Will Stonehenge Become Reform's...
News0 min ago
car insurance
7 Answers
are you still covered by your car insurance if you have forgotten to renew your car tax.
for example if you were insured but had no road tax and were driving the car and were involved in an accident, would your car insurance still be valid?
for example if you were insured but had no road tax and were driving the car and were involved in an accident, would your car insurance still be valid?
Answers
1 to 7 of 7
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by LOBSTERB52. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Questions about the validity of insurance policies, when the vehicle does not have a road fund tax disc and/or an MoT certificate, occur quite often here on AB. They usually produce a range of conflicting answers! However, I've just read through my policy, which does require a current MoT certificate for the insurance to remain valid but does not impose any conditions relating to road fund tax.
Since the absence of a tax disc does not relate to the road-worthiness of the vehicle, or to the ability of the policy-holder to drive it, I can see no reason why an insurance policy should be invalidated by a driver's failure to renew the tax disc. My own policy seems to confirm this view.
There was a test case where the High Court ruled that it was unlawful for councils to impose a penalty charge on vehicles parked on their car parks, solely because the vehicles did not have valid tax discs. The Court ruled that the presence, or otherwise, of a tax disc was irrelevant to the contract which existed between the driver and the council. It's likely that a court would similarly rule that the presence, or otherwise, of a tax disc is irrelevant to the contract which exists between a driver and his insurer.
However, as I indicated at the start of this post, I would not be at all surprised to see conflicting views posted here ;-)
Chris
Since the absence of a tax disc does not relate to the road-worthiness of the vehicle, or to the ability of the policy-holder to drive it, I can see no reason why an insurance policy should be invalidated by a driver's failure to renew the tax disc. My own policy seems to confirm this view.
There was a test case where the High Court ruled that it was unlawful for councils to impose a penalty charge on vehicles parked on their car parks, solely because the vehicles did not have valid tax discs. The Court ruled that the presence, or otherwise, of a tax disc was irrelevant to the contract which existed between the driver and the council. It's likely that a court would similarly rule that the presence, or otherwise, of a tax disc is irrelevant to the contract which exists between a driver and his insurer.
However, as I indicated at the start of this post, I would not be at all surprised to see conflicting views posted here ;-)
Chris
The problem is, Chris, that insurers are obliged by law to cover Third Party risks (as required by the Road Traffic Act) regardless of any other laws which may be broken.
They cannot, for example, refuse liability because their insured driver was speeding. The only exception I know is when the driver is disqualified.
For this reason I would be surprised if your insurers could refuse to compensate a Third Party if you had no MoT, although they may try to recover their outlay from you subsequently.
They cannot, for example, refuse liability because their insured driver was speeding. The only exception I know is when the driver is disqualified.
For this reason I would be surprised if your insurers could refuse to compensate a Third Party if you had no MoT, although they may try to recover their outlay from you subsequently.
As has been covered many time (and pointed out by Chris), a lack of tax disc or MOT does not necessarily invalidate your insurance.
Certainly a lack of tax would make no difference whatsoever, and the lack of an MOT would only be an issue if a component failed causing the accident, and that component would have been picked up (and caused a fail) on the MOT
Certainly a lack of tax would make no difference whatsoever, and the lack of an MOT would only be an issue if a component failed causing the accident, and that component would have been picked up (and caused a fail) on the MOT
My car insurance requires my car to be road legal if being driven on a public highway.
The RAC states:
Remember, driving a vehicle without a valid MOT may invalidate your car insurance.
http://www.rac.co.uk/web/car-insurance/know-ho w/running-a-car/keep-legal.htm
I suggest you read your policy in full. An insurance company cannot by law negate its third party obligations - it will pay for any harm or damage you cause to other people or property belonging to somebody else - but they can pursue for the money they have had to pay. They can certainly refuse to pay out if your car is stolen or damaged.
The RAC states:
Remember, driving a vehicle without a valid MOT may invalidate your car insurance.
http://www.rac.co.uk/web/car-insurance/know-ho w/running-a-car/keep-legal.htm
I suggest you read your policy in full. An insurance company cannot by law negate its third party obligations - it will pay for any harm or damage you cause to other people or property belonging to somebody else - but they can pursue for the money they have had to pay. They can certainly refuse to pay out if your car is stolen or damaged.
1 to 7 of 7
