I have a car that has been off the road for a year (SORN reg etc). I will soon want to put it back on the road. However, I want to make sure it will pass it's MOT first before going to the expense of taxing and insuring it. My question is...is there any way I can legally drive my car to the nearest test centre (approx quarter of a mile) while it's not taxed or insured (I don't have access to a trailer or transporter).
Thanks
|
Yes. sort of. well, no actually.
Just get someone else (wife,GF, mate etc) who has their own insurance with the 'third party only any vehicle as long as its not theirs' tacked on bit.
It will be legal as long as you make an appointment with the testing station, notify them of make/model/reg. make sure you see them write it down (preferably in an appointment book or some such) and not on an easily lost scrap of paper.make sure you go straight there and back, with no scenic detours.
WTM
|
|
Ah, but also check their small print doesn't say "As long as the other vehicle is also insured by the owner." as that's what mine says or words to that effect.
|
|
You can either take a chance (I probably would) or just get it towed there by another car?
|
|
dont tow it if it's not insured , i got done for no insurance on a car that i was towing when a woman drove into the tow rope and pulled the car into her car, she had been drinking but was not breathalysed . her husband was a police officer though.this is gospel truth i found it hard to believe and it happened to me...cheers...keo.
|
|
Book an appointment at the MOT station (this sorts Tax) and add car onto your existing insurance as a temporary car for a day? Probable cost £10-£20?
|
|
|
|
The advice of the other Backroomers is spot on. The Law gives you an exemption if you are taking a car, that has no MOT direct to an MOT testing station, but the proviso is that it MUST be a pre-booked appointment. You must ensure that the garage with whom you have arranged for the MOT to be done have noted and recorded your details in their 'booking ledger' and preferably give you an appointment card as well.
As for the insurance, this has been discussed before and there are two schools of thought:
1. In order for some to drive a car that does not belong to them, the vehicle must already have a schedule of insurance in ofrce, thereby (and if your cover allows) you can drive it Third Party only (as you suggest your insurance company suggests).
...or...
2. Drive any car not belonging to you, regardless if it has any insurance or not.
As for your case, if your vehicle is SORNd already, did you continue with your insurance cover, albeit reducing it down to Fire and Theft only while it was off the road? Or did you simply let the insurance run out and not renew it? If you have a schedule of insurance in force currently, then speak to your insurance company and simply have the exisitng cover upgraded. If you have no insurance, then I doubt there would be a company that would offer you just one days cover.
And as for the 'Policeman's drunk wife driving into the back of someone and nothing happeneing' I'm guessing that was years ago because if that happened today, then the Police would stand in line for some heavy criticism for any favour shown would result in people loosing their jobs and compensation being paid out. So either this 'story' is jsut that, a story - or the event happened ages ago. It always amazes me that people remember the worst things when it comes to the Police, not the best :P
|
I was hit in the rear by an off duty Police Officer.
Thought brilliant, no arguments.....but Oh no he lied and said the incident never happened. Went to court and he won as a Police Officers evidence was considered more reliable than mine (an insurance broker....well I guess I can see there point!). All joking apart, I have had utter contempt for the Police since then.
Good thread this, it has included the two sets of people that have wound me up the most. Can we somehow work in banks & politicians and number three and four will be in as well!
|
I was hit in the rear by an off duty Police Officer. Thought brilliant, no arguments.....but Oh no he lied and said the incident never happened. Went to court and he won as a Police Officers evidence was considered more reliable than mine (an insurance broker....well I guess I can see there point!). All joking apart, I have had utter contempt for the Police since then. Good thread this, it has included the two sets of people that have wound me up the most. Can we somehow work in banks & politicians and number three and four will be in as well!
That would drive me up the wall, makes me angry just reading it!
As a precaution I keep a cheap camera in the glovebox for similar eventualities
|
Thanks for all the replies. I'll book it in at the MOT station and contact my insurers (I have another car fully insured) to see if they can arrange temp cover.
|
|
Have you considered asking the garage to collect it? They will have the appropriate insurance cover and if its only 1/4 mile then I can hardly see it will put them out much. If it was me and I'm not condoning this - I would just drive it up there and risk the very slim chance of running in to any problems.
|
|
|
|
"I was hit in the rear by an off duty Police Officer."
I sincerely hope you were in your car at the time!
|
my incident was about 14 years ago and i actually phoned the police, when they arrived i stated that the other driver smelled of alcohol the police officer stated that in his opinion she had not been drinking, i had consumed alcohol earlier in the day and stated this to the officer who accused me of lying . i have nothing against the police they have a job to do that i wouldn't want but the old boy network does exist still. at the end of it i got done for no insurance and careless driving on a car which was not mine but the court wouldn't believe me, such is life...cheers...keo.
ps mods feel free to delete this if it is outwith the nature of the thread.
|
|
|
|
>>I have had utter contempt for the Police since then.
So your whole life experience is tainted by the one experience? Nice. So if at some point in my driving life I felt that an Insurance Broker loaded my premium just because and pocketed the difference, I should hold that against them and all Brokers for ever and ever? Right...
