Own Account Driver:
Only trailers display MOT discs. Drivers bear no responsibility for road tax, MOT or operators disc issues. Any fixed penalities should be reimbursed by their employer as they’re the negligent party.
But . . . a vehicles excise license is visually displayed, should the driver bear no responsibility if they’ve not checked it?
If they haven’t checked that, what else haven’t they bothered checking?
Own Account Driver:
Drivers should be most vigilant with tyres as this is endorsable. I think the employer should still reimburse the fixed penalty in all circumstances, but some may try not to if the wear or damage was in an area that was visible on daily checks.
Tyres are 110% down to the driver.
What about the instances where the truck is on the road for several days at a time & only the driver has had the opportunity to check them regularly.
You and any person who is covered by this policy must:
make sure your car is roadworthy;
I looked for a definition of roadworthy and in a different document they say:
Even if your vehicle passes the MOT, you might be surprised to discover the following things:
-Your van is not necessarily roadworthy for the entire duration of the MOT certificate.
and
Don’t forget to carry out regular checks yourself to not only reduce the likelihood of you breaking down but also to lessen the risk of your van insurance being affected if you’re involved in an accident which is your fault and your van’s not regarded as being in a roadworthy condition.
Could we agree that it entirely depends on the wording of the T&C’s of the different insurance companies policy? I don’t doubt that for some it is exactly as you said above. I’m yet to be convinced that mine is like that.
I still don’t think there is a universal answer to this that applies across all insurance companies, because as you say it depends what is written in policy small print and this will change from company to company.
Chas:
I’m on a roll so I’ll post something that your insurance Co’ doesn’t want you to know about.
Your car is fully legal, comprehensively insured & it’s parked outside your house while you’re inside asleep.
A stolen car is driven recklessly down your street & sideswipes yours & all your neighbours cars causing several £1000’s of damage but approx’ £1000’s worth to yours.
The stolen car has been abandoned at the bottom of the street & the “alleged” driver has fled the scene.
How do you get the damage to your car put right?
Knuckledraggerz especially, will have serious problems with the logic involved in this one.
While the vehicle does not have to display or carry a test certificate, the trailer does. Normally next to the VTG 6T Plate will be a VTG 5B Test Date Disc which looks similar to a tax disc holder. This displays which month the trailer’s test runs out . Checking that this is in-situ should be part of a driver’s walk around check. A trailer that is less than 1 year (actually 13 months) old will not have one.
cav551:
While the vehicle does not have to display or carry a test certificate, the trailer does. Normally next to the VTG 6T Plate will be a VTG 5B Test Date Disc which looks similar to a tax disc holder. This displays which month the trailer’s test runs out . Checking that this is in-situ should be part of a driver’s walk around check. A trailer that is less than 1 year (actually 13 months) old will not have one.
Do you know this because you looked it up or because you are a professional driver?
You are correct. I have a defence if my tractor unit has no MOT, but I do not have a defence if my trailer hasn’t.
Interestingly, from a legal viewpoint . . . a tractor unit on its own is a vehicle, a tractor unit + trailer (C+E) is also a vehicle, yet a trailer on its own cannot possibly be a vehicle !
Chas:
I’m on a roll so I’ll post something that your insurance Co’ doesn’t want you to know about.
Your car is fully legal, comprehensively insured & it’s parked outside your house while you’re inside asleep.
A stolen car is driven recklessly down your street & sideswipes yours & all your neighbours cars causing several £1000’s of damage but approx’ £1000’s worth to yours.
The stolen car has been abandoned at the bottom of the street & the “alleged” driver has fled the scene.
How do you get the damage to your car put right?
Knuckledraggerz especially, will have serious problems with the logic involved in this one.
MIB…no, not men in black!
No, you simply claim off your own comprehensive insurance, the abandoned car that hit you was stolen, that means taking without permission, so even if the abandoned car is insured fully comprehensive, no one gave the oik permission to drive it or take it. It matters not if the oik is your son or daughter.
There will be many drivers on this forum who do not have valid third party insurance on the companies truck, because it is not compulsory… the company may instead have chosen to lodge £500,000 with the Accountant General of the Supreme Court
One last thing is that commercial vehicles MOT certificates do not expire on the 1st anniversary of their registration date, which means you could buy a vehicle on the 1st January and run it quite legally until the 31st of January of the following year
Chas - you clearly know what you are talking about so I’ll accept your word on it. (I was just quoting the document I linked to)
I’d hope that for most people it’s a red herring anyway as (in their own private vehicles) they wouldn’t be caught without MOT.
The OP was most unlucky here and I sincerely hope that it’s his company that will take the fine, hopefully without him needing a day in court.
I watch with interest what your answer will be about the uninsured stolen car damaging a fully comp car and fleeing. I suspect it is down to the damaged vehicles owner to attempt to identify and bring a civil claim against the runaway driver, and the insurance company will only pay the legal fees if you can find him.
A wild guess!
cheers
Tim
th2013:
I watch with interest what your answer will be about the uninsured stolen car damaging a fully comp car and fleeing. I suspect it is down to the damaged vehicles owner to attempt to identify and bring a civil claim against the runaway driver, and the insurance company will only pay the legal fees if you can find him.
A wild guess!
cheers
Tim
Out of interest, is there any difference in the scenario you are asking about and the scenario in the long thread “I was nearly killed by an O’learys International Driver”
Will find link in moment
HERE: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=97158
Essentially damage by a vehicle who’s driver couldn’t be traced afterwards.
Own Account Driver:
Only trailers display MOT discs. Drivers bear no responsibility for road tax, MOT or operators disc issues. Any fixed penalities should be reimbursed by their employer as they’re the negligent party.
But . . . a vehicles excise license is visually displayed, should the driver bear no responsibility if they’ve not checked it?
If they haven’t checked that, what else haven’t they bothered checking?
Own Account Driver:
Drivers should be most vigilant with tyres as this is endorsable. I think the employer should still reimburse the fixed penalty in all circumstances, but some may try not to if the wear or damage was in an area that was visible on daily checks.
Tyres are 110% down to the driver.
You would struggle to safely check the inner walls of the tyres for damage
What about the instances where the truck is on the road for several days at a time & only the driver has had the opportunity to check them regularly.
DrivingMissDaisy:
You won’t be fined and if the CPS charge you a not guilty plea is the way to go although I’d speak to the copper involved and remind him you’re just the driver driving your GAFFERS truck and he’s responsible for the MOT NOT YOU!
You’re responsible for checking the MOT is valid on the walkaround checks.
In the car/motorcycle world, no MOT invalidates any comprehensive terms on the insurance policy, the policy will pay out for any 3rd party claims but the insurer may seek to recover the cost of all such claims from the insured.
i.e. You in your comprehensively insured £15k car swerves to miss a fox & hits a bus shelter, causing major injuries to 1 person, minor injuries to 3 persons, totally demolishing the bus shelter & write off your car. You realise the next day that your MOT ran out 4days ago.
Your insurance Co’ will deal with & payout to all the 3rd parties, the 4 persons injured + the owner of the bus shelter, they are legally obliged to by law. They will not be paying out anything in regards to your £15k motor.
They can then look to you to pay them back. If you’ve got sod all then they’ll probably just shrug their shoulders & increase everyone else’s premiums, but if you property/equity or money, they will take it.
It is a myth that it is a myth that no MOT does not invalidate insurance.
DrivingMissDaisy:
You won’t be fined and if the CPS charge you a not guilty plea is the way to go although I’d speak to the copper involved and remind him you’re just the driver driving your GAFFERS truck and he’s responsible for the MOT NOT YOU!
You’re responsible for checking the MOT is valid on the walkaround checks.
This is something required by some companies as part of their vehicle checks regime. However, you still won’t see the original test certificate for the unit/rigid. You will have a little label stuck on the vehicle somewhere with the MOT expiry date showing. That’s not what we’re talking about here. Your little label is not a legally required document, the test certificate is and at the risk of repeating myself, you might ask to see the original but your boss is under no obligation to comply with your request, thereby relieving you of any responsibility for producing an MOT certificate for an employers vehicle. Unfortunately, not all plods are aware of this and occasionally will mistakenly charge an employee with failing to produce. The employee thinks he’s bang to rights and cops for a guilty plea and walks away with a fine none the wiser.
I’ve been there, I’ve done it and got the T-shirt!
In the car/motorcycle world, no MOT invalidates any comprehensive terms on the insurance policy, the policy will pay out for any 3rd party claims but the insurer may seek to recover the cost of all such claims from the insured.
i.e. You in your comprehensively insured £15k car swerves to miss a fox & hits a bus shelter, causing major injuries to 1 person, minor injuries to 3 persons, totally demolishing the bus shelter & write off your car. You realise the next day that your MOT ran out 4days ago.
Your insurance Co’ will deal with & payout to all the 3rd parties, the 4 persons injured + the owner of the bus shelter, they are legally obliged to by law. They will not be paying out anything in regards to your £15k motor.
They can then look to you to pay them back. If you’ve got sod all then they’ll probably just shrug their shoulders & increase everyone else’s premiums, but if you property/equity or money, they will take it.
It is a myth that it is a myth that no MOT does not invalidate insurance.
Oooops!
This has been ruled on by the Financial Ombudsman in cases where an insurance company has declined a claim solely due to no MOT…
roadworthiness
Most motor policies contain an express requirement that the vehicle must be maintained in a roadworthy state. If so, where there is good evidence that the loss or damage was caused (or substantially contributed to) because the vehicle was unroadworthy, we are likely to consider it fair for the insurer to reject the claim. In other cases, the insurer might reduce the payout on the basis that the vehicle was not in good condition. If so, where there is good evidence that the vehicle would have failed an MOT test, we are likely to consider it fair for the insurer to take this into account in assessing its value.
The bit in bold is key.
Imagine a vehicle that has failed it’s MOT on emissions & is involved in an accident, emissions can’t cause or contribute to any accident or damage &, assuming the car was otherwise roadworthy, the insurance co would have to honour any claim despite what it’s T&Cs might say.
If the above car was written off then no MOT would reduce any payout purely because a car without MOT is worth less but you would still get paid!
