NCT and car insurance

heartofwhite

Quick question:

Why is it not mandatory to provide proof of a valid NCT certificate when buying car insurance? Surely this would stop people driving around with no NCT's. I mean, a car with no test is more likely to cause an accident in the long run therefore increasing the possibility of a claim.

Am I missing something?

CiniO

heartofwhite wrote: »

Quick question:

Why is it not mandatory to provide proof of a valid NCT certificate when buying car insurance? Surely this would stop people driving around with no NCT's. I mean, a car with no test is more likely to cause an accident in the long run therefore increasing the possibility of a claim.

Am I missing something?

It is.

Not directly, because nearly every insurer will take your premium whether you have NCT or not.
But they might refuse to pay for the claim if they find out that you don't have NCT.

alias no.9

heartofwhite wrote: »

Quick question:

Why is it not mandatory to provide proof of a valid NCT certificate when buying car insurance? Surely this would stop people driving around with no NCT's. I mean, a car with no test is more likely to cause an accident in the long run therefore increasing the possibility of a claim.

Am I missing something?

The test may have been done almost 2.5 years before hand (first NCT can be done up to 6 months in advance and there may only be days left to run) yet the car still has a valid cert on the day insurance starts. The only thing proved by a valid NCT cert is that the car passed the NCT on the date it was tested. It could have been crashed and stuck back together with sticky tape in the intervening time and still have a valid cert.

copeyhagen

heartofwhite wrote: »

a car with no test is more likely to cause an accident in the long run therefore increasing the possibility of a claim.

and your basing that on what exactly?!!!

heartofwhite

Recently I have noticed a lot of cars with expired NCT certs of more than a year. This means that they have renewed or received new insurance in the meantime. This seems wrong to me. I got new insurance last week and no mention or requirement to provide an NCT cert. However, I had to send in a photocopy of my drivers licence and NCB. I just find it very strange that they not ask for a valid NCT cert as well.

I admit that my original comment regarding a car with no NCT being more likely to cause a crash is a very large generalisation but there must be some sense to it also. I am looking at it from the point of view of an insurer. I would be much more comfortable insuring a car with a valid NCT cert than a car without. If you are really serious about maintaining your vehicle and ensuring that it is fit for purpose, you would put it through the NCT when it is due rather than let it expire for a year or more.

One scenario for instance: a car with no NCT might have really bald tyres and crash into the back of somebody on a wet day. The state of tyres would be picked up in an NCT test therefore reducing this risk greatly.

Anan1

copeyhagen wrote: »

and your basing that on what exactly?!!!

I'm sure it's statistically verifiable. Quite apart from the car itself, the kind of person who drives a car without an NCT is almost certainly more likely to crash.

slimjimmc

heartofwhite wrote: »

Recently I have noticed a lot of cars with expired NCT certs of more than a year. This means that they have renewed or received new insurance in the meantime. This seems wrong to me. I got new insurance last week and no mention or requirement to provide an NCT cert. However, I had to send in a photocopy of my drivers licence and NCB. I just find it very strange that they not ask for a valid NCT cert as well.

I admit that my original comment regarding a car with no NCT being more likely to cause a crash is a very large generalisation but there must be some sense to it also. I am looking at it from the point of view of an insurer. I would be much more comfortable insuring a car with a valid NCT cert than a car without. If you are really serious about maintaining your vehicle and ensuring that it is fit for purpose, you would put it through the NCT when it is due rather than let it expire for a year or more.

One scenario for instance: a car with no NCT might have really bald tyres and crash into the back of somebody on a wet day. The state of tyres would be picked up in an NCT test therefore reducing this risk greatly.

Second scenario: a car with NCT might have really bald tyres and crash into the back of somebody on a wet day. The state of tyres passed the NCT test but have deteriorated greatly since.

Third scenario: a 2 year old car (not liable for NCT) might have really bald tyres and crash into the back of somebody on a wet day.

I understand what you're getting at but just about every insurance policy now has a condition that the car be kept in good working order. I suspect that's more effective from an insurer's point of view than a piece of paper saying how good the car was 1 or 2 years ago.
That said I believe some insurers do require the car to have a valid NCT (where applicable) when taking out or renewing a policy.

mgbgt1978

CiniO wrote: »

It is.

Not directly, because nearly every insurer will take your premium whether you have NCT or not.
But they might refuse to pay for the claim if they find out that you don't have NCT.

Which is it cinio ????
(a)IT IS.
(b)NOT DIRECTLY.
(c)They MIGHT REFUSE to pay a claim.

The fact is that some companies look for a current NCT, some do not.
Those that don't may insist that the car is roadworthy....but this DOES NOT mean that it must have a current NCT. If you are involved in an accident their own assessors can decide if the car is roadworthy or not.

Liberty for example do not look for an NCT, and if a customer is involved in an accident they will not take the lack of an NCT to mean that the car is unroadworthy. Their assessor will decide that themselves.

Even the NCT operators will agree that a car is only roadworthy on the day that it passes the NCT test.

CiniO

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

Which is it cinio ????
(a)IT IS.
(b)NOT DIRECTLY.
(c)They MIGHT REFUSE to pay a claim.

As I said - It is mandatory to have a proof of NCT. Not directly because most likely insurer will not ask for it when signing a policy, but they most likely will ask for it when there is a claim, and if you don't have one they might refuse to pay a claim.

The fact is that some companies look for a current NCT, some do not.

As I can see at the moment most companies do look for NCT.
And it's more and more every month, so probably in a while all insurers will require NCT to be valid.

Those that don't may insist that the car is roadworthy....

AFAIK all insurers insist that car is roadworthy. NCT requirements are completely irrelevant to this.

but this DOES NOT mean that it must have a current NCT. If you are involved in an accident their own assessors can decide if the car is roadworthy or not.

Of course. But even if car is roadworthy, they still might ask for NCT.

Liberty for example do not look for an NCT,

Of course they do.
This is from their policy document:

12. You or any insured person must:
e) make sure the vehicle is kept in a roadworthy condition and, if necessary,
has a valid NCT certificate.

and if a customer is involved in an accident they will not take the lack of an NCT to mean that the car is unroadworthy. Their assessor will decide that themselves.

Yes. Their assessor will check if car was roadworthy.
But they still can refuse to pay on grounds that car was not NCTed.

Even the NCT operators will agree that a car is only roadworthy on the day that it passes the NCT test.

So?

mgbgt1978

CiniO wrote: »

As I said - It is mandatory to have a proof of NCT.


As I can see at the moment most companies do look for NCT.
And it's more and more every month, so probably in a while all insurers will require NCT to be valid.

How can it be mandatory if not all companies look for it ??

edit; Liberty have changed their policy, when Quinn Direct were the insurers they did not insist on an NCT.

CiniO

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

How can it be mandatory if not all companies look for it ??

OK. My wrong.
So it's only mandatory with insurers who require it.
But anyway - it's most insurers now.

edit; Liberty have changed their policy, when Quinn Direct were the insurers they did not insist on an NCT.

Few years back no insurer in Ireland required NCT.
Now it's nearly every single one.

Cheensbo

Anan1 wrote: »

I'm sure it's statistically verifiable. Quite apart from the car itself, the kind of person who drives a car without an NCT is almost certainly more likely to crash.

So you're saying the status of an nct directly relates to a persons driving ability?

CiniO

Cheensbo wrote: »

So you're saying the status of an nct directly relates to a persons driving ability?

If in insurers eyes a make and model of car driven relates to persons driving ability, then surely other factors like having valid NCT or not might relate to it as well.

jca

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

How can it be mandatory if not all companies look for it ??

edit; Liberty have changed their policy, when Quinn Direct were the insurers they did not insist on an NCT.

I got insured with Liberty recently on a 07 car. They never mentioned NCT at all. It is NCT'd by the way.

Cienciano

I got insured a couple of weeks ago and they won't issue an insurance disc without giving a copy of the nct.

jca

Cienciano wrote: »

I got insured a couple of weeks ago and they won't issue an insurance disc without giving a copy of the nct.

Who with? Do insurance companies have access to vehicle records to find out if a car is nct'd? Maybe thats why they didn't ask me for the nct cert.

Cienciano

That was with aaran insurance. And waiting for an nct is almost 2 months in Dublin, luckily someone must have cancelled and I got their slot

furtzy

RSA require a valid NCT as well as part of terms of cover. Guess a lot of people need to read the terms and conditions of thier policy

jca

furtzy wrote: »

RSA require a valid NCT as well as part of terms of cover. Guess a lot of people need to read the terms and conditions of thier policy

It shouldnt be hidden in the "terms and conditions" . It should be asked for during the renewal process the way you re asked for the policy number while taxing the vehicle. No NCT, no insurance, simple.

Anan1

Cheensbo wrote: »

So you're saying the status of an nct directly relates to a persons driving ability?

