Other Stuff > Misc / Open
MOT after May 20th?.
Moorey:
No it is no guarantee of payout it would depend on what else comes into play, in the event of a claim. But if they stipulate you MUST have a MOT it is just the same as if they stipulate you MUST have a alarm or whatever fitted, then that is the term of the contract. There is no getting around the word must. It would be what you are agreeing to do in the contract for insurance.
Just because HM Gov are allowing it does not mean insurance comps will have to allow it. That will be a matter for the individual insurance companies. I would suggest people ask their insurance companies what their position ion this is. At this time I would think all polices would say you MUST have a Mot to use on the road unless you are going to or from a Mot.
Does anyone know what happens already with pre 60s vehicles as far as insurance is concerned. Because the pool of vehicles that qualify is about to get much larger and will continue to do so.
In 20 years time you will be having such as Blackbirds qualifying .
Moorey:
--- Quote from: royhall on March 30, 2018, 12:55:08 PM ---
--- Quote from: moorey on March 30, 2018, 10:53:35 AM ---Its not a matter of them complying with the 40 year rule. A insurance company can stipulate whatever it wants in the terms and conditions for them to insure you. The choice is yours whether you agree to terms and conditions or seek another insurance company. If terms and conditions stipulate a mot and you do not have one then you have broken the contract and they will not have to pay out.
--- End quote ---
That's why I say ask the insurance company. If they say they want an MOT then that is what you will have to do. How many people take out insurance and have no idea what they are buying. It's not just MOT issues there are many other things that will cause a No Payout ie. Bike stored away from the address listed without prior consent. All my garages addresses are listed on the insurance, just one example. Just a phone call.
--- End quote ---
Then you are sensible and doing the right thing and covering your arse as far as i'm concerned.
Not everyone is though. I am sure we all know someone who has been conservative with the truth to get insurance.
kevski:
Claims assessor, says the bike was not fit for the road and should not have been there, no pay out. No legs to stand on. Don't get me wrong i like the idea of not having to MOT my bikes, but insurance is just a business, so for the sake of a few quid they will be tested.
royhall:
--- Quote from: kevski on March 30, 2018, 01:31:38 PM ---Claims assessor, says the bike was not fit for the road and should not have been there, no pay out. No legs to stand on. Don't get me wrong i like the idea of not having to MOT my bikes, but insurance is just a business, so for the sake of a few quid they will be tested.
--- End quote ---
Agreed. If its not fit for the road don't ride it (MOT or not). And if you want to lie to your insurer don't whine when they refuse a payout. If your in any doubt whatsoever get it MOTed. Simple really.
Arch stanton:
But an MOT is pretty pointless really. As it only certifies that the vehicle was roadworthy at the time of the test.
Sean.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version