Can insurance company refuse to fix your car if your tax is out?

oneoneeight

Hi guys, just wondering - can insurance company refuse fixing your car, if your tax is out for good few months? Friend of mine had an accident when his tax was out for nearly 3 months, and the liable driver's insurance company asked him to produce his tax, otherwise they would refuse to fix it. Is that even legal?

djimi

If the other partys insurer is accepting liability then they cannot refuse to pay out.

Del2005

oneoneeight wrote: »

Hi guys, just wondering - can insurance company refuse fixing your car, if your tax is out for good few months? Friend of mine had an accident when his tax was out for nearly 3 months, and the liable driver's insurance company asked him to produce his tax, otherwise they would refuse to fix it. Is that even legal?

Doubt it's legal since they will pay out for claims where bigger laws have been broken.

Atlantic Dawn

It's designed to make you not proceed with the claim, will fool a small amount of people.

bazz26

Motor tax is a requirement between the registered owner of the car and the State. I cannot for the life of me understand what that has to do with an insurance company or how it would have any bearing on a claim. Expired NCT I could understand but motor tax? I would see it the same as an insurance company refusing to pay out on a life insurance policy because the deceased hadn't paid their income tax.

djimi

Even if valid tax was a stipulation of an insurance policy, it would have no bearing on a third party claim. You are not bound to the terms of the other parties policy; if they are liable for your damage then their insurer pays, end of.

MugMugs

If liable then they have an obligation to meet the injured parties material loss. They are a company, not the Gardai.

Short answer, no, they can't refuse.

Limbo123

Surely when taking out insurance you are saying your car is legal and roadworthy etc etc? If not taxed, car shouldn't be on the road leaving your insurance void.

No Pants

Limbo123 wrote: »

Surely when taking out insurance you are saying your car is legal and roadworthy etc etc? If not taxed, car shouldn't be on the road leaving your insurance void.

If my car is declared off the road, I'd still keep it insured in my driveway. Not seeing anything illegal there and there's a big difference between tax compliance and roadworthiness.

CiniO

Limbo123 wrote: »

Surely when taking out insurance you are saying your car is legal and roadworthy etc etc? If not taxed, car shouldn't be on the road leaving your insurance void.

Surely not.
No policy in this country puts a requirement for insured car to be "legal" (whatever it means)

Limbo123

https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091223144703AAdmXGd

In the uk, a car must be taxed for insurance to be valid. As a fair few insurance companies here are underwritten by UK companies I would have thought this would be scripted in to the policy small print somewhere.

Limbo123

CiniO wrote: »

Surely not.
No policy in this country puts a requirement for insured car to be "legal" (whatever it means)

As in taxed/insured/nct'd/roadworthy/permission to use.......

tinofapples

oneoneeight wrote: »

Hi guys, just wondering - can insurance company refuse fixing your car, if your tax is out for good few months? Friend of mine had an accident when his tax was out for nearly 3 months, and the liable driver's insurance company asked him to produce his tax, otherwise they would refuse to fix it. Is that even legal?

I recall one of the insurance companies (One Direct I think) refusing to quote me on a car I was thinking of buying a few years ago cause the road tax was out, I think it's a ploy to fob your mate off. Back date the tax and f**k them.

Kenny Logins

Limbo123 wrote: »

https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091223144703AAdmXGd

In the uk, a car must be taxed for insurance to be valid. As a fair few insurance companies here are underwritten by UK companies I would have thought this would be scripted in to the policy small print somewhere.

Yahoo answers is your source, seriously?

corktina

Limbo123 wrote: »

Surely when taking out insurance you are saying your car is legal and roadworthy etc etc? If not taxed, car shouldn't be on the road leaving your insurance void.

Whatever about that, we aren't talking about his policy, it's a third parties Insurance Co

CiniO

Limbo123 wrote: »

https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091223144703AAdmXGd

In the uk, a car must be taxed for insurance to be valid. As a fair few insurance companies here are underwritten by UK companies I would have thought this would be scripted in to the policy small print somewhere.

So please find this small print scripted somewhere to any random policy and show us.

Limbo123

Kenny Logins wrote: »

Yahoo answers is your source, seriously?

so out comes the sarcasm as always expected on the motors forum.......

Limbo123

CiniO wrote: »

So please find this small print scripted somewhere to any random policy and show us.

So please read my post where I say..... ' I would have thought' rather than say IT IS scripted in to the small print

kub

OP next time your buddy is corresponding to that insurance company get him to drop a bomb. Something like he has to get the doctor to check his back, his nerves are not right sense. You know what I mean.......

I have a hunch that will cause a quick settlement.

Kenny Logins

Limbo123 wrote: »

so out comes the sarcasm as always expected on the motors forum.......

What do you expect when you cite Yahoo Answers? :pac:

No Pants

Limbo123 wrote: »

https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091223144703AAdmXGd

In the uk, a car must be taxed for insurance to be valid. As a fair few insurance companies here are underwritten by UK companies I would have thought this would be scripted in to the policy small print somewhere.

I think you've got it backwards. Insurance is required before you can tax a car. If it was also as you describe, then no one would be able to do either, it would be a catch-22.

K.Flyer

If you buy a car, or a new car or import a car the first requirement to use it on the road is to have insurance.
Technically you cannot obtain road tax without your insurance being valid.
(Anyone remember the good old days of having to produce your original policy when paying for your road tax.)
So then, how can a policy be invalid if you do not have your vehicle taxed.
I've never heard of a Garda telling someone "....because your tax is out technically you have no insurance, so you are being done for that as well."
I would have thought the other parties insurer should be more interested in the vehicles roadworthiness.

bladespin

Limbo123 wrote: »

Surely when taking out insurance you are saying your car is legal and roadworthy etc etc? If not taxed, car shouldn't be on the road leaving your insurance void.