No, I don't know how you arrived at that conclusion. I'm saying it's an indicator of their attitude to driving.

jca

Cienciano wrote: »

That was with aaran insurance. And waiting for an nct is almost 2 months in Dublin, luckily someone must have cancelled and I got their slot

You can NCT a car 6 months before its due in the case of it being its first test or 3 months before its due for every other test.

Cheensbo

Anan1 wrote: »

I'm sure it's statistically verifiable. Quite apart from the car itself, the kind of person who drives a car without an NCT is almost certainly more likely to crash.

Anan1 wrote: »

No, I don't know how you arrived at that conclusion. I'm saying it's an indicator of their attitude to driving.

The bolded part is how I arrived at that conclusion.

There is no logical argument to say that a valid/invalid nct directly relates to a persons driving ability/attitude, not that I can see anyway.

It may relate to the quality & repair of a car, but it only states that for one 30 minute period, the car met a minimum standard, that minimum standard is ambiguous by nature with discretion lying with individual inspectors regarding visual inspections, and their competence in spotting defects.

There are more than enough sh1t drivers on the road driving cars with valid nct disks in their window.

My cars nct is in a week and a half, will my driving skill and attitude improve once it passes?

Anan1

Cheensbo wrote: »

The bolded part is how I arrived at that conclusion.

You didn't get it from my quote. I made no reference to driving ability. In short, it came from you.

Cheensbo wrote: »

There is no logical argument to say that a valid/invalid nct directly relates to a persons driving ability/attitude, not that I can see anyway.

Ability and attitude are two separate things. Clearly choosing to drive without a valid NCT is an indicator of attitude. And attitude, by and large, is what causes accidents.

furtzy

jca wrote: »

It shouldnt be hidden in the "terms and conditions" . It should be asked for during the renewal process the way you re asked for the policy number while taxing the vehicle. No NCT, no insurance, simple.

To be fair to them they highlighted in bold the requirement in the covering letter. But yes they should ask for the details prior to cover

Cheensbo

Anan1 wrote: »

You didn't get it from my quote. I made no reference to driving ability. In short, it came from you.

I'm not exactly twisting your words here, but ok, you said that a person who would drive a car without a valid nct is almost certainly more likely to have a crash, which you say based on attitude, are they still more likely to crash, based on attitude, when they get their car tested?

Anan1 wrote: »

Ability and attitude are two separate things. Clearly choosing to drive without a valid NCT is an indicator of attitude. And attitude, by and large, is what causes accidents.

I would have thought ability (or lack of) would be the main cause of accidents.. I'm sure you agree that human error is the main cause of all r.t.as... Lapses in concentration, inability to assess emergency situations as they unfold, inability to assess conditions and drive accordingly, inability to stay off the mobile phone, inability to stay awake at the wheel, inability to drive on the correct carriageway of a motorway, these are not attributes that are affected by the NCT.

heartofwhite

jca wrote: »

It shouldnt be hidden in the "terms and conditions" . It should be asked for during the renewal process the way you re asked for the policy number while taxing the vehicle. No NCT, no insurance, simple.

This is exactly my point. Why are you not asked to provide the NCT cert when getting insurance with all insurance companies!

If my NCT has expired, I cannot provide prove of a valid test therefore I should not be able to get insurance in anyway shape or form until this has been rectified.

This is the way it should be. Simple as.

Anan1

Cheensbo wrote: »

I'm not exactly twisting your words here, but ok, you said that a person who would drive a car without a valid nct is almost certainly more likely to have a crash, which you say based on attitude, are they still more likely to crash, based on attitude, when they get their car tested?

Did they have a change of attitude, did they just happen to get around to it, or did someone else put the car through the test for them for them?

Cheensbo wrote: »

I would have thought ability (or lack of) would be the main cause of accidents.. I'm sure you agree that human error is the main cause of all r.t.as... Lapses in concentration, inability to assess emergency situations as they unfold, inability to assess conditions and drive accordingly, inability to stay off the mobile phone, inability to stay awake at the wheel, inability to drive on the correct carriageway of a motorway,

When you think about it, a lot of those things are really attitude. Ability is what pulls you out of a slide, attitude is what got you into it.

Cheensbo

Anan1 wrote: »

Did they have a change of attitude, did they just happen to get around to it, or did someone else put the car through the test for them for them?

So, the process has no bearing on it then?

So inherently: Just like the validity of the nct cert

Anan1 wrote: »

When you think about it, a lot of those things are really attitude.

Suppose some of them are,

Abilities are not always directly related to attitudes though Anan, I know plenty of 'sh1te drivers' who dilligently have all their disks up to date, yet are known to crash into things and plenty of good drivers who are a bit more inconsistent with their window accessories who have never hit anything.. Purely anecdotal and without evidence, but isn't that what we're doing here..


And what does nct have to do with their attitude getting them into a slide or their ability getting them out of it?

Cienciano

jca wrote: »

You can NCT a car 6 months before its due in the case of it being its first test or 3 months before its due for every other test.

I bought a car with no nct!

CiniO

Cienciano wrote: »

I bought a car with no nct!

Exactly.
There's too many cases when people are forced to drive without NCT.

With such strict law in relation to NCT, we should have a possibility to do a test at any time.
So if I want to have my car tested today, I should be able to do it.
Weeks or months delays on waiting lists for bookings is ridiculous.

If everyone would want to obey law, there would be many drivers forced to park their cars for weeks or month, just because they can't get NCT done in time.

coylemj

furtzy wrote: »

RSA require a valid NCT as well as part of terms of cover. Guess a lot of people need to read the terms and conditions of thier policy

If they did (read the Ts & Cs), they'd find that there is no such requirement with RSA policies.

I just download the RSA motor policy documents and there is no mention of a requirement to have a valid NCT.

I searched for 'nct' as a whole word and there is no occurrence of it in the entire document. If I search for 'nct' as a string, I get three hits on words like conjunction and puncture so the term 'nct' appears nowhere in their policy documents.

This is the nearest I could find, it's under 'Conditions' on P.16 of both the 'Private Car Policy' and 'Select Car Insurance' policy documents. If there was going to be such a condition (valid NCT), I would expect to see it under this heading......

4 Care of Vehicle

The Policyholder shall take all reasonable steps to safeguard the Insured Vehicle from loss or damage and maintain it in efficient and roadworthy condition The Insurer shall have at all times free access to examine such vehicle


http://www.rsagroup.ie/ProductServices/Motor/DownloadableForms.html

Before you reply that it said so in their letter, let me remind you that as with all policies of motor insurance, the policy document takes precedence over communications of any kind from the company, that includes letters or what you may be told over the phone by an agent.

If it doesn't say it in the policy document, it doesn't apply.

jca

Cienciano wrote: »

I bought a car with no nct!

You shouldn't be driving it then....

CiniO

jca wrote: »

You shouldn't be driving it then....

He shouldn't be driving it until he gets NCT.
But he should be able to get NCT straight away.
That's how it work in many other countries. You just drive to the test centre and have your car inspected on the spot. There might be a queue so you might need to wait for half an hour or something.

But Irish NCT with nearest available booking months away is mad.

slimjimmc

jca wrote: »

You shouldn't be driving it then....

It might have been under 4 years old when he bought it

Cienciano

jca wrote: »

You shouldn't be driving it then....

Tow the car to the test center?

furtzy

coylemj wrote: »

If they did (read the Ts & Cs), they'd find that there is no such requirement with RSA policies.

I just download the RSA motor policy documents and there is no mention of a requirement to have a valid NCT.

I searched for 'nct' as a whole word and there is no occurrence of it in the entire document. If I search for 'nct' as a string, I get three hits on words like conjunction and puncture so the term 'nct' appears nowhere in their policy documents.

This is the nearest I could find, it's under 'Conditions' on P.16 of both the 'Private Car Policy' and 'Select Car Insurance' policy documents. If there was going to be such a condition (valid NCT), I would expect to see it under this heading......

4 Care of Vehicle

The Policyholder shall take all reasonable steps to safeguard the Insured Vehicle from loss or damage and maintain it in efficient and roadworthy condition The Insurer shall have at all times free access to examine such vehicle


http://www.rsagroup.ie/ProductServices/Motor/DownloadableForms.html

Before you reply that it said so in their letter, let me remind you that as with all policies of motor insurance, the policy document takes precedence over communications of any kind from the company, that includes letters or what you may be told over the phone by an agent.

If it doesn't say it in the policy document, it doesn't apply.

Ahem...did you think I made it up?

NCT requirement mentioned in their policy doc.

http://www.123.ie/downloads/rsamotorpolicy0412.pdf

pg 30 Section 5.

5. Care of Your Car
Your Car must be covered by a valid Department of Transport NCT Test Certificate, if you need one by law.

slimjimmc

furtzy wrote: »

Ahem...did you think I made it up?

NCT requirement mentioned in their policy doc.

http://www.123.ie/downloads/rsamotorpolicy0412.pdf

pg 30 Section 5.

5. Care of Your Car
Your Car must be covered by a valid Department of Transport NCT Test Certificate, if you need one by law.

Probably different policies for an intermediary, or less likely, 123 are quoting an expired policy. RSA one is dated 02/13, 123's is dated 04/12.

Just goes to show the requirement varies even with the same insurer!

furtzy

slimjimmc wrote: »

Probably different policies for an intermediary, or less likely, 123 are quoting an expired policy. RSA one is dated 02/13, 123's is dated 04/12.

Just goes to show the requirement varies even with the same insurer!

The doc is still their active link. 123.ie is RSA owned now

coylemj

furtzy wrote: »

The doc is still their active link. 123.ie is RSA owned now

Legally they would not be able to weasel out of paying a third party claim because the car being driven by one of their policyholders didn't have a current NCT cert.

Whether that policy document (123.ie, dated April 2012) or the one on the RSA website (Feb 2013) applies to current policyholders is another matter entirely.

The are rules and regulations governing motor insurance to stop motor insurers imposing conditions that would render a lot of their policies effectively worthless on the day of an accident, one of them for example is that they cannot insist that a driver have a current driving licence, they are only allowed to insist that he/she is not disqualified. Including a requirement that a car have a current NCT in the policy would also be questionable which is probably why it no longer appears in the RSA policy document on their website.

I'd be inclined to go with the current RSA policy document because ultimately the contract of insurance is between the policyholder and RSA, 123 is just acting as a broker, they have no role in setting the conditions of the policy.

furtzy

coylemj wrote: »

Legally they would not be able to weasel out of paying a third party claim because the car being driven by one of their policyholders didn't have a current NCT cert.

Whether that policy document (123.ie, dated April 2012) or the one on the RSA website (Feb 2013) applies to current policyholders is another matter entirely.

The are rules and regulations governing motor insurance to stop motor insurers imposing conditions that would render a lot of their policies effectively worthless on the day of an accident, one of them for example is that they cannot insist that a driver have a current driving licence, they are only allowed to insist that he/she is not disqualified. Including a requirement that a car have a current NCT in the policy would also be questionable which is probably why it no longer appears in the RSA policy document on their website.

I'd be inclined to go with the current RSA policy document because ultimately the contract of insurance is between the policyholder and RSA, 123 is just acting as a broker, they have no role in setting the conditions of the policy.

It's on my current policy so it applies. The link is to my RSA policy so the contract is indeed with them. I hope you now realise I wasn't wrong in this matter

CiniO

coylemj wrote: »

Legally they would not be able to weasel out of paying a third party claim because the car being driven by one of their policyholders didn't have a current NCT cert.

Whether that policy document (123.ie, dated April 2012) or the one on the RSA website (Feb 2013) applies to current policyholders is another matter entirely.

The are rules and regulations governing motor insurance to stop motor insurers imposing conditions that would render a lot of their policies effectively worthless on the day of an accident, one of them for example is that they cannot insist that a driver have a current driving licence, they are only allowed to insist that he/she is not disqualified. Including a requirement that a car have a current NCT in the policy would also be questionable which is probably why it no longer appears in the RSA policy document on their website.

I'd be inclined to go with the current RSA policy document because ultimately the contract of insurance is between the policyholder and RSA, 123 is just acting as a broker, they have no role in setting the conditions of the policy.

Could you give a like to those regulations?
I could never find them

sabinalee

Hi,

Please advice.
My brother bought a car few days ago. NCT expired on the day of buying.
My brother wanted to insure that car as a first car. He paid deposit, signed contract with a broker and on the end lady said that he needs to bring back copy of nct the next day.
He told her that nct is booked but for next week, Monday.
She made a call and said she need to cancel policy without having nct!!

My question. How can he drive to nct station with out insurance!?
This is very risky!!
What if nct people check all?
He will be at work, so I need to go for a test with his car.
Logbook not here yet..and no chances to get it by Monday 8:15am

I dont know how to help him?

djimi

sabinalee wrote: »

Hi,

Please advice.
My brother bought a car few days ago. NCT expired on the day of buying.
My brother wanted to insure that car as a first car. He paid deposit, signed contract with a broker and on the end lady said that he needs to bring back copy of nct the next day.
He told her that nct is booked but for next week, Monday.
She made a call and said she need to cancel policy without having nct!!

