DVLA mad Red Tape

[Florence]

I have to say I couldn't have asked for a more helpful response the guys at Manchester DVLA was great they have taxed the car and sorting out the log book. He said the new log book should be with me in a month.

What a difference from the person on the phone at Swansea. They could have said go to my local DVLA but no it was send us the green slip with the V62 form and they would do security checks that take 4 to 6 weeks. She wouldn't give any help at all jsut said I couldn't use the car until the log book arrived. Sorry but Swansea DVLA really need to help those who contact with problems if I had stolen the car I certainly wouldn't tax it!

The final thing to do is Thank the two at Manchester DVLA you are both stars.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by KingPhoenix

I could be wrong, but im sure my insurance policy states that my insurance is only valid whilst my car is MOT'd and TAXed

I used to work for Admiral Insurance and once asked that question - and it's no more than a common fallacy - a certificate of insurance is a legally-binding document. The law states that once you have it in your possession and it correctly relates to you and your vehicle, it must be honoured, irregardless of whether it's taxed/MOT'd.

I think times have changed now though Russ.

There is usually conditions attached surely in any insurance policy that if a vehicle is not taxed or MOT'd, then you are actually voiding your insurance and if a claim is made, the insurance company can turn round and invalidate the cover if they learn you were driving the car without a tax disc. Because, as we know - legally you cannot drive without a tax disc.

I've checked through my policy and there is a condition attached that I am covered if I am driving the car with a valid road fund license and a MOT certificate.

[Russ]

On the radio show each sunday we have a solicitor who comes on to answer people's legal questions - he was asked this very question last month and said if a company agrees to insure you and you hold a valid certificate, they are obliged to cover you. The only difference is to what extent - the legal minimum level of cover is called RTA (not third party fire and theft, contrary to popular belief, however you can no longer buy RTA cover) and this is the maximum level they will likely cover you for if you make a claim without tax and/or an MOT.

[Florence]

Originally Posted by Russ D

On the radio show each sunday we have a solicitor who comes on to answer people's legal questions - he was asked this very question last month and said if a company agrees to insure you and you hold a valid certificate, they are obliged to cover you. The only difference is to what extent - the legal minimum level of cover is called RTA (not third party fire and theft, contrary to popular belief, however you can no longer buy RTA cover) and this is the maximum level they will likely cover you for if you make a claim without tax and/or an MOT.

I checked my insurance document and it does quote that the insurance is only valid if the car is taxed and mot'd. I certainly wouldn't want to be the one to test it

[Escapee]

Originally Posted by Mick

I think times have changed now though Russ.

There is usually conditions attached surely in any insurance policy that if a vehicle is not taxed or MOT'd, then you are actually voiding your insurance and if a claim is made, the insurance company can turn round and invalidate the cover if they learn you were driving the car without a tax disc. Because, as we know - legally you cannot drive without a tax disc.

I've checked through my policy and there is a condition attached that I am covered if I am driving the car with a valid road fund license and a MOT certificate.

I think the TAX issue has arisen because authorities are now trying to clamp down on untaxed cars that are abandonded. Insurance companies don't want to have all the hassle and pay out on a car to find it was crushed by the local authority because it didn't have a TAX disc.

If your car was stolen and it didn't have a tax disc I can understand their angle, however I have a number of cars that are SORN and stored in garages. These vehicles are all insured, so are people here trying to say my cars are not insured just because they dont have little round disc in the window?

There have been instances recently in my area where the council have gone onto private property and removed vehicles without TAX discs, I understand there is currently a legal case in my area over such an instance.

Did you know if your car is in the street, TAX'd, MOT'd and Insured and someone comes along and smashed the window, the council could remove it and crush it because they would consider it a health/fire hazzard!

It has been happening, all red tape gone mad

[Nugget]

Originally Posted by Escapee

<snip>If your car was stolen and it didn't have a tax disc I can understand their angle, however I have a number of cars that are SORN and stored in garages. These vehicles are all insured, so are people here trying to say my cars are not insured just because they dont have little round disc in the window?

