/no fee test, drive to that and
fail, and then drive to your mate / repairer.

And obviously if you've pre-booked a test you can drive there and have
the repairs done first; I meant driving somewhere else first.

However there's plenty of anecdotal evidence that if you're stopped,
pass the attitude test, can show you've booked a repair and the car is
roadworthy the police are unlikely to take any action.

--
Reentrant

newshound

2014-08-25 17:05:08 UTC

Post by Reentrant

Post by b***@googlemail.com
My Fiesta is about 6 weeks away from MOT crunch time, with the
insurance due in November, and the VED due at the end of September.
It's parked by the roadside- have I got the details straight...
It *must* have VED.
It *must* have insurance.
It *needn't* have an MOT to sit stationary by the roadside, or be
driven to or from repairs or testing

After the MOT expires you can drive to a pre-booked test. If it fails
you can drive home, or elsewhere to have it repaired (but it must be
roadworthy).
However you can't drive to have it repaired if it hasn't just failed a test.

Is that strictly correct? If the MOT has expired and you believe you may
have a failure (which does not affect roadworthiness), can't you drive
it to a repair centre which does tests for the repair followed by test?
It presumably should be booked in formally for this.

Post by Reentrant
There are "no pass, no fee" test centres so that would avoid that problem.

How?

Peter Crosland

2014-08-25 20:40:42 UTC

Post by b***@googlemail.com
My Fiesta is about 6 weeks away from MOT crunch time, with the insurance due in November, and the VED due at the end of September. It's parked by the roadside- have I got the details straight...
It *must* have VED.
It *must* have insurance.
It *needn't* have an MOT to sit stationary by the roadside, or be driven to or from repairs or testing

If it is parked on the highway it does require a current MOT
certificate. It is only allowed on the road without an MOT to go
directly to and from a pre-booked MOT test. Your insurance may be
invalid if there is no current MOT certificate.

--
Peter Crosland

Reply address is valid

Alex Heney

2014-08-26 22:33:34 UTC

Post by Peter Crosland

Post by b***@googlemail.com
My Fiesta is about 6 weeks away from MOT crunch time, with the insurance due in November, and the VED due at the end of September. It's parked by the roadside- have I got the details straight...
It *must* have VED.
It *must* have insurance.
It *needn't* have an MOT to sit stationary by the roadside, or be driven to or from repairs or testing

I have never seen an insurance policy which requires a valid MNOT
certificate.

I think it would actually be illegal for such a clause in the legally
required third party insurance.

--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Nothing is as inevitable as a mistake whose time has come
To reply by email, my address is alexDOTheneyATgmailDOTcom

Paul Cummins

2014-08-26 23:28:00 UTC

Post by Peter Crosland
Your insurance may be
invalid if there is no current MOT certificate.

Cite please...

--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
Please Help us dispose of unwanted virtual currency:
Bitcoin: 1LzAJBqzoaEudhsZ14W7YrdYSmLZ5m1seZ

the Omrud

2014-08-25 21:28:15 UTC

Post by b***@googlemail.com
My Fiesta is about 6 weeks away from MOT crunch time, with the insurance due in November, and the VED due at the end of September. It's parked by the roadside- have I got the details straight...
It *must* have VED.
It *must* have insurance.
It *needn't* have an MOT to sit stationary by the roadside, or be driven to or from repairs or testing

AFAIK that last one is wrong. An MOT is required if the car is on the
public highway, and you're not allowed to drive it on the road without
an MOT to get to a place of repair - only for a pre-booked test. If you
do drive to a pre-booked test, it must still not be in a dangerous
condition (which is a legal requirement regardless of the possession of
an MOT).

--
David

steve robinson

2014-08-25 21:34:14 UTC

Post by b***@googlemail.com
My Fiesta is about 6 weeks away from MOT crunch time, with the
insurance due in November, and the VED due at the end of September.
It's parked by the roadside- have I got the details straight...
It must have VED.
It must have insurance.
It needn't have an MOT to sit stationary by the roadside, or be
driven to or from repairs or testing

You may run foul of your insurance companies terms and conditions if
the mots out of date they have been known to viod the policy

Alex Heney

2014-08-26 22:34:19 UTC

On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 22:34:14 +0100, "steve robinson"

Post by steve robinson

Post by b***@googlemail.com
My Fiesta is about 6 weeks away from MOT crunch time, with the
insurance due in November, and the VED due at the end of September.
It's parked by the roadside- have I got the details straight...
It must have VED.
It must have insurance.
It needn't have an MOT to sit stationary by the roadside, or be
driven to or from repairs or testing

You may run foul of your insurance companies terms and conditions if
the mots out of date they have been known to viod the policy

I am not sure that would be legal, and have never heard of it
happening.

Do you have a cite for that?

--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Nothing is as inevitable as a mistake whose time has come
To reply by email, my address is alexDOTheneyATgmailDOTcom

Roland Perry

2014-08-27 06:58:21 UTC

Post by Alex Heney

Post by steve robinson
You may run foul of your insurance companies terms and conditions if
the mots out of date they have been known to viod the policy

I am not sure that would be legal, and have never heard of it
happening.

The insurance policy will require the car to be roadworthy. Certain
types of MOT-fail will tend to prove that.

Hard-liners will doubtless say that any MOT fail does, but I'm not
entirely sure that having the wrong spacing on your numberplate makes a
car unroadworthy, although perhaps if the front and rear plates were
swapped over your car would be more of a danger.

--
Roland Perry

The Todal

2014-08-27 09:41:24 UTC

Post by Alex Heney

Post by steve robinson
You may run foul of your insurance companies terms and conditions if
the mots out of date they have been known to viod the policy

I am not sure that would be legal, and have never heard of it
happening.

The insurance policy will require the car to be roadworthy. Certain
types of MOT-fail will tend to prove that.
Hard-liners will doubtless say that any MOT fail does, but I'm not
entirely sure that having the wrong spacing on your numberplate makes a
car unroadworthy, although perhaps if the front and rear plates were
swapped over your car would be more of a danger.

I doubt if there is a strict requirement that the vehicle be roadworthy.
There are quite a few policy wordings to be found online. This is from
the Zurich policy:

"You must do all you reasonably can to prevent loss or damage to your
car and maintain it in a roadworthy condition".

Roland Perry

2014-08-27 11:24:25 UTC

Post by The Todal
"You must do all you reasonably can to prevent loss or damage to your
car and maintain it in a roadworthy condition".

What is their sanction if you don't? Does it extend to refusing a claim
(for fire/theft might be a bit of a stretch, but if you collided with
something in a car which had failed its MOT for bad brakes, what
then...)

--
Roland Perry

Martin Bonner

2014-08-27 11:42:34 UTC

Post by The Todal
"You must do all you reasonably can to prevent loss or damage to your
car and maintain it in a roadworthy condition".

What is their sanction if you don't?

Your insurance is void. Zurich will be on the hook for statutory insurance,
but are at liberty to sue you for anything they pay out.

Post by Roland Perry
Does it extend to refusing a claim
(for fire/theft might be a bit of a stretch, but if you collided with
something in a car which had failed its MOT for bad brakes, what
then...)

I suspect they would probably pay out for theft. They might well
refuse to pay out for fire if the lack of maintenance was the cause
of the fire (but they might pay if it wasn't). In practise they
would probably pay 3rd party costs if you knew your brakes were
dodgy, but possibly not for damage to your car.

August West

2014-08-27 11:49:26 UTC

Post by The Todal
"You must do all you reasonably can to prevent loss or damage to your
car and maintain it in a roadworthy condition".

What is their sanction if you don't?

Your insurance is void. Zurich will be on the hook for statutory
insurance, but are at liberty to sue you for anything they pay out.

Unless it's a warranty (which is no longer permitted in consumer
insurance contracts) they cannot invalidate the insurance if it is
breached.

--
I don't need no alibi when I'm spending time with you

Martin Bonner

2014-08-27 11:58:49 UTC

Post by The Todal
"You must do all you reasonably can to prevent loss or damage to your
car and maintain it in a roadworthy condition".

What is their sanction if you don't?

Your insurance is void. Zurich will be on the hook for statutory
insurance, but are at liberty to sue you for anything they pay out.

Unless it's a warranty (which is no longer permitted in consumer
insurance contracts) they cannot invalidate the insurance if it is
breached.

Ooo! I didn't know that. In which case, the question stands:
what is their sanction if you don't?

August West

2014-08-27 12:06:37 UTC

Post by The Todal
"You must do all you reasonably can to prevent loss or damage to your
car and maintain it in a roadworthy condition".

What is their sanction if you don't?

Your insurance is void. Zurich will be on the hook for statutory
insurance, but are at liberty to sue you for anything they pay out.

Unless it's a warranty (which is no longer permitted in consumer
insurance contracts) they cannot invalidate the insurance if it is
breached.

what is their sanction if you don't?

As always in insurance, assesed loss adjustment. They can't escape their
legal third party liabilities, but they can reduce or refuse other
claims if the state of the motor affected, increased, or caused, the
claim. Just as, for example, of your car has a large scrape on the side
where you collided with a bollard, and your car was kayer badly
vandalised by keying, they would quite probably assess it and not pay
for the preexisting damage to be repaired (even if was indcidentally
reapaired), so would reduce the sum paid out, posibly to zero.

--
a thousand miles behind

Neil Williams

2014-08-27 12:10:06 UTC

Post by Martin Bonner
what is their sanction if you don't?

They could I suppose cancel the policy (which itself would be a big
punishment - insurers don't like that and it would inflate the cost of
a later policy) or ban any further policies with them?

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

Roland Perry

2014-08-27 12:06:27 UTC

Post by The Todal
"You must do all you reasonably can to prevent loss or damage to your
car and maintain it in a roadworthy condition".

What is their sanction if you don't?

Your insurance is void. Zurich will be on the hook for statutory
insurance, but are at liberty to sue you for anything they pay out.

Unless it's a warranty (which is no longer permitted in consumer
insurance contracts) they cannot invalidate the insurance if it is
breached.

Can they restrict it, for example to just 3rd party claims rather comp?

--
Roland Perry

August West

2014-08-27 12:19:11 UTC

Post by The Todal
"You must do all you reasonably can to prevent loss or damage to your
car and maintain it in a roadworthy condition".

What is their sanction if you don't?

Your insurance is void. Zurich will be on the hook for statutory
insurance, but are at liberty to sue you for anything they pay out.

Unless it's a warranty (which is no longer permitted in consumer
insurance contracts) they cannot invalidate the insurance if it is
breached.

Can they restrict it, for example to just 3rd party claims rather comp?

Not in a blanket way.

--
I'm only here for the beer

Roland Perry

2014-08-27 12:36:07 UTC

Post by The Todal
"You must do all you reasonably can to prevent loss or damage to your
car and maintain it in a roadworthy condition".

What is their sanction if you don't?

Your insurance is void. Zurich will be on the hook for statutory
insurance, but are at liberty to sue you for anything they pay out.

Unless it's a warranty (which is no longer permitted in consumer
insurance contracts) they cannot invalidate the insurance if it is
breached.

Can they restrict it, for example to just 3rd party claims rather comp?

Not in a blanket way.

No blanket, just the specific case of driving an unroadworthy car.

--
Roland Perry

August West

2014-08-27 13:19:13 UTC

Post by The Todal
"You must do all you reasonably can to prevent loss or damage to your
car and maintain it in a roadworthy condition".

What is their sanction if you don't?

Your insurance is void. Zurich will be on the hook for statutory
insurance, but are at liberty to sue you for anything they pay out.

Unless it's a warranty (which is no longer permitted in consumer
insurance contracts) they cannot invalidate the insurance if it is
breached.

Can they restrict it, for example to just 3rd party claims rather comp?

Not in a blanket way.