My question. How can he drive to nct station with out insurance!?
This is very risky!!
What if nct people check all?
He will be at work, so I need to go for a test with his car.
Logbook not here yet..and no chances to get it by Monday 8:15am

I dont know how to help him?

He cant drive to the NCT center without insurance.

If you have a policy then you might be able to drive his car using the third party extension from your policy. Check your details.

Otherwise he will need to put it on the back of a truck to get it to the test center.

sabinalee

djimi wrote: »

He cant drive to the NCT center without insurance.

If you have a policy then you might be able to drive his car using the third party extension from your policy. Check your details.

Otherwise he will need to put it on the back of a truck to get it to the test center.

Thanks

Yes, I add his car to my incurance for a few hours on Monday!
My company didn't charge me anything for doing that.

visual

Your brother should shop around for another insurance company as its unrealistic to always have vaild NCT

with delays in some centres of months and the possibility that car may not be in use at time of renewal it would leave you exposed.

Also what happens when you do have NCT and do test early but car fails the old NCT cert may still be indate but car has failed NCT

if a comany is this awkward buying insurance they be more so making a claim especially if you fall into grey area.

coylemj

visual wrote: »

Your brother should shop around for another insurance company as its unrealistic to always have vaild NCT

I think the issue is that because it is a new policy, some companies ask to see a valid NCT which they are entitled to do, same as how they usually want to see your driving licence.

Although they can't repudiate the policy later if you have an accident and it turns out that NCT or your driving licence has expired, they can legally decline your business as a prospective new customer if you can't produce a current NCT cert.

visual

coylemj wrote: »

I think the issue is that because it is a new policy, some companies ask to see a valid NCT which they are entitled to do, same as how they usually want to see your driving licence.

Although they can't repudiate the policy later if you have an accident and it turns out that NCT or your driving licence has expired, they can legally decline your business as a prospective new customer if you can't produce a current NCT cert.

Liberty don't ask for NCT cert they do stipulate must be road worthy but thats a legal requirement anyway.

plus you are legally entitled to drive a car without NCT to the test centre.

The NCT requirement by some insurance company is pushing the boundaries and would reflect lack of proper regulation within industry.

CiniO

sabinalee wrote: »

Hi,

Please advice.
My brother bought a car few days ago. NCT expired on the day of buying.
My brother wanted to insure that car as a first car. He paid deposit, signed contract with a broker and on the end lady said that he needs to bring back copy of nct the next day.
He told her that nct is booked but for next week, Monday.
She made a call and said she need to cancel policy without having nct!!

My question. How can he drive to nct station with out insurance!?
This is very risky!!
What if nct people check all?
He will be at work, so I need to go for a test with his car.
Logbook not here yet..and no chances to get it by Monday 8:15am

I dont know how to help him?

You can't drive to NCT centre without insurance.
But it doesn't change a thing, as even if you had insurance, you still can't drive to NCT centre without valid NCT.
Either way - only legal way to get your car to test centre is to bring it on a towing truck/trailer etc..

CiniO

djimi wrote: »

He cant drive to the NCT center without insurance.

If you have a policy then you might be able to drive his car using the third party extension from your policy. Check your details.

Otherwise he will need to put it on the back of a truck to get it to the test center.

But car is still not NCTed. So why would he be OK to drive without NCT, and he is not OK to drive without insurance?

CiniO

visual wrote: »

Your brother should shop around for another insurance company as its unrealistic to always have vaild NCT

with delays in some centres of months and the possibility that car may not be in use at time of renewal it would leave you exposed.

Over last 7 years I owned over 10 different cars in Ireland, I owned sometimes even 3 at the time, and never ever any of those cars was without NCT, not even for 1 day. Why is it unrealistic to always have valid NCT?

Also what happens when you do have NCT and do test early but car fails the old NCT cert may still be indate but car has failed NCT

Car failed NCT, but still has valid previous NCT. All good.

if a comany is this awkward buying insurance they be more so making a claim especially if you fall into grey area.

Most insurers require vehicle to be NCTed. Nothing strange about it.

CiniO

coylemj wrote: »

I think the issue is that because it is a new policy, some companies ask to see a valid NCT which they are entitled to do, same as how they usually want to see your driving licence.

Although they can't repudiate the policy later if you have an accident and it turns out that NCT or your driving licence has expired, they can legally decline your business as a prospective new customer if you can't produce a current NCT cert.

Of course they can refuse to pay out, basing on fact that your car was not NCTed.
Most policies these days have such a clause, and I believe they are using it.