Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators
Thanks to gpadsa,Steffers0,lansdown,Wasron,jfgw, for Donating to support the site
Taking a car for its MOT, without an MOT or tax
-
- Lemon Slice
- Posts: 479
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:56 pm
- Has thanked: 1311 times
- Been thanked: 108 times
Taking a car for its MOT, without an MOT or tax
A car has been parked since the beginning of the pandemic and both tax an MOT have lapsed. Can I legally drive it to a prearranged MOT test?
-
- Lemon Slice
- Posts: 501
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:57 pm
- Has thanked: 536 times
- Been thanked: 226 times
Re: Taking a car for its MOT, without an MOT or tax
MyNameIsUrl wrote:A car has been parked since the beginning of the pandemic and both tax an MOT have lapsed. Can I legally drive it to a prearranged MOT test?
Yes, as long as the MOT is pre-booked.
https://www.gov.uk/getting-an-mot
If the MOT has run out
If your tax is due to run out, register your vehicle as ‘off the road’ - you cannot renew your vehicle tax if your MOT has expired.
Book an MOT test.
Tax your vehicle once it has passed its MOT.
You cannot drive or park your vehicle on the road if the MOT has run out. You can be prosecuted if caught.
The only exceptions are to drive it:
to or from somewhere to be repaired
to a pre-arranged MOT test
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2304
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 4:20 pm
- Has thanked: 1907 times
- Been thanked: 870 times
Re: Taking a car for its MOT, without an MOT or tax
I'm 99% certain you can.
You definitely can drive to a pre-arranged MOT test (has to be pre arranged to be a legal drive), and as you can't tax a car without the MOT it follows that must be ok too.
However, when the tax lapsed, I think you should have declared the car SORN (statutory off road notification) rather than simply let it lapse.
Guess that's academic now if the car is to be MOT'd and taxed.
You definitely can drive to a pre-arranged MOT test (has to be pre arranged to be a legal drive), and as you can't tax a car without the MOT it follows that must be ok too.
However, when the tax lapsed, I think you should have declared the car SORN (statutory off road notification) rather than simply let it lapse.
Guess that's academic now if the car is to be MOT'd and taxed.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2510
- Joined: January 15th, 2017, 9:20 am
- Has thanked: 697 times
- Been thanked: 1009 times
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 6050
- Joined: May 30th, 2021, 6:01 pm
- Has thanked: 1843 times
- Been thanked: 2067 times
Re: Taking a car for its MOT, without an MOT or tax
JohnB wrote:Remember to insure it first
How can you do that without an MOT? - not challenging you - just curious
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 6050
- Joined: May 30th, 2021, 6:01 pm
- Has thanked: 1843 times
- Been thanked: 2067 times
Re: Taking a car for its MOT, without an MOT or tax
Seems as if you can
https://www.kwik-fit.com/blog/can-i-tax ... out-an-mot
BUT
The most important thing to note with the insurance is that without an MOT certificate, your insurer likely won’t cover you in the event of an accident.
https://www.kwik-fit.com/blog/can-i-tax ... out-an-mot
BUT
The most important thing to note with the insurance is that without an MOT certificate, your insurer likely won’t cover you in the event of an accident.
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 16629
- Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
- Has thanked: 4343 times
- Been thanked: 7536 times
Re: Taking a car for its MOT, without an MOT or tax
pje16 wrote:Seems as if you can
https://www.kwik-fit.com/blog/can-i-tax ... out-an-mot
BUT
The most important thing to note with the insurance is that without an MOT certificate, your insurer likely won’t cover you in the event of an accident.
In which case it is de facto not insured as far as the owner is concerned but may of course meet the legal requirements for third party bodily injury cover.
Dod
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 3644
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:00 am
- Has thanked: 565 times
- Been thanked: 1616 times
Re: Taking a car for its MOT, without an MOT or tax
Dod101 wrote:pje16 wrote:The most important thing to note with the insurance is that without an MOT certificate, your insurer likely won’t cover you in the event of an accident.
In which case it is de facto not insured as far as the owner is concerned but may of course meet the legal requirements for third party bodily injury cover.
Dod, the point of legal insurance is to cover others, not you.
Insurers cannot deny third party cover on the basis of (lack of) MoT or roadworthiness of the vehicle. Road Traffic Act 1988.
They can deny comprehensive payouts, and may even (very rarely) try to recover costs of third party payouts from the insured in cases of extreme negligence. But they can’t refuse third party cover, which is what you need to legally take the car on the road to an MoT.
So the procedure is:
Obtain insurance.
Prebook and obtain MoT. Make sure the garage knows your prior MoT has expired and makes a note of your reg number.