Like I said the incident you report happened 14 years ago - ther's been a LOT of change in the Police Service - something we don't give ready credit for. Just FYI, as a result of such 'incidents' most Forces have the policy of breathalising ALL drivers for EVERY accident they attend, whether or not the Officer suspects alcohol. It avoids just such instances - but your experience was 14 years ago and you still hold the Police with contempt? Shame on you.
|
WHOA!!!! hang on a minute i dont hold the police in any state of contempt as stated i wouldn't do their job. all i have tried to point out is that it's not worth taking any risks with towing and insurance and that i still believe that the police favour their own and like in any organisation there are good and bad in all i have come across good ones as well, in different circumstances. the policy of breathalysing was i believe in force at this time was if one driver was breathalysed then all drivers involved were breathalysed. hence me being called a liar when i stated that i had been drinking.
you are confusing two posts from two seperate people .
apology expected....cheers...keo.
|
Keo,
I'm not sure why you think that I am referring to you at all? I unreservedly apologise to you if you felt I was having a pop at you my man. I wasn't. I was referring to the other poster whose quote I have used ... not yours. I say again, please accept my apologies for any offence caused, it was neither my intention nor desire to offend you (or the other poster) just merely trying to 'set the record straight' is all.
Hope it helps?
|
|
i got the impression re the refference to 14 years ago, i thought you may have got two posts mixed up no worries apology accepted and apology offered if i was also mistaken which it appears i was ...cheers...keo.
|
|
|
|
Many years ago, I used to work for a large motoring organisation as a breakdown patrol and IIRC the legal position on towing a vehicle then was that the towed vehicle did not have to be taxed or insured if it was unable to propel itself (i.e. broken down), as it was then classed as a trailer. This condition did NOT include having no tax, no insurance, removing parts to disable the vehicle or not having fuel in the vehicle as reasons to tow.
As for accidents and police involvement, Quite a few years ago, I had an incident (note the police jargon there) where an off-duty police officer, in his own vehicle, ran into the back of my vehicle, hitting my tow bar, creating no damage whatsoever to mine, but almost destroying his front grill, headlamp, indicator and bumper. He just held his hands up and admitted that he was at fault, for travelling too close to my rear and I never heard a thing from him or his insurers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'd just get the garage to come and get it - they can drive it legally on their trade plates.
|
If you were ripped off by a major chain of brokers, would you use them again? Probably no. Or would you say it was the actions of one individual in a branch and use them again?
I was ripped off by this off duty copper and yes it has tainted my view of the Police. I complained to his station and did not even get a reply, hence my anger goes deeper than one person. It also wasted a couple of days my time, a little bit of cash (not much I admit) and he had even gone onto my drive in the middle of the night to photograph my car. This never came up in evidence and I still do not know why, but I remember being upset at the time about this violation of my privacy.
Life is about learning through experience and my experience is don't trust a Police Officer. A few Police reviews and recent court cases seem to agree with me.
Thanks for putting your point across nicely though!! :)
|
Retro, you post reminds me of the true reason behind the old saying 'if you want to know the time, ask a policeman'.
It wasn't because they were regarded as kindly benefactors of the public - it was because of their tendency to roll drunken toffs and relieve them of their fob watches.
|
|
|
If you were ripped off by a major chain of brokers, would you use them again? Probably no. Or would you say it was the actions of one individual in a branch and use them again?
Like you say yourself, if it was a person in a branch of the whole firm, you most probably would feel justifiably aggrieved, and not use them again. But would you then say that ALL brokers were the scum of the earth?
Likewise, take Doctor Harold SHIPMAN, the 'killer GP' - should we all then assume that ALL GPs are killers in disguise? Does logic really suggest that rational behaviour is that we taint everyone with the same brush for ever and ever?
Or a bad expereince at an independant car servicing garage where you paid of rsay...the timing belt to be done...and you alter found out it hadn't? Does that make ALL independant mechanics liars and cehats? No of course not. If people started to make and adhere to such strict and illconceived notions about others then we would never get anything done!
I was ripped off by this off duty copper and yes it has tainted my view of the Police.I complained to his station and did not even get a reply, hence my anger goes deeper than one person.
>>
I'm not suggesting for one minute that you do not have cause to be upset - but I'm guessing that this was not recent? Maybe pre-1995? Things have changed, some for the better - some not. And like the other incident some 14 years ago - that one particular Copper is perhaps long retired ;)
Life is about learning through experience and my experience is don't trust a Police Officer. A few Police reviews and recent court cases seem to agree with me.
Life indeed is about learning, but you have good and bad experinces alltogether - and you're goin to tell me that you've never had an equally bad experience from other people/service industiries? Thats jsut plain silly. We all get shoddy service and even somtimes get screwed over. But we don't generalise because if you feel it is OK to generalise then so can others - and when we all start to generalise then I'd bet people could group you in a derogatory fashion - you wouldn't like that would you? You'd want to be judged on your own merits - as an individual. And thats the case with any organisation. You get good and bad in all.
Live for the now, not the past, cause you can't change the past - but you can look to make a better tomorrow.
|
OK I take your point, but you have forgotten one thing from my post.
The magistrate/judge whatever they are called made his decision on the basis of the perceived honesty of an insurance broker vs a Police Officer.
Surely, if this is how our peers work I cannot be blamed for adopting a similar approach. Hence my view.
|
|
|
|
|
|
