 | |
Re: Mandatory insurance
Classic Cars (UK) Classic Cars in the UK (uk.rec.cars.classic)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#71
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: Mandatory insurance -
07-28-2006
, 06:43 PM
|
Basically a car needs to be specifically covered by an insurance policy whilst on the road. There is no change to this part of the law. The change is that any car, even if it is never ON the road, still needs to have an insurance policy OR be declared SORN. It is analogous with the new road fund licence laws that now state that a vehicle needs to be either taxed or declared SORN whether or not it us driven on the road. |
if the insurance runs out before the tax runs out and you don't intend
to renew it, then you have to SORN the car straight away rather than
waiting until the tax expires. It's quite easy for tax and insurance
and MOT to get out of sync.
--
Richard Porter
Mail to username ricp at domain minijem.plus.com
"You can't have Windows without pains."
#72
| |||
| |||
|
|
The difference this makes as far as most of us are concerned, is that if the insurance runs out before the tax runs out and you don't intend to renew it, then you have to SORN the car straight away rather than waiting until the tax expires. It's quite easy for tax and insurance and MOT to get out of sync. The trouble is that some of us carefully do that so that there is a few |
my 2000, I started with a 6-month road tax (and have renewed it annually
ever since) so that there is a half year gap between tax and insurance.
Likewise, although both it and my PI are on the same insurance, they have
staggered MOT dates so that I can use one to collect spares for the other if
spares are needed.
It will be a nuisance if my best laid plans are undone by some parliamentary
clown and his latest spiffing wheeze to justify his seat and his gold plated
pension.
Jim
#73
| |||
| |||
|
|
The trouble is they shoot themselves in the foot because the extra pollution and emissions caused by running an older car with a low annual milage are dwarfed by those generated by the manufacture of a new car and the scrapping of the old one. I suspect that it's the motor manufacturers' lobby that wants to get rid of old cars. |
last count I thought our biggest manufacturers were TVR, Caterham and JCB. ;-)
#74
| |||
| |||
|
|
Richard Porter wrote: ... I suspect that it's the motor manufacturers' lobby that wants to get rid of old cars. We have motor manufacturers that can muster up enough weight to lobby with? At last count I thought our biggest manufacturers were TVR, Caterham and JCB. ;-) |
Seriously though, several big car makers manufacture or assemble in
the UK and can threaten to take their factories elsewhere.
--
Richard Porter
Mail to username ricp at domain minijem.plus.com
"You can't have Windows without pains."
#75
| |||
| |||
|
|
... I suspect that it's the motor manufacturers' lobby that wants to get rid of old cars. We have motor manufacturers that can muster up enough weight to lobby with? At last count I thought our biggest manufacturers were TVR, Caterham and JCB. ;-) I thought TVR was Russian? Morgan, perhaps |
British production - probably Nissan or Toyota or Honda.
#76
| |||
| |||
|
|
Christian McArdle wrote: Actually BT don't HAVE insurance as they have so many vehicles. They lodge a bond (£500,000 if my memory serves) I think it's a damn sight bigger than that now. Actually, the bond required is much smaller. Ridiculously small, in fact. Barely enough to cover a wing mirror. Personally, I think that this method of "insurance" should not be allowed. At least not without some evidence of reinsurance for large claims. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1991...n_2.htm#mdiv20 confirms Gordon's memory. |
Worth keeping.
#77
| |||
| |||
|
|
Barely enough to cover a wing mirror. Personally, I think that this method of "insurance" should not be allowed. At least not without some evidence of reinsurance for large claims. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1991...n_2.htm#mdiv20 confirms Gordon's memory. Good link. |
not realise that a slightly more realistic figure had been substituted.
Christian.
#78
| |||
| |||
|
| http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1991...n_2.htm#mdiv20 confirms Gordon's memory. Good link. Nice one. I was probably remembering the original 1988 Act amount and did not realise that a slightly more realistic figure had been substituted. |
the impression from decades ago it was 25K or so and that was in 1974 or
thereabouts. Perhaps that was just Scotland, though.
--
Dave
SE6a
#79
| |||
| |||
|
|
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember "Christian McArdle" cmcardle75 (AT) nospam (DOT) yahooxxxx.co.uk> saying something like: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1991...n_2.htm#mdiv20 confirms Gordon's memory. Good link. Nice one. I was probably remembering the original 1988 Act amount and did not realise that a slightly more realistic figure had been substituted. I'm surprised it was as low as 15grand up to so recently. I was under the impression from decades ago it was 25K or so and that was in 1974 or thereabouts. Perhaps that was just Scotland, though. |
What can you safely get on that on deposit?
Say 3%?
£15,000 could buy you a lot of motor insurance. But for a fleet operator,
well, maybe...
#80
| |||
| |||
|
|
I'm surprised it was as low as 15grand up to so recently. I was under the impression from decades ago it was 25K or so and that was in 1974 or thereabouts. Perhaps that was just Scotland, though. |
(1961). I thought it was low then but I presume the idea is that if you
had that sort of money to put on ice then you would have plenty more
assets to finance a really big claim.
--
Roger Chapman
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.