Obtain road tax.
Since insurance companies charge a fortune to change your cover level, it may be cheaper to obtain your final desired level of cover from the start, even though some of it may be worthless until you get the MOT. It can cost more to obtain 3rd party cover first, then modify it later. Unless you expect the whole procedure to take a long time. But frankly, there’s no reason it can’t all happen the same day.
Note you can still be prosecuted for driving an obviously unroadworthy vehicle, EVEN if you are taking it to a pre-booked test or repair.
Gryff
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 16629
- Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
- Has thanked: 4343 times
- Been thanked: 7536 times
Re: Taking a car for its MOT, without an MOT or tax
gryffron wrote:Dod101 wrote:pje16 wrote:The most important thing to note with the insurance is that without an MOT certificate, your insurer likely won’t cover you in the event of an accident.
In which case it is de facto not insured as far as the owner is concerned but may of course meet the legal requirements for third party bodily injury cover.
Dod, the point of legal insurance is to cover others, not you.
Insurers cannot deny third party cover on the basis of (lack of) MoT or roadworthiness of the vehicle. Road Traffic Act 1988.
They can deny comprehensive payouts, and may even (very rarely) try to recover costs of third party payouts from the insured in cases of extreme negligence. But they can’t refuse third party cover, which is what you need to legally take the car on the road to an MoT.
So the procedure is:
Obtain insurance.
Prebook and obtain MoT. Make sure the garage knows your prior MoT has expired and makes a note of your reg number.
Obtain road tax.
Since insurance companies charge a fortune to change your cover level, it may be cheaper to obtain your final desired level of cover from the start, even though some of it may be worthless until you get the MOT. It can cost more to obtain 3rd party cover first, then modify it later. Unless you expect the whole procedure to take a long time. But frankly, there’s no reason it can’t all happen the same day.
Note you can still be prosecuted for driving an obviously unroadworthy vehicle, EVEN if you are taking it to a pre-booked test or repair.
Gryff
I am not arguing with you but I know what insurance is legally required. It is third party bodily injury cover and if valid insurance is not in place you are acting illegally. If though you do not have valid insurance there is an outfit called the Motor Insurers' Bureau which will pick up the costs.
Anyway purely of academic interest for me.
Dod
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 19022
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
- Has thanked: 642 times
- Been thanked: 6741 times
Re: Taking a car for its MOT, without an MOT or tax
gryffron wrote:Note you can still be prosecuted for driving an obviously unroadworthy vehicle, EVEN if you are taking it to a pre-booked test or repair.
Wouldn't you have to have known it was unroadworthy, and then drive anyway, to be successfully prosecuted for that?
And how can you know it is not roadworthy without the inspection that you are on your way to?
Otherwise it is a Catch-22.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 3499
- Joined: November 27th, 2016, 8:45 am
- Has thanked: 131 times
- Been thanked: 1278 times
Re: Taking a car for its MOT, without an MOT or tax
gryffron wrote:Since insurance companies charge a fortune to change your cover level, it may be cheaper to obtain your final desired level of cover from the start, even though some of it may be worthless until you get the MOT. It can cost more to obtain 3rd party cover first, then modify it later.
Gryff
Or alternatively just pay for one days insurance from the many companies that offer it. And then when it has an MOT *if* the car is to be driven buy a normal annual policy.
-
- Lemon Slice
- Posts: 326
- Joined: November 30th, 2016, 7:19 pm
- Has thanked: 6 times
- Been thanked: 58 times
Re: Taking a car for its MOT, without an MOT or tax
Lootman wrote:gryffron wrote:Note you can still be prosecuted for driving an obviously unroadworthy vehicle, EVEN if you are taking it to a pre-booked test or repair.
Wouldn't you have to have known it was unroadworthy, and then drive anyway, to be successfully prosecuted for that?
And how can you know it is not roadworthy without the inspection that you are on your way to?
Otherwise it is a Catch-22.
Tyres+.
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 19022
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
- Has thanked: 642 times
- Been thanked: 6741 times
Re: Taking a car for its MOT, without an MOT or tax
stockton wrote:Lootman wrote:gryffron wrote:Note you can still be prosecuted for driving an obviously unroadworthy vehicle, EVEN if you are taking it to a pre-booked test or repair.
Wouldn't you have to have known it was unroadworthy, and then drive anyway, to be successfully prosecuted for that?
And how can you know it is not roadworthy without the inspection that you are on your way to?
Otherwise it is a Catch-22.
Tyres+.
