Unfortunately I am getting this story from the other half so all the details might be sketchy but I was wwondering what the outcome might be.
Friends away on holiday and returned to find the house broken into and a car stolen along with other household items, they think that they must have had a van with them as things like drawers and a large TV were also taken that would not have fitted in the car.
On checking the insurance, House covered, car covered but then they discovered that they needed an MOT as the car was just over 3 years old. Car was taxed but had been parked on the road outside house.
They haven't asked for advice on here but I'd thought I'd kick-off the discussion so I can offer any crumbs of comfort through the wife .(Or should this have gone in ANOTHER FORUM?)
What does the MOT have to do with it?
Car Insurance firm are asking for a current MOT certificate as the car is over 3 years old, unfortunately, they don't have one to send and are worried the Insurance company won't pay out.
Is it a condition of the policy?
Flame pit is probably more appropriate, but anyway. I wouldn't expect the MOT to affect car insurance in this case, since the MOT status has no relevance to the circumstances of the claim - it's not like they would have left it had it been MOT'd.
Lack of MOT will affect the value hence the pay out.
Shouldn't affect their liability for theft as the two are unrelated. The Adjustor might think otherwise. Presumably the car was declared as kept on the road when not in use? (i.e. no fictiicious garage?)
The value bit is the one part that I thought about but the woman concerned is sure they will not pay out. I will pass on the comments and update when I know more.
An MOT is required if used on the road. As the vehicle was parked unattended when stolen it did not need an MOT. However as has been said you need to check your policy to see what if anything it says about having an MOT. I would be surprised if it makes a difference.
Yes, no offence committed until it moves, and only the. If it's not on it's way to a prebooked MOT.
Insurance would be needed though.
As others have mentioned the lack of an MOT will not affect the Insurers liability to pay a theft claim, it will however mean the car is worth less than a car with an MOT so the payout will be affected.
Insurers typically settle written off car claims that don't have an MOT based on the "Trade" value.
Some Insurers state an MOT is required and many Insurance staff also believe this, if you're told your claim isn't valid due to a lack of an MOT the Insurers are wrong, if this happens post back here and I can provide links from the Insurers regulators and also the Ombudsman confirming they need to deal with the claim.
Be aware that not having an MOT is generally the type of indicator that causes Insurers to make extra investigations into a theft claim, this is because it's fairly common for people who can't afford the work required to get their car MOTed to have their car stolen fraudulently. The extra investigations are typically a longer "cognitive interview" (Google it). Tell her to stick to telling the truth and she'll be ok, if she decides to lie about any part of the theft they have a habit of discovering it
Insurers often ask for your wellies that you wore as a kid, even for minor bumps.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)