Classic cars forum & vehicle restoration.
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Penman
Joined: 23 Nov 2007 Posts: 4880 Location: Swindon, Wilts.
|
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 10:17 pm Post subject: MoT exempt vehicles and Insurance |
|
|
Hi
Thought you might be interested in the following from the BOC Newsletter.
Further link to the FBHVC magazine.
| Quote: | Hi John,
Here's the link to the FBHVC Newsletter page:
http://www.fbhvc.co.uk/member-benefits/newsletter-archive/
The column I quoted is on page six of the February 2013 issue. They are certainly happy for any member clubs to reproduce as much of their Newsletter as they want, so I doubt there would any problem quoting it on Old Classic Car either, properly attributed obviously.
cheers,
Sam
|
_________________ Bristols should always come in pairs.
Any 2 from:-
Straight 6
V8 V10 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Riley Blue
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 Posts: 1751 Location: Derbyshire
|
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 10:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The issue, I suggest, is whether NFU is acting correctly in refusing cover on an MoT exempt car unless its owner takes it for a voluntary inspection and obtains a pass certificate.
If the test is not a legal requirement, can an insurer overrule that? I would think it would soon lose business with that attitude though I suppose they can write their own terms and conditions and it's up to the customer to decide whether they're acceptable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ukdave2002
Joined: 23 Nov 2007 Posts: 4326 Location: South Cheshire
|
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's a free market, insurers can set their own term and price, punters can accept them or go elsewhere.
Actuaries will determine the risk and premiums for the individual firms, the good news is that the marketplace is pretty competitive, so as long as there is no material increase in the accident rate for classics, then policies should not have to change much.
I do think we have to accept that there must be a small increase in risk, that insurance companies will have to cover in premiums or revised terms.
Dave |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
clan chieftain

Joined: 05 Apr 2008 Posts: 2041 Location: Motherwell
|
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Surely the onus would be on the insurance company to inspect the vehicle to make sure it is not a deathtrap. If I owned an insurance company I would not insure a vehicle or anything else for that matter without first seeing it. I would still get an MOT certificate even although it would be MOT exempt. To me MOT exemption is stupid . There are too many grey areas. _________________ The Clan Chieftain |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
colwyn500
Joined: 21 Oct 2012 Posts: 1745 Location: Nairn, Scotland
|
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 11:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Before the legislation came into force, my insurance company said that there would be no increase in premium or enforced testing or inspection once my car became MOT exempt.
Classic car insurance premiums are low so presumably, the risk that the insurance companies have previously taken must also be comparably low. They must do constant re-assessment of the risks of accident claims from our category of car
In time, they will be the first to know if MOT exemption creates more or less danger on the roads. Judging by the care and precison exercised by contributors here, classic cars are molly-coddled and tweaked to a very high standard and any accidents are unlikely to be caused by lack of maintenance or official inspection. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ukdave2002
Joined: 23 Nov 2007 Posts: 4326 Location: South Cheshire
|
Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| marina estate wrote: | | Surely the onus would be on the insurance company to inspect the vehicle to make sure it is not a deathtrap. If I owned an insurance company I would not insure a vehicle or anything else for that matter without first seeing it. I would still get an MOT certificate even although it would be MOT exempt. To me MOT exemption is stupid . There are too many grey areas. |
The law has correctly always made the owner/driver responsible for having a safe vehicle mot or not. Insurance companies terms, normally require that the vehicle is roadworthy. In the event of an accident, in all but the smallest claims insurance companies inspect the vehicle, if they find anything that makes the vehicle unroadworthy whether it was related to the accident or not, then they are quite within their rights not to revoke the insurance.
I can imagine that they would want to quickly make examples of any pre 1960 classics involved in an accident, where they could demonstrate were not roadworthy, by revoking the insurance in order to send a message out.
Dave |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ChrisD
Joined: 03 Dec 2012 Posts: 78 Location: South Wales
|
Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 11:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
I've just had my renewal from Peter James for all three of my classics. Two of them are now MOT exempt and the premium has gone DOWN from last year by £150!!!
To cover the lot is now below 200 quid. I can't understand it but I'm asking no questions!
My circumstances are exactly the same and no mention whatsoever of an MOT requirement.
Incredible value considering its fully comp, agreed value, unlimited mileage and European breakdown recovery included. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mikeC

Joined: 31 Jul 2009 Posts: 1822 Location: Market Warsop, Nottinghamshire
|
Posted: Mon Apr 29, 2013 9:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
I see that Haggery Insurance has issued a press release stating that "... if a vehicle that does not have a current MOT is involved in an accident then the insurance is not valid..."
So they are happy to take your money and issue insurance cover, safe in the knowledge that any claim will be rejected  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Inglewood

Joined: 28 Dec 2010 Posts: 183 Location: Stone, Staffordshire
|
Posted: Mon Apr 29, 2013 10:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
The correct interpretation should be that if a car does not have an MOT certificate due to having failed an MOT test the full operation of the policy can be restricted, reduced or withdrawn as essentially the car is not roadworthy.
If a car does not have an MOT certificate due to being outside the scope of the test (Cars less than 3 years old or into the new exempt category) the insurance for not having an MOT cannot be restricted, reduced or withdrawn.
However, notwithstanding the MOT, all cars irrespective of the MOT categories or age etc should, to all intense & purposes, be maintained as fit and roadworthy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rootes75
Joined: 30 Apr 2013 Posts: 4277 Location: The Somerset Levels
|
Posted: Wed May 01, 2013 11:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have a policy with Heritage, I have just read through the complete package and there is no mention of requiring an MOT at all let alone making the policy invalid etc.
The car is in good mechanical order and has an agreed value certificate with the insurer.
There were no questions asked about an MOT etc when I phoned and took out the policy either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
php BB powered © php BB Grp.
|