Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi All I have now received a Final Reminder, which I have attached. Can you confirm that I should still ignore this letter and take no further action. It does not appear to say "Letter of Claim" anywhere on the document but I just wanted to check with you all. Many thanks FightUnfairParkingTickets Parking Charge Final Reminder issued 29th May 2024.pdf
    • Hello I am a resident of a communal block of flats owned by a Housing Association and since Tuesday 14th May 2024 Matthews and Tannert had put up scaffolding for a job on the roof last week, which was up for the best part of nine days. They had removed the scaffolding on Thursday 23rd May 2024 but my Sky box is still not working because of the satellite dish outside, and I was wondering whether the scaffolders had touched the dish while it was there and as a result had probably knocked the dish and probably made the dish go out of signal or whatever. I needed someone to check this out as well as to see my Sky box to see what could be the problem, and hopefully sort this out. I have had my Sky Digibox for many years and I have got recordings saved on them that I have had a long time - it would break my heart if I had lost them forever.       I contacted Sky but I almost made the mistake of accepting an offer where I would have to pay £31.50 and wait a whole month without television in my front room for it. I am in debt at the moment and I don't want all this on top of everything else - thankfully I have since cancelled it two weeks later when I told the person on the phone that it is the dish which is at fault as well as the fact that I live in a communal Housing Association property, and so that is one of very few weights off my mind. I emailed the Housing Association's Repairs department and they said that they will contact an electrical company to come out and see to the dish outside. I received a telephone call on Friday 24th May from the man to say that he will arrive on Wednesday 29th May 2024 to do the job. He arrived at around 9.40 am on Wednesday as promised; he went into my flat and had a look at the Sky box and saw the blue screen on my front room TV set, indicating no signal. He also looked outside as to where the dish was.  The main problem was that the ladders that he had with him were not enough to reach the dish outside as the dish was towards the top of the building - obviously the Health and Safety aspect of the job didn't allow him to do this. He then mentioned that whether he could do the job as a result of getting onto the roof and doing it like that as the dish is closer to the top. He said that he needed the key to enter the loft part of the building in order to reach this, and he needed to contact the Housing Officer at the Housing Association who had key to this, but lo and behold, he came on the Wednesday to do the job, and guess what? Wednesday was the Housing Officer's day off and so therefore he was unable to contact him for the key so that he could do the job! I just couldn't believe it myself. I am personally annoyed because this has not been sorted, and the man who came to do this is also annoyed because he came all the way to Nottingham from Peterborough, and he said to me that he won't get paid if he cannot do the job, so you see, we are both angry about this for different reasons. We are both in the same boat with regards to frustration, and we both want to see a conclusion to this, once and for all. Sometimes I wish that I didn't live in a flat which is in a communal building and I am thinking of getting a transfer to a one bedroom flat that isn't in that sort of place. I pay around £85 a month in a Direct Debit to Sky to receive their TV services which I cannot use at the moment, and I don't have much money in my bank account as it is due to one thing and another. I also pay nearly £14 a month to TV Licensing so that I can legally watch TV in my front room. I pay for Sky hence the fact that I want the Sky service in my front room and not Freeview. Also, as the General Election is coming up in five weeks' time, I want the satellite TV to be working properly so that I can catch up with what is on the news channels, and I feel rather "cut off" from that at the moment, and I want it working in time for Thursday 4th July 2024 for ovbious reasons . I have Freeview in my bedroom, but that is not the point  - I don't want to be limited to my bedroom every time I want to watch TV. I have tried putting the Freeview in te front room but it doesn't seem compatable for the same uses that I usually have Sky for.  Sunday 9th June 2024 is Day 27 of the satellite TV not working in my flat, and I feel that something needs to be done about this. You can take this message as a complaint if you like, but nevertheless, I want this message to be acknowledged and also something to be done about what has happened. I have enough on my plate with regards to health problems and depression without things like this making things worse. I would appreciate it if something was done.  I don't like naming and shaming but it is Matthews and Tannert's fault that I am in this situation in the first place, and sometimes I wish that I could sue them. In a nutshell, I have had more than enough after being without TV in the my front room for nearly four weeks. Also, at a time like this, I am missing so much of interest on TV what with the General Election comning up in just a few weeks.
    • There's no facility for a settlement "out of court" as such. But matters that are started under the "Single Justice" (SJ) Procedure can often be concluded without the defendant appearing. The SJ procedure, as the name suggests, involves a single magistrate, sitting in an office with a legal advisor, dealing with matters "on papers" only. Nobody else can attend. The SJ deals with straightforward guilty pleas. Anything where the SJ believes the defendant should appear, or which should be dealt with by the "ordinary" court are adjourned o a hearing in the normal magistrates'  court .As well as this, all defendants have the right to a hearing in the normal court if they wish. Nobody is forced to have their case heard under he SJP.  In particular, as far as traffic matters go, a SJ will not disqualify a driver and if a ban is to be considered, the case will be passed over to the normal court. Because, following your SD, you will be pleading Not Guilty (and offering the "deal"), your case would usually be heard in the normal court, meaning a personal appearance. To be honest, performing your SD at the court is a more straightforward way of doing things. It avoids any possible hitches involved in serving he SD on the court. But of course, as I said, most courts have backlogs which mean an SD may not be quickly accommodated. If you do end up doing your SD before a solicitor, check with them the protocol for serving it on the court. Do let us know what the solicitor says about Wednesday.    
    • Welcome to posting on CAG cabot, people will be along soon to help you try to sort this out. Please complete this:  
    • Quotes of the day penny mordaunt came out swinging with her broadsword, and promptly decapitated sunak while Nigel Farage, representing Reform UK, made contentious claims about immigration policies, which were swiftly fact-checked during the debate.   Good question though raised at labour about the 2 child benefit cap, which I broadly agree with, but the tory 'trap' assumes tory thinking - rather than child centric thinking. There should be no incentives to have kids as a financial way of life paid for by everyone else ... ... BUT the kids should not be made to suffer for the decisions of their parents Free school meals would feed the kids, improve their ability to learn, and incentivise them to go to school. As an added benefit ... it would invest in our nations future.   How far this should go is a matter for costing, social intent and future path of the nation, but not feeding our nations kids is an abomination. There should be at least one free school meal per day for every child who attends school. Full Stop. Its the cheapest and most effective investment in our future we could make.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Law re: no MOT / Tax while driving to garage then to MOT test?


Zombe
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3197 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

What is the legal position? My car is currently SORN (no tax, no MOT), I need to drive it to a garage tomorrow to get a full service etc. Then on to a separate MOT center.

 

I have insured the car by phone. I have insurance policy No, docs posted to me today. Can I legally drive it for such purpose?

 

I have searched .gov, VOSA, and Google - could find nothing other than must have valid MOT, Tax, insurance.

 

Help appreciated!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

You can drive a car with no MOT directly to a MOT testing station for a pre-booked appointment only. If you are going to a garage for a service who is not doing the MOT, then this would be illegal.

 

Additionally, to drive a car on the road, you must have and display a valid Tax disk irrespective of where you are going.

 

I have just been in this situation and have arranged for my wife's old banger to be recovered to a garage for a major service/overhaul. It has been set on our drive for a year and had no tax or insurance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How is OP able to tax the car before the MOT is issued.

 

:confused:

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can drive a car with no MOT directly to a MOT testing station for a pre-booked appointment only. If you are going to a garage for a service who is not doing the MOT, then this would be illegal.

 

Whilst I agree that getting the car serviced is going too far, there is case law that allows the motorist to stop off along the journey to/from the MoT appointment.

 

The case precedent is Secretary of State for Transport V. Richards ( 1998 ) JP 682. Richards stopped off twice on the way to an MOT test, first to buy petrol and then stopping again to buy cigarettes, and was convicted by magistrates, the judgment was appealed before the Crown Court and was overturned. The prosecution then appealed to the QBD and the Crown Court verdict was upheld.

 

The Court accepted the submission that it is a question of fact and degree in each case for the court to determine whether the exemption is satisfied. But the court said, "it is only if this court is satisfied that no court could reasonably have come to the conclusion that it did that it can interfere. On the facts of this case, it is ridiculous if a driver could not stop to obtain petrol on the way. it would fly in the face of common sense if some short stop cannot be made by the driver, for whatever purpose, providing he is on his way to the test station."

 

Additionally, to drive a car on the road, you must have and display a valid Tax disk irrespective of where you are going.
Sorry, absolutely wrong

 

To/from a pre-booked MoT Test and during the test, and to/from repair premises after failing an MoT test, the vehicle is an exempt vehicle under VERA 1994 Sched.2 and requires neither road tax or number plates.

 

All that is required is that the driver is insured to drive the car and that it is roadworthy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As said above, MOT day is the one day a year you dont need tax or a current MOT cert to drive your car, as long as you drive directly to the MOT place and the test appointment has been arranged in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure that you can drive a car without an MOT as long as you have a pre booked appointment and you only frive to the MOT and do not take a de tour! You don't need to have in surance documents, as the police can confirm all this with their modern technology! :o)

Link to post
Share on other sites

All that is required is that the driver is insured to drive the car and that it is roadworthy.

 

Pat is the above a bit pointless though because on one hand they say you must be insured, but on the other hand any insurance claim would be refused because the car was not mot'd or taxed to be on the road.

 

PF

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pat is the above a bit pointless though because on one hand they say you must be insured, but on the other hand any insurance claim would be refused because the car was not mot'd or taxed to be on the road.

 

PF

 

Nonsense.

 

Insurance is not voided by lack of tax or MoT (unless specifically stated in the policy (ie by contract); mine certainly doesn't - it merely states that the vehicle must be roadworthy

Edited by patdavies
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure that you can drive a car without an MOT as long as you have a pre booked appointment and you only frive to the MOT and do not take a de tour!

 

See [post #5 - there is no requirement to drive directly to the MoT test - case law clearly states otherwise.

 

You don't need to have in surance documents, as the police can confirm all this with their modern technology! :o)

 

Only if the vehicle is insured in your name. What about when you are driving somebody else's vehicle to the test, with their permission, under the DOC terms of your policy? Or an unregistered vehicle - with no number plates?

Link to post
Share on other sites

As said above, MOT day is the one day a year you dont need tax or a current MOT cert to drive your car, as long as you drive directly to the MOT place and the test appointment has been arranged in advance.

 

It certainly not 1 day, it can be as often as you book an MoT test.

 

And the need to drive directly to the pre-booked test is simply urban myth - see post #5

Link to post
Share on other sites

Insurance is not voided by lack of tax or MoT (unless specifically stated in the policy (ie by contract); mine certainly doesn't - it merely states that the vehicle must be roadworthy

 

Indeed Pat but im just trying to see it from the insurers point of view as we all know what they are like when it comes to them paying out.

 

So has to be roadworthy IMHO again in an insurers point of view it is not roadworthy with out MOT,TAX

 

Regards

 

PF

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So has to be roadworthy IMHO again in an insurers point of view it is not roadworthy with out MOT,TAX

 

Roadworthy means only that the vehicle complies with the relevant C&U legislation.

 

Unless the insurer has specifically placed a requirement for tax and MoT in the policy, then the lack of these has no effect whatsoever on the validity of the policy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

I'm a tester so you all know so long as you have insurance and you are pre booked into and mot testing station your legal to drive it there (really should be closest testing station to your home) and who ever said sumit about not needing number plates your talking bollox! Number plates are part of the test you div! I'v had police ring me before asking to speak to nominated tester i spoke to them and they have asked me to confirm the vehicle is booked in and what the registration number of the vehicle is they then followed him down to us!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a tester and who ever said sumit about not needing number plates your talking bollox! Number plates are part of the test you div!

 

 

I've been out of testing for a few years but unless it's changed, number plates are not compulsory,

Examples are, unregistered, military, diplomatic and foreign.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope they are compulsory and now if they do not have a postcode / area where they were made thats a fail item aswell! Lot's changed since you been testing regarding towbars etc etc to be fair its a load of bull i think!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope they are compulsory and now if they do not have a postcode / area where they were made thats a fail item aswell! Lot's changed since you been testing regarding towbars etc etc to be fair its a load of bull i think!

 

I know you can insure a car with just the chassis number, and was under the impression that you can go to a pre booked MOT with just the chassis number. I have done this in the past.

All I ask is to be treated fairly and lawfully.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you can present an unregistered vehicle with no plates but a registered vehicle must have plates present at tiem of test infact ill look at the special notice i printed off over it as you have to keep them and let you know tomorrow when exactly this law came into effect

Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is so old now but here is a definitive answer. Pat is correct in that stopping is allowed for the reasons given.

However, it is quite explicit in that it has to be a prebooked test and to the nearest station. Number plates are not required if the vehicle has a DVLA form requiring a test prior to plate number issue. If the vehicle has been pre-registered as say an MOD vehicle, foreign plates etc then they must be displayed.

Under the above circumstances then insurance is valid. If the vehicle has a reg plate and is used outside of the purposes for going to a pre-arranged test and does not have a MOT cert from an EU member country, then it can be determined that technically the vehicle is unroadworthy and thus the insurance is void.

 

FINITO!

Link to post
Share on other sites

A vehicle can run on the road without tax or mot if

a. it is being driven to a pre booked mot.or

b.taken to a place of repair to be brought up to mot standard, also pre booked.

Not all mot stations have repair facilities therefore b exists to allow this.

It must be insured.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A few things about above.

 

no the MOT station does not have to be the nearest, what if the nearest id renowned for giving poor service, nobody enforces you to take your car to a particular garage.

 

MOT must be booked,

car must be insured to drive on the road. -bear in mind that the insurance also pays for other people in the case that your car drives into them, this would cover mechanical fault, for example if you drove into them because your brakes failed.

 

you can't have tax without a valid MOT so there is no need to tax.

 

you have to take a reasonably direct route to the station, (A pre-booked test is not an excuse to drive a car wherever you like without valid insurance and tax). -you can't go on a nice long round trip 30 miles or so to get to the garage that's only 1 mile down the road.

 

your insurance is NOT invalid if your car is not roadworthy, indeed if your car fails you're able to drive it home, complete with a certificate to prove that your car is not roadworthy!

and indeed you can drive to any further appointments to get the car fixed. -assuming that those appointments are booked as well I assume.

(for example to have the car fixed, or to have tyres changed).

 

contrary to what the poster above said, if your car fails, you can still drive it, either home to fix it yourself, or to another garage to fix, there is no need or requirement to get a transporter to move the car!

 

For OP.

driving to get the car serviced would probably not be allowed. it wouldn't be a reasonable short stop, (e.g getting petrol/stopping at a cash point to get money to pay for the test etc).

on the other hand, once your car has failed, say on emissions, taking your car to service would be a reasonable fix for that problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...