Those cars must be insured as SORN is the alternative offered to tax by the DVLA. More pertinently, I'd like to know if you'd need to have them insured - I know that it's better for you in case something does happen to one of them but, if there all registered as off the road, is there a need for it?

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Kits

I checked my insurance document and it does quote that the insurance is only valid if the car is taxed and mot'd. I certainly wouldn't want to be the one to test it

What that means is you level of cover (comprehensive, third party fire and theft etc) is only valid if the car has tax and an MOT, so any claims you would make under that cover would only be honoured if you have the other documents for the vehicle. But the legal minimum cover, RTA which is similar to third party only, would still have to be honoured.

[bob_builder]

Originally Posted by Escapee

If your car was stolen and it didn't have a tax disc I can understand their angle, however I have a number of cars that are SORN and stored in garages. These vehicles are all insured, so are people here trying to say my cars are not insured just because they dont have little round disc in the window?

There appears to be some confusion here with the term "insurance".
When you insure your car you are effectively insuring it for two things. As Russ has pointed out, the legal minimum cover RTA, which is similar to third party only, is to insure your car on the road against other drivers. Any other insurance is to insure your car's property against fire, theft, damage, breaking-down, etc. wherever the car is.

As Russ has pointed out, the RTA cover will be unaffected by lack of tax disc, etc. but any other insurance might depending on the wording of your policy.

I imagine that Escapee's SORN cars are insured against damage and theft but do not have RTA cover as they are obviously not intended to be driven. This insurance would be more like home insurance than car insurance.

[Florence]

Originally Posted by Escapee

If your car was stolen and it didn't have a tax disc I can understand their angle, however I have a number of cars that are SORN and stored in garages. These vehicles are all insured, so are people here trying to say my cars are not insured just because they dont have little round disc in the window?

There have been instances recently in my area where the council have gone onto private property and removed vehicles without TAX discs, I understand there is currently a legal case in my area over such an instance.


It has been happening, all red tape gone mad

This was my worry apparently they have done this in our area as I was informed by a policeman. I was stuck in the middle I couldn't do a SORN as I wasn't the registered keeper! so it would have sat on my drive in full veiw while I was out longer than normal due to the route the public transport takes to get to my place of work.

All Swansea DVLA had to say was visit my local DVLA office.. Instead she insisted there was now way to tax the car and it would be off the road 4 to 6 weeks!!! that is the most annoying part.

I wonder if Swansea is the best place for the main DVLA offices just makes you think what her motive was not telling me the truth.

[Escapee]

Originally Posted by Nugget

Those cars must be insured as SORN is the alternative offered to tax by the DVLA. More pertinently, I'd like to know if you'd need to have them insured - I know that it's better for you in case something does happen to one of them but, if there all registered as off the road, is there a need for it?

I use them as I need, so it's easier to keep them on the policy. Removing cars from the policy doesn't have a great deal of affect on the cost when they are covered by a multi car policy.

Most insurance companies have an off road cover that costs £50 a year, so it would cost me more to insure them as off-road vehicles than vehicles on a multi car policy. Strange but true!

I have confirmed with my insurance company about this, although the one question (without going offf topic too much) they have been unable to answer is "Am I covered if I am towing one vehicle behind thye other on a trailer/dolly and they are both on the same policy"

I have never done this because my camper van is on a seperate policy, but it was interesting that they couldn't answer that one and they are the leading company dealing with multi car classic policies.

PS: I also have one vehicle that I declared SORN about three years ago and they have never been in contact about renewing the SORN.
Funny though I recently received a new style V5 for that vehicle, I seem to be getting a constant flow of new V5's these days.

[SMHarman]

Yes you are covered for the towing scenaro, there are a number of parallels to draw. A fire that wiped out the collection would result in payout on all cars, not just the first.

A multicar company car policy would payout for damage to both cars if one hit the other in say the company car park.