It's very difficult to actually void insurance, particularly when it's someone elses


TBH that's also a very narrow view, I have a car insured but declared off the road, if someone crashed into it I'd be expecting full settlement and none of that kind of bollix.

visual

oneoneeight wrote: »

Hi guys, just wondering - can insurance company refuse fixing your car, if your tax is out for good few months? Friend of mine had an accident when his tax was out for nearly 3 months, and the liable driver's insurance company asked him to produce his tax, otherwise they would refuse to fix it. Is that even legal?

Name and shame the insurance company then report them for attempted fraud.

Insurance companies are really taking the piss here not content with profiteering in a captive market but greedy and not honouring their own policies.

oldyouth

visual wrote: »

Name and shame the insurance company then report them for attempted fraud.

Insurance companies are really taking the piss here not content with profiteering in a captive market but greedy and not honouring their own policies.

It's the TP's insurer we are talking about here, so it is not about honouring terms and conditions of a policy

touts

oneoneeight wrote: »

Hi guys, just wondering - can insurance company refuse fixing your car, if your tax is out for good few months? Friend of mine had an accident when his tax was out for nearly 3 months, and the liable driver's insurance company asked him to produce his tax, otherwise they would refuse to fix it. Is that even legal?

Why was your "friend" driving with the Tax out of date by 3 months? Technically he shouldn't have been on the road so maybe there is a loophole in the insurance policy that says they don't have to pay if the driver is committing an illegal act.

djimi

touts wrote: »

Why was your "friend" driving with the Tax out of date by 3 months? Technically he shouldn't have been on the road so maybe there is a loophole in the insurance policy that says they don't have to pay if the driver is committing an illegal act.

I very much doubt that. And even if there were, third parties are not bound to the terms of an insurance policy. The insurer has accepted liability; they have gone beyond the point of looking for ways out of paying (if they dont want to pay then they should have found a way to avoid accepting liability; no tax would not have been one of them).

truedoom

Well, you're not supposed to be driving the car if there is no tax on it. That's probably what they're trying to pull on you. They'll try and find any excuse to not pay out.

Del2005

truedoom wrote: »

Well, you're not supposed to be driving the car if there is no tax on it. That's probably what they're trying to pull on you. They'll try and find any excuse to not pay out.

They pay out if you break red lights or are speeding so why should the tax status of the car that was hit be of any interest to the company?

ironclaw

Del2005 wrote: »

They pay out if you break red lights or are speeding so why should the tax status of the car that was hit be of any interest to the company?

Speeding and Red light breaking, the car is legally entitled to be on a public road the human behind the wheel is just breaking the law. Whilst if not taxed, it shouldn't be in a public place in the first place. That would be my view.

I wouldn't expect an insurance company to cover my car if it wasn't taxed. I think it would send a strong message if they refused to cover them as its frankly astounding the amount of cars without tax. However my policy (FBD) makes no mention of NCT or Tax in the policy document.

djimi

truedoom wrote: »

Well, you're not supposed to be driving the car if there is no tax on it. That's probably what they're trying to pull on you. They'll try and find any excuse to not pay out.

Thats not up to them to decide. If it was a first party claim then they can put whatever clause they like into the policy. But for a third party claim its not up to them to decide when they will and wont pay out. Once they have accepted liability on behalf of their client (as it sounds they have done here) then they must pay out; why the third party vehicle was where it was to get involved in the incident is not relevant.

djimi

ironclaw wrote: »

Speeding and Red light breaking, the car is legally entitled to be on a public road the human behind the wheel is just breaking the law. Whilst if not taxed, it shouldn't be in a public place in the first place. That would be my view.

I wouldn't expect an insurance company to cover my car if it wasn't taxed. I think it would send a strong message if they refused to cover them as its frankly astounding the amount of cars without tax. However my policy (FBD) makes no mention of NCT or Tax in the policy document.

Again, that is fine for a first party claim, but this is a third party claim.

visual

oldyouth wrote: »

It's the TP's insurer we are talking about here, so it is not about honouring terms and conditions of a policy

Of course it is

3rd party is 3rd party, insurance company is labile to its clients by insuring them against 3rd party claims, if they refuse to pay up they will expose their clients to claims that the insurance company took money from to INSURE them against 3rd party claims.... couldn't be simpler

3rd party insurance can't impose conditions on someone else
name and shame them then off to the regulator with a formal complaint
It doesn't matter if the car has NCT TAX or is red with white wall tyres.

There are exceptions when you can drive a car without TAX or NCT but none without insurance.

I would not be surprised if you sought legal advise that a solicitor would be rubbing his hands and laughing

oldyouth

visual wrote: »

Of course it is

3rd party is 3rd party, insurance company is labile to its clients by insuring them against 3rd party claims, if they refuse to pay up they will expose their clients to claims that the insurance company took money from to INSURE them against 3rd party claims.... couldn't be simpler

3rd party insurance can't impose conditions on someone else
name and shame them then off to the regulator with a formal complaint
It doesn't matter if the car has NCT TAX or is red with white wall tyres.

There are exceptions when you can drive a car without TAX or NCT but none without insurance.

I would not be surprised if you sought legal advise that a solicitor would be rubbing his hands and laughing

WTF??? I'm making the same point............................

MCD.

Car tax being out is not a valid reason for an insurer to not indemnify a third party.

If they really didn't want to pay a claim they could try that card with their own insured and not pay the own damage aspect of the claim.

Your friend is entitled to have his car repaired.

Get an official note from the insurance company stating the reason for repudiation (in writing) and then toddle off to the financial service ombudsman.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.