LowStandards Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 Tax and mot has nothing whatsoever to do with insurance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longspoon Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 Getting a bit over enthusiastic here, your right that the vehicle needs to be insured first, mot next and taxed in that order, non of which however makes what you propose legally viable..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowStandards Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 (edited) Senario: You have your insured car sat on your drive, the mot and tax run out on the same day, you take it for the mot the next day, pass then tax it; legal? Yes! Exact same thing. Its really quite simple, the goverment cannot force you to not use the mot station of your choice, doesnt matter a jot if its 30 yards up the road or 300 miles away FACT I have been stopped twice on one of these trips, they have phoned my chosen mot both times and then im on my merry way... I dont see how anyone is confused about this? Edited July 24, 2016 by LowStandards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hambone Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 I think Low Standards is right about this. My Pajero failed its MOT last wednesday for 1 ball joint and 3 poor tyres. Took it to a local garage friday (booked in) and taking it for the tyres monday again booked in. Both trips legal even the it has no MOT untill retest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longspoon Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 Not confused, Fact, The scenario you suggest has you as the registered owner, the case in point has a non registered owner, different scenario Fact. Buyer, attempting to drive a vehicle home on the public roads without tax or mot, I presume it would have been insured, You are trying to pull a fast one, plod would see it a mile off ! Being the registered owner is the salient point here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowStandards Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 You have purchased the car, you have the green slip, you are the registered owner FACT You insurance has zero to do with tax or mot, quite the oposite, you need insurance to tax the car, not the other way round... I suggest you toddle off the the dvla or any police forum or go and ask your local copper, there is no set distance to take an mot FACT Are we done now or do i have to say the same thing over and over again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longspoon Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 (edited) You have suffered me the limits of your credulity long enough....Fact ! Edited July 24, 2016 by longspoon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowStandards Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 I guess thats a no, you cant be ***** to go and actually find the facts right? You own the car (even if its literally from 30 seconds ago) - Fact Youve insured the car (day insurance, added to policy, allowed to drive) - Fact You have it booked in for an mot (because you can drive an un-mot'd, un-taxed car in this situation) - Fact Are we done, i think we're done... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodp Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 I believe Low standards is correct in his assumptions, and I'm not arguing the point. However, the vehicle in question failed an mot on tyres and brakes, until these are attended to the vehicle isn't roadworthy and that's the plain and simple truth. Is it worth removing all the wheels and getting new tyres fitted, then attending to the brakes, on someone else's drive miles from home, under the assumption the rest of the vehicle is sound? In my opinion just pay the £150 to get it back then repair it properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowStandards Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 I agree rod, i merely flitted through the first post. It needs to be roadworthy, but then, thats a fine line to really, else no one would ever fail an mot... 😜 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodp Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 My thinking on this one is that if there was a serious accident, enough for vosa to check the cars history (and they will) then driving it after a fail with no independent paperwork of repair would land you in rather deep mire. You would be in it up to your neck. Once home and repaired for mot then a local station would be acceptable, I just can't see vosa / courts accepting you needed to drive a non mot'd vehicle 70 or 80 miles to mot, legal or not. Pay the dollars and have no hassle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowStandards Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 Thing is there is no legal requirement to check the most history, for all you know it's not been for one, but again, satisfy yourself it has tyres and the wheels are bolted on ;p As for the distance thing, it's law, so they couldn't do a thing about it, you'd get the same penalities you would driving it a mile away... Useful loophole, but always nice when you arrive home... As an aside I'd worry it's failed an mot and they are just flogging it, a set of part worns at £15 a pop and £20 on pads would see it passed and worth a whole lot more money, still I guess some folk are just lazy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodp Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 Thing is there is no legal requirement to check the most history, for all you know it's not been for one, but again, satisfy yourself it has tyres and the wheels are bolted on ;p As for the distance thing, it's law, so they couldn't do a thing about it, you'd get the same penalities you would driving it a mile away... Useful loophole, but always nice when you arrive home... As an aside I'd worry it's failed an mot and they are just flogging it, a set of part worns at £15 a pop and £20 on pads would see it passed and worth a whole lot more money, still I guess some folk are just lazy... Guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one Just as a matter of curiosity, are you younger than me (63 this year) ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luckyshot Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 Low standards is right on this one but, and it is a big but you can and will be prosecuted if the vehicle is not in a road worthy condition. If you replaced the tyres and had a look over the car and you were satisfied it was good to go then I also would drive it away. The brakes are a tricky one if they are good enough to stop you then that's ok as you don't have any other way of checking them till you strip it down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowStandards Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 I'm 35 mate, mortgage and kids and a good Job I wouldn't risk anything for It's the law, it's not an interpretation, so I would see by anyone would be wary of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowStandards Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 Low standards is right on this one but, and it is a big but you can and will be prosecuted if the vehicle is not in a road worthy condition. If you replaced the tyres and had a look over the car and you were satisfied it was good to go then I also would drive it away. The brakes are a tricky one if they are good enough to stop you then that's ok as you don't have any other way of checking them till you strip it down. We need to see the wording on the fail sheet. You've also got to remember if you are stopped they won't be able to do an mot test, same as if you were stopped normally. So if it failed on a knocking ball joint I'd be 1000% happy to drive it home, hope that makes sense, same if it failed it's test on brake imbalance or low pads Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luckyshot Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 We need to see the wording on the fail sheet. You've also got to remember if you are stopped they won't be able to do an mot test, same as if you were stopped normally. So if it failed on a knocking ball joint I'd be 1000% happy to drive it home, hope that makes sense, same if it failed it's test on brake imbalance or low pads Agree totally, I took my brothers Evo 8 for mot last week it ran out day before so phoned booked it in and all sorted that simple. Also taking my nieces Peugeot 106 for test tomorrow its been off the road for 5 months so no tax or mot but is insured, my insurance covers me to drive aoc so won't be a problem there either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodp Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 I'm 35 mate, mortgage and kids and a good Job I wouldn't risk anything for It's the law, it's not an interpretation, so I would see by anyone would be wary of it. Thought so Now I don't know if it's advancing years that makes the older one's more cautious, or having no kids at home or mortgage so not so fussed about £150 but there's definitely a big difference of opinion between us "old uns" and you young whipper snappers As I said, we'll never agree on this one But it doesn't really matter anyway, because neither of us have bought the vehicle in question Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowStandards Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 Damn 3 pages, kinda took over this one didn't we To recap It should be about a quid a mile one way for a transporter (I've not had one for 2ish years) or the cost of a train ticket and fuel if you drive it Lastly, beware of shiply, I'd suggest 90% of folks on there just own a low loader, not the relevant insurances etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 You misunderstood my good fellow Book it in for an mot close to home. Go and pick it up and as you are going for an mot you can legally drive it (insurance of course) Take it home, ring mot place and cancel Done... Whilst the law may not state the distance involved, I don't think your insurance would cover you. Okay if you get away with it, but if you are involved in an accident, I believe you could kiss goodbye to your cover. Insurance companies are not stupid - look at last keeper, look at where you live, look at MOT station. It's not rocket science. If you were involved in a fatality, a bloke on the internet told me it was 100% legal wouldn't quite hack it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowStandards Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 Insurance does not become invalid with no tax or mot, it may if you are fully comp drop to third party only which makes sense. But they cannot remove your liabilty Again, law Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodp Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 Insurance does not become invalid with no tax or mot, it may if you are fully comp drop to third party only which makes sense. But they cannot remove your liabilty Again, law Vehicle has to be in roadworthy condition to be covered driving on the public highway I believe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowStandards Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 They cannot refuse your third party liability, only to pay for your car So yeah if youre buying a £20k wagon you'd want to make sure its tip top, but a £500 beater not so much... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 The insurance company will know that you have covered more than the minimum distance to have the car MOT'd. As for them being unable to remove your cover or refuse to pay a claim, I think they would do it at the drop of a hat. They would contend that if you were in any doubt, you should have checked with them first. If you were in no doubt, they might think that your cavalier attitude was a deliberate ploy. They would be right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowStandards Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 But there is no minimum distance, or maximum, by law, so they cant. I dont have a cavalier attitude, i am abiding by the law, something i imagine you do? You are merely straw clutching. It is legal and the liability side of your insurance cannot be revoked You can come up with as many what ifs, but at the end of the day there is no maximum distance set by law to take a car for an mot. If you make reasonable procautions to be road legal, tyres and lights you are set Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts