I have a friend (seriously...) who has been involved in an accident, not their fault apparently (is it ever?)
Their car was a write off, and they have received a letter from the insurance company with an offer of cash for a replacement, and requesting all paperwork be sent to them.
At this point it has transpired that the MOT has expired before the accident.
(1) Can anyone confirm what the conseuquences of this are? My first reaction was "well, you're screwed, as you policy is now invalid."
(2) Will they pay out at all for a replacement now?
(3) If the other driver sues for loss or earnings/whiplash or whatever, will the driver now be liable, assuming no MOT=no insurance at all?
(4) What are the legal consequences? points/fine etc
(5) The accident happened on private property, does this have any effect? there was a low speed limit, obviously exceeded by the other driver, but I don't believe this is enforceable on private land
(6) If it is provable that it was the other drivers fault, does this affect the chances of a payout even with no MOT?
I've given them my views on this, but whats happened has happened, so I'm only really interested in advice that may assist them in what they can expect. I said they should invest in an hour with a solicitor as soon as possible
There is no law that says so, but if the policy says so, then that's the terms of the contract.
One avenue of hope (other than goodwill or oversight), is to claim...
Under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 that that non-negotiable contract term does not satisfy the requirement of reasonableness, because the loss to the insurer was not incurred as a result of the breach, and the penalty for the breach is not in keeping with the nature and severity of the breach.
You need to post the T&C on here to get a better answer.
This has been brought up a few times on here. Some depends on who's insurance is paying out, his or the other party. Also how long ago had it expired.
If nothing else, they will probably try to reduce any payout for not having an MOT.
Thanks for the responses, not quite as black and white as I thought then
I think they are resigned to losing most if not all of the value of the car, so anything there would be a bonus
The other party, who was speeding in a 10 zone (albeit private car park), is starting to talk about loss of earnings, whiplash, the usual, even though they suffered a mere dented front wing, and the other car was written off
I think my friend is now primarily concerned with the possibility they will be responsible for all the usual no-win, no-fee nonsense that tends to follow these sorts of accidents