12vMatt
Member
Registered: 28th Oct 06
Location: Sunderland
User status: Offline
|
Unless your mate had insured the car then you had no insurance. quinn cover you on other vehicles with the owners permission AND the have insurance on the car.
chances are youll go to court and get bummed
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
Blebo in that case it would be the owner of the car that would be liable, not the driver in this case.
|
Tommy L
Member
Registered: 21st Aug 06
Location: Northampton Drives: Audi wagon
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robbo
If it had no MOT it should have been trailered from one destination to the other. No MOT = invalid insurance, are people not understandign this?!
correct unless you are driving to the test centre iirc
|
blebo
Member
Registered: 18th Apr 02
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Doldy
If you would have stopped, or carried on as normal, you would be ok as they would have made you get an MOT as you were taking it to get it prepped for the mot......
Wrong...must be to a pre booked appointment, coveying to your house dosent count unless you are drriving from the mot center imediatly after the test.
He states in his post that it failed "recently" which would suggest otherwise
|
blebo
Member
Registered: 18th Apr 02
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by John
Blebo in that case it would be the owner of the car that would be liable, not the driver in this case.
The owner would be liable for cause of permit, the driver however commited the offence
|
Robbo
Member
Registered: 6th Aug 02
Location: London
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by corsa_tomtom
quote:
Originally posted by Robbo
If it had no MOT it should have been trailered from one destination to the other. No MOT = invalid insurance, are people not understandign this?!
correct unless you are driving to the test centre iirc
Even then i think its a tricky area?
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
The driver wouldn't have commited the offence of having it on a public road with no insurance, thats the owners fault.
The driver was driving it with no insurance seperate to that.
|
Tommy L
Member
Registered: 21st Aug 06
Location: Northampton Drives: Audi wagon
User status: Offline
|
Should be trailered imo robbo
[Edited on 13-08-2008 by corsa_tomtom]
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
There's clearly more to the story same as there always is with these 18 year olds that are going to court for nothing.
|
Tommy L
Member
Registered: 21st Aug 06
Location: Northampton Drives: Audi wagon
User status: Offline
|
So was the car in question actually insured by the owner?
|
Robbo
Member
Registered: 6th Aug 02
Location: London
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by John
There's clearly more to the story same as there always is with these 18 year olds that are going to court for nothing.
Yup!
|
LeeM
Member
Registered: 26th Sep 05
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
having no mot wont imediatley void your insurance, however you'll find indemnity issues in the case of an accident.
also unless the vehicle was insured by itsowner then you werent covered by your quinn policy
|