Tyres are probably the one exception where an ordinary person can determine a lack of roadworthiness, or at least should be able to. For other things like brakes, steering, suspension, emissions etc., it does not seem reasonable to expect a layman to determine that, other than regular inspections and tests. If those happened and the incident was a freak occurrence then it is not clear to me how such a prosecution could prevail.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 1022
- Joined: December 9th, 2016, 6:44 am
- Has thanked: 236 times
- Been thanked: 312 times
Re: Taking a car for its MOT, without an MOT or tax
Tyres, windshield, mirrors, lights, dragging exhaust pipes or body panels, flashing red lights on the dash, visible black smoke, fluids under the car.
There are clearly shades of grey, but there are a many unroadworthy conditions that will reveal themselves to a cursory walk round, or at least will reveal that a prudent driver should check further.
One of my nephews drove his family's second car exclusively for a couple of months. A few weeks ago his younger brother drove it, pulled over after less than a mile, and had it towed to a mechanic. Was it unroadworthy? Yes, according to mechanics report, most of the brake systems needed to be replaced. Was it obvious, well it was to younger nephew, a prudent and careful new driver. Older nephew should not be let out without a keeper.
There are clearly shades of grey, but there are a many unroadworthy conditions that will reveal themselves to a cursory walk round, or at least will reveal that a prudent driver should check further.
One of my nephews drove his family's second car exclusively for a couple of months. A few weeks ago his younger brother drove it, pulled over after less than a mile, and had it towed to a mechanic. Was it unroadworthy? Yes, according to mechanics report, most of the brake systems needed to be replaced. Was it obvious, well it was to younger nephew, a prudent and careful new driver. Older nephew should not be let out without a keeper.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 3816
- Joined: November 6th, 2016, 10:25 pm
- Has thanked: 1205 times
- Been thanked: 2001 times
Re: Taking a car for its MOT, without an MOT or tax
9873210 wrote:Tyres, windshield, mirrors, lights, dragging exhaust pipes or body panels, flashing red lights on the dash, visible black smoke, fluids under the car.
TBH you shouldn't be driving a car like that irrespective of MOT, Tax, or insurance.
Besides, if it is obviously unroadworthy it invalidates your MOT
Paul
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 16629
- Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
- Has thanked: 4343 times
- Been thanked: 7536 times
Re: Taking a car for its MOT, without an MOT or tax
DrFfybes wrote:Besides, if it is obviously unroadworthy it invalidates your MOT
Paul
I am not sure if that is the correct expression. After all the MOT is evidence only that at the time of inspection the vehicle was roadworthy. A lot can happen in three, six or nine months.
Dod
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 6050
- Joined: May 30th, 2021, 6:01 pm
- Has thanked: 1843 times
- Been thanked: 2067 times
Re: Taking a car for its MOT, without an MOT or tax
Correct it is only valid (roadworthy) at the time of the test
If you get stopped by the police next day, say for a light being out, saying you MOT was yesterday won't help you
I knew someone years ago who swapeed his balding tyre for a good one , got his test and swapped it back again afterwards
See why it's only valid at the time of the test
If you get stopped by the police next day, say for a light being out, saying you MOT was yesterday won't help you
I knew someone years ago who swapeed his balding tyre for a good one , got his test and swapped it back again afterwards
See why it's only valid at the time of the test
Last edited by pje16 on September 8th, 2021, 2:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 19022
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
- Has thanked: 642 times
- Been thanked: 6741 times
Re: Taking a car for its MOT, without an MOT or tax
pje16 wrote:Correct it is only valid (roadworthy) at the time of the test. If you get stopped by the police next day, say for a light being out, saying you MOT was yesterday won't help you.
True, but you will only be stopped by the police if the problem with your vehicle is visible and obvious, in which case you should have known about it yourself, making you guilty.
But if the flaw is something that requires an inspection by a mechanic to detect, then you are not likely to be stopped by the cops for that anyway.
pje16 wrote:I knew someone years ago who swapeed his balding tyre for a good one , got his test amd swapped it back again afterwards.
I had a similar experience with emissions. To pass the test the engine has to be detuned. After it passed it was immediately tuned back so the car ran better!
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 3816
- Joined: November 6th, 2016, 10:25 pm
- Has thanked: 1205 times
- Been thanked: 2001 times
Re: Taking a car for its MOT, without an MOT or tax
Dod101 wrote:DrFfybes wrote:Besides, if it is obviously unroadworthy it invalidates your MOT
Paul
I am not sure if that is the correct expression. After all the MOT is evidence only that at the time of inspection the vehicle was roadworthy. A lot can happen in three, six or nine months.
Dod
DOh - I meant insurance!
Return to “Cars, Driving, Motorbikes or any Transport”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests