|
Post by starider on Sept 15, 2017 19:25:26 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mattsdafs on Sept 16, 2017 10:06:25 GMT
Thanks for posting this Starider..
I'm not sure I agree with this,an MOT test is there for a reason...but as insurance companies will insist on a test,it does seem a pointless move.
|
|
|
Post by jackytwoshoes on Sept 16, 2017 11:48:26 GMT
That's interesting, I've been in some deep discussions elsewhere about this, with there obviously being a lot reasons for and against.
No once did it come up about insurers insisting on a test though, which is a good point. Does is say that anywhere in the current documentation?
|
|
|
Post by starider on Sept 16, 2017 15:17:53 GMT
Hi, I think that insurers will ask, within the proposal/renewal form if the vehicle is in good roadworthy condition and of course the owner will have to sign that it is, therefore any claim will be dismissed if it's found the vehicle is not.....starider
|
|
andrewthe33
Bigger Belter
I don't know what you've done to me, sir, but you've done me the power of good!
Posts: 158
|
Post by andrewthe33 on Sept 16, 2017 15:47:26 GMT
Hi, I think that insurers will ask, within the proposal/renewal form if the vehicle is in good roadworthy condition and of course the owner will have to sign that it is, therefore any claim will be dismissed if it's found the vehicle is not.....starider I agree, but the owner's idea of "roadworthy" might be different to the insurer's, so the M.O.T. should be a requirement for ALL vehicles used on the public highway, regardless of age (obviously the test should be appropriate to the age of the vehicle) then there's no argument! Having exemptions for different aged vehicles opens a whole can of worms; is the age defined as the date of first registration or the date of manufacture or the date of importation? What about vehicles that have been significantly modified, say be having a new engine fitted? In this case would the age of the body of the car or the engine indicate the age of the car? (And so on and on and on...) Make it simple! If you use your car on the road you MUST have an M.O.T! END OF!!
|
|
|
Post by andrejuan on Sept 16, 2017 16:55:25 GMT
Thanks for posting this Starider.. I'm not sure I agree with this,an MOT test is there for a reason...but as insurance companies will insist on a test,it does seem a pointless move. Yes, the insurers will not be removing the MOT requirement any day soon. The only good point of the exercise I can see is this, if you decide to let the MOT lapse for a while (winter or whatever reason) you can still tax it and avoid having to SORN it.
|
|
|
Post by starider on Sept 16, 2017 23:54:06 GMT
Hi, sorry can't see what is meant by an MOT requirement by insurance companies? you can insure a vehicle if it hasn't got an MOT, otherwise how do you drive to an MOT legally? My son's Pick-up has been insured all the time it has been stored. The legal requirement to use it on the road at present, as we all know, is that it is insured, taxed and has an MOT Test. That is a Government Law not an insurance requirement, I've never been asked if a vehicle I insure has an MOT Test. Perhaps I'm wrong, if I am I stand corrected.................starider
|
|
|
Post by starider on Sept 17, 2017 17:31:10 GMT
Hi, Seems to be some debate about the date for motorcycles and 3 wheelers. Typical Government c-ck up!!............starider
|
|
andrewthe33
Bigger Belter
I don't know what you've done to me, sir, but you've done me the power of good!
Posts: 158
|
Post by andrewthe33 on Sept 17, 2017 17:43:24 GMT
So my Reliant Robin's exempt an M.O.T.? Or is it? It's hard enough these days to find a garage able to test a 3 wheeler, but my regular one in Welwyn Garden City is still doing them-just!
|
|
|
Post by andrejuan on Sept 17, 2017 17:49:36 GMT
Hi, sorry can't see what is meant by an MOT requirement by insurance companies? you can insure a vehicle if it hasn't got an MOT, otherwise how do you drive to an MOT legally? My son's Pick-up has been insured all the time it has been stored. The legal requirement to use it on the road at present, as we all know, is that it is insured, taxed and has an MOT Test. That is a Government Law not an insurance requirement, I've never been asked if a vehicle I insure has an MOT Test. Perhaps I'm wrong, if I am I stand corrected.................starider I know what you mean, my 44 is insured but not MOT't. However, it does state in the small print that it has to have a current MOT to be covered. A phone call to them was inconclusive, the opinion of the adviser was that if it were to be involved in an accident it would be third party at best, at worst they could refuse to pay out. I doubt they would refuse if one could prove it was on it's way to the testing station. My reasons for insuring it were other than "on the road".
|
|