Moped Crash - Insurance help - no CBT or MOT

[Gooter]

Hi,

 

I hope this is in the right section, but please move if need be.

 

My cousin had an accident on his moped and broke his leg. He claims he was blameless and the car driver accepts this (I think). His problem is that although he was insured, he had no CBT or MOT

 

Will that affect any compo he gets? He'll be out of work for a good three months and needs to provide for his family.

 

His insurance was only 3rd party Fire and Theft, so I assume that if he does get any compo, it'll be the other driver's insurance who pays (ie he'll still have his no claims?) as he was blameless in the accident?

 

His wife is a bit frantic atm, so I'd appreciate any comments

[nohope]

Don't think he'l be able to claim. As soon as they ask for his details for the bike and find out he has no cbt then he shouldn't be on the road in the first place so he's breaking the law.

[i hate bailiffs]

I hoe there will be no compensation and treat it as a lesson learnt the hard way.

to enjoy the privilege of the road you should be legal as it is not a right. There will now be a fine by police for no MOT

[blackknight]

His insurance will be invalidated without cbt but if the accident was not his fault he should still be able to claim of the other persons insurance

[nohope]

He could put in a claim for enough to pay of his court fine for having no cbt, no insurance, no Mot.

Or he could leave it alone and hope the other person decides not to do anything about it otherwise your cousin is going to be in trouble. The least of his worrys will be if he can claim for something that shouldn't have happened if he'd not been there as he was not legal to be on the bike in the first place.....

[ashmk]

His problem is that although he was insured

 

He was not insured as he has no CBT or MOT.

 

When the other party finds that out, and they will, they will shift blame to your cousin and go after him for all their costs.

 

This is going to be a very expensive experience but he only has himself to blame.

 

Oh and the police will prosecute too which will result in a fine and possible a ban.

 

To be honest I would keep my head down and hope it goes away. Claiming anything is going to open a whole load of trouble.

[Aceman1974]

His insurance is technically invalid as it contains conditions around the licence and the condition of the vehicle and so he can forget any help from his insurer. This is however a "non fault" claim from his viewpoint and therefore he may be able to go to a no win no fee solicitor.

 

The problem is, regardless of blame, the other party are going to make things difficult and therefore, no win no fee solicitors may not be interested as they only like to take on cases they can generally win easily.

 

If he choses to pay for a lawyer, he may get some compensation if it can be proved it was not his fault but this could be expensive and potentially long winded. It is likely at best the other side are going to argue contributory negligence (ie it is partly your fault)

 

For the cost of CBT and MOT all this could have been a lot simpler!

[nohope]

Its his fault and thats the end of it. no cbt means he should not be on the road as he has not had the training he should have. If it went to court your friend would end up in a lot more trouble than he is now and the other person could then claim against him for causing the accident and claim damages against him as he couldnt not claim against his insurance as it was void due to no cbt and no mot.

Tell your cousin to dig a hole and hide in it for now.

[sailor sam]

As there was injuries involved then no doubt the police were. What action (if any) have they taken? This could also have a bearing on how things will pan out. I also agree that had the OP's cousin should not of been riding in the first place. What would of happened had of collided with a child?

 

Please Note

 

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

 

[Hammy1962]

Yeah, what about the Children!

 

No, wait, what if he'd run over a Kitten.........................

 

H

[Endymion]

The Defendant will raise a defence of Ex turpi causa non oritur actio which is the old legal maxim for not being able to benefit from an illegal act. However, such a defence is not a strict defence and the cases of Gray v Thames Trains Ltd [2008] and Smyly v Agheampong v Allied Manufacturing (London) Ltd [2008] show that some heads of damage are recoverable even when an illegal act has been undertaken.

The test will be as to whether the illegal act materially contributed to or caused the accident i.e. bike faulty which would have been picked up on MOT and if no fault then the accident would not have happened. If the illegal act is related then it is likely that the Claimant will not recover any damages.

In any event, I agree with the above that the Claimant will have a torrid time if he makes a claim. Personally, if I was on the defence for this claim I would be reporting the Claimant to the police, DVLA etc and bringing up all sorts of arguments in relation to fraud, Ex turpi and have the Claimant under surveillance if they made a claim for personal injury and then if I could prove any fraud I would try for a prosecution against them.