No blanket, just the specific case of driving an unroadworthy car.

Blanket as in "unroadworthy car, bad driver, no insurance". Only claims
affected by the unroadworthiness could be afected. See another reply I
made in this thread.

--
I'd rather have your jelly than my home-baked bread

Roland Perry

2014-08-27 13:56:38 UTC

Post by Roland Perry
Can they restrict it, for example to just 3rd party claims rather comp?

Not in a blanket way.

No blanket, just the specific case of driving an unroadworthy car.

Blanket as in "unroadworthy car, bad driver, no insurance". Only claims
affected by the unroadworthiness could be afected.

I was only asking about unroadworthiness.

--
Roland Perry

Neil Williams

2014-08-27 11:47:53 UTC

Post by Roland Perry
What is their sanction if you don't? Does it extend to refusing a claim
(for fire/theft might be a bit of a stretch, but if you collided with
something in a car which had failed its MOT for bad brakes, what
then...)

A claim cannot be refused for the legal minimum third party insurance,
though the fully comp/legal protection parts can be. In such a case
the insurer would have to pay out, but could then choose to sue the
policyholder for what was paid.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

The Todal

2014-08-27 12:46:12 UTC

Post by The Todal
"You must do all you reasonably can to prevent loss or damage to your
car and maintain it in a roadworthy condition".

There is a requirement in many insurance contracts that the policyholder
must take reasonable care to prevent loss and damage.

Under the Road Traffic Act the motor insurers are obliged to meet third
party claims, but (as others have pointed out) they can sue the
policyholder for reimbursement if they can show that this condition has
been breached.

It is generally taken to exclude reckless behaviour. If you try to
repair your own tyre puncture, then drive the car on the road and the
tyre bursts, you'll probably be in breach. If you try to fix your fuel
tank by applying a blowtorch to it. If you patch up holes in the
vehicle's subframe using epoxy resin to mislead the MOT examiner. If
you continue driving the car after a MOT examiner or garage technician
has warned you that it is unsafe to drive, or when you can tell for
yourself that the brake pedal often goes right down to the floor without
actually stopping the car.

Alex Heney

2014-08-28 00:02:44 UTC

Post by The Todal
"You must do all you reasonably can to prevent loss or damage to your
car and maintain it in a roadworthy condition".

They cannot legally refuse a claim for third party.

They could refuse the claim for comprehensive, and they *could* in
some circumstances attempt to reclaim the third party losses from you.

But it would have to be a particularly obvious and egregious situation
before they would do so.

--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
A Bugless Program is an Abstract Theoretical Concept.
To reply by email, my address is alexDOTheneyATgmailDOTcom

Alex Heney

2014-08-28 00:01:11 UTC

On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 04:19:52 -0700 (PDT), Martin Bonner

Post by The Todal
I doubt if there is a strict requirement that the vehicle be roadworthy.
There are quite a few policy wordings to be found online. This is from
"You must do all you reasonably can to prevent loss or damage to your
car and maintain it in a roadworthy condition".

I would read that as "You must ... maintain [your car] in a roadworthy
condition",

Whereas I would prefer to read it using the actual words.

So "you must do all you reasonably can to maintain it in a roadworthy
condition".

Sorry, but you can't just take the words "all you reasonably can" out.

--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
A Bugless Program is an Abstract Theoretical Concept.
To reply by email, my address is alexDOTheneyATgmailDOTcom

Roland Perry

2014-08-28 06:37:59 UTC

Post by Alex Heney

I would read that as "You must ... maintain [your car] in a roadworthy
condition",

Whereas I would prefer to read it using the actual words.
So "you must do all you reasonably can to maintain it in a roadworthy
condition".
Sorry, but you can't just take the words "all you reasonably can" out.

That would include taking your car to the garage to be fixed as soon as
possible. The get-out is for situations occurring on a Sunday afternoon
where you can't "reasonably" have anything done about them until the
following day.

--
Roland Perry

Alex Heney

2014-08-25 22:22:31 UTC