[sailor sam]

Yeah, what about the Children!

 

No, wait, what if he'd run over a Kitten.........................

 

H

 

 

Please Note

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

 

[T.C.]

There is nothing to prevent him making a claim against the third party (I deal with personal injury daily and have had many cases like this) and it will be dealt with in exactly the same way as any other claim would be handled.

 

No MOT has absolutely no bearing unless it can be shown that is directly contributed to the cause of the crash, and no CBT will not have a direct bearing, but the other side will try and apportion a degree of contrib, but they can only do this if the evidence is a bot flimsy, but then they would have to show that your lack of a DL196 directly contributed to the cause of the crash.

 

Your solicitor will under the pre action protocols write a letter of claim to the third party, and there is no need to use your insurance under a conditional fee agreement (no win no fee) anyway, and in any case, unlless your insurers have made it a specific point in the terms and conditions, having no MOT and DL196 is not sufficient to cancel your policy, but they would still have to cover you third party anyway.

 

If you want some help, you are free to message me and I will be happy to help, but don't panic, any claim you make is still valid.

[sailor sam]

How can he have insurance with no valid licence or MOT?

 

Please Note

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

 

[T.C.]

How can he have insurance with no valid licence or MOT?

 

Please Note

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

 

 

If he is simply missing his DL196, that does not mean that his licence is invalid, and likewise, no MOT does not and cannot invalidate his insurance per se unless it is specific to the terms and conditions in his policy

 

But in any case it does not preclude anyone from making a claim because the claim is not made by the OP's insurers, and he is not precluded from making a claim if someone has or is proven to be negligent.

 

It is no different to a pedestrian making a claim against a car driver, the OP does not need to be insured to make a claim, and even if he had no licence at all, it still would not preclude him from making a claim against the third party.

 

If he had not been wearing a crash helmet, that does not invalidate a claim, it just means that he would have to accept a 25% reduction for contrib, or if he had been in a car and not wearing a seat belt, then the same degree of contrib applies. It does not invalidate the right to claim for injuries sustained or invalidate the insurance.

 

Civil procedure rules work completely differently to road traffic laws as far as liability is concerned,

[i hate bailiffs]

There is nothing to prevent him making a claim (I deal with personal injury daily and have had many cases like this)

Really?

Its you're lot that keep texting me about the non existent accident.

What you are saying is I can drive on the roads with no licence and still have insurance?

The terms and conditions of any insurance is that you have a licence otherwise it is the same as driving with no insurance if IE if you have a provisional licence and get caught driving without supervision it is NO insurance.

Having no MOT normally will only cover you third party

NO licence No argument should not be on the road=NO INSURANCE

I am sure given all this no payout will or should happen a lesson learnt the hard way

[T.C.]

There is nothing to prevent him making a claim (I deal with personal injury daily and have had many cases like this)

Really?

Its you're lot that keep texting me about the non existent accident.

What you are saying is I can drive on the roads with no licence and still have insurance?

The terms and conditions of any insurance is that you have a licence otherwise it is the same as driving with no insurance if IE if you have a provisional licence and get caught driving without supervision it is NO insurance.

Having no MOT normally will only cover you third party

NO licence No argument should not be on the road=NO INSURANCE

I am sure given all this no payout will or should happen a lesson learnt the hard way

 

Firstly, the texts you get are from claims management firms who then sell the cases on, not from solicitors. The majority of these text messages originate from a call centre in Basingstoke.

 

Secondly, before you start questioning whether the OP can make a claim or not, may I suggest that you go away and actually learn how the system works. It is bar room lawyers like you who cause many of the problems we have these days in the legal system.

 

He has a licence FFS It is simply not validated by a DL196 CBT certificate, or it may have expired, either way if look at your insurance policy it will say something along the lines of "Holds or has held a driving licence!" and whilst it may not provide full cover, the insurance company is still obliged to maintain third party cover unless it is specified in the policy.

 

Having no MOT may reduce the cover to third party, but that still does not preclude the OP from making a claim for the injuries sustained.

 

What you perceive to be law and what actually applies can be two different things, but either way, it still does not preclude the OP from making a claim for his injuries regardless of what your biggoted self beliefs might be