Carole Nash won't insure bikes without MOT!

[daveg]

Just tried to renew my 'Future Classic' bike policy with them only to be told they won't insure bikes if they don't have an MOT as it's a 'road policy' and therefore the bike won't be legal without an MOT.

They can be SORNed but must have an MOT for them to insure them!

I asked how they can get an MOT if they can't be ridden and was told they'd have to be transported to an MOT station.

I have five bikes on this policy, three on SORN.

He double checked with two of his colleagues and came back saying that this was a result of Government legislation that came in about two years ago.

Anybody experienced this?

 

[brut33]

In this case, would it be over to house and contents insurance re your situation?

Someone will come along and answer this one I would anticipate. ....

 

[cookie]

Sounds like we have the same policy.

IIRC the wording is something along the lines of "to be insured the vehicle must have an MOT if required".

No MOT is required to travel to a pre booked MOT or for a bike that is off the road/SORNed.

 

[KMD]

Sounds like we have the same policy.

IIRC the wording is something along the lines of "to be insured the vehicle must have an MOT if required".

No MOT is required to travel to a pre booked MOT or for a bike that is off the road/SORNed.

That's right. But to be ridden to the MOT they must be insured. So has a 'catch 22' situation been created ?

 

[daveg]

That's right. But to be ridden to the MOT they must be insured. So has a 'catch 22' situation been created ?

This is how it has come across from my long discussion with CN!

 

[cookie]

That's right. But to be ridden to the MOT they must be insured. So has a 'catch 22' situation been created ?

no, because CN only insist on an MOT if it is "required" (by law, presumably). it is NOT required by law for a pre booked MOT appointment.

if they want something else, they need to re write their policy. maybe they have since i last checked? quite possible - they slipped in a yearly mileage limit without telling me a few years back.

 

[daveg]

I've now had 3 x 30 minute calls with CN today

Each time a different take on this....

2nd call, which was mostly with Customer Services, ended with the guy saying yes, you are right we can insure you for bikes that don't have a current MOT but we'll have to transfer your call so you can change your policy from a 'Future Classic' policy (which is a "modern policy" in their language) to a Rider Policy. I hung on for 10 mins then got cut off.....

3rd call - renewals girl. Let's look at changing the policy...15 mins later "only bikes pre-1986 can be insured on any of our policies without an MOT. OK, can you quote me for a renewal for two bikes only. She came back with a higher price than the renewal for 5 bikes! Why? After 10 mins holding she said she'd got permission to apply a "renewals discount" which brought it down to below the previous renewal price.

If I want to add bikes later - with an MOT of course - I'll have to pay an admin' fee but she couldn't tell me how much, that's up to Customer Services; did I want to speak to them? No thanks.

Oh and I was advised that I would still have to get a bike transported to an MOT as they wouldn't insure it on the way to an appointment - I still can't believe this.

Just as well I didn't want to be out in the sunshine today!

 

[Posh Pete]

Change your insurer / broker.

 

[daveg]

Change your insurer / broker.

Very helpful advice ta!

I spoke at length to another broker earlier. They advertised multibike policies. But....only apply NCD on one bike. Oh, and they didn't insure bikes without an MOT....

I'm posting all this shit because I bet I'm not the only one unaware of this 'no MOT', 'no insurance' clause.

Work in progress...

 

[Posh Pete]

Very helpful advice ta!

I spoke at length to another broker earlier. They advertised multibike policies. But....only apply NCD on one bike. Oh, and they didn't insure bikes without an MOT....

I'm posting all this shit because I bet I'm not the only one unaware of this 'no MOT', 'no insurance' clause.

Work in progress...

Give Peter James Insurance a call. I just did. Ask for Becky.

 

[daveg]

Give Peter James Insurance a call. I just did. Ask for Becky.

I just did...and spoke to Brendan....

All five bikes aged between 1968 & 1996, no issue with MOTs, unlimited mileage, 35 days Euro cover, UK and Euro breakdown cover, no NCD applied as it's a Classic policy, £50 excess on all bikes. OK, a little bit more expensive than CN was last year but miles better as far as the terms go.

Cheers scotboxer, good call

 

[Posh Pete]

Don't mention it. Happy to help a fellow Tosser. BTW, You haven't seen a Hilleberg tent by any chance?

 

[daveg]

Don't mention it. Happy to help a fellow Tosser. BTW, You haven't seen a Hilleberg tent by any chance?

No, but I'll keep my eyes open for you; anything for a fellow Tosser

 

[Posh Pete]

Sawright. Just making a point for the benefit of another subscriber!

 

[daveg]

Sawright. Just making a point for the benefit of another subscriber!

I realised, I should have said but I've only just found the emoticon!

 

[abrasion]

Weird. I changed my policy to include my 48 BSA and my 90's Suzuki which has no MOT no problem ?

 

[daveg]

Weird. I changed my policy to include my 48 BSA and my 90's Suzuki which has no MOT no problem ?

I've been renewing this policy with CN for years with no problem but I didn't get into a discussion with them about MOTs. Also I can't find any reference to MOTs in the paperwork.

If I'd just renewed this time without ringing and asking why the premium had gone up 20% I expect I would have just carried on in blissful ignorance. I mentioned that 3 out of 5 of the bikes were off the road and SORNed and that's when they said that the bikes had to have an MOT to be insured by them.

I spent absolutely ages on this talking to various people at CN because I couldn't believe it.

I'd be fascinated to know what they say if you ask them the question, but you might not want to do that! Do you have the 'Future Classic' policy or another - not that it makes any difference to the MOT requirement according to what they told me.

 

[daveg]

Well, as an update and for the record, this is what I've now had from CN as the 'definitive' answer to my queries:

CN - "Thank you for your email.

We can confirm we will provide insurance for a bike without MOT, however the only time we will cover the vehicle for road use is for a booked appointment to an MOT station.

To enhance our service to you, if replying to this email, please do not remove the reference number.

Kind regards,

The Carole Nash Help Team"


Me - "Thanks for this which is contrary to what I was told by two separate advisors in your company on Tuesday. In both cases I was told I would have to trailer/transport the bikes to an MOT station as they wouldn’t be covered on the journey.

Can you also confirm that bikes SORNed and stored offroad in my premises are also unable to be covered for any risks i.e. they can’t be insured unless they have an MOT which is what I was told in the same series of calls."


CN - "Thank you for your email.

We are sorry for the conflicting information however we have checked with the insurers and they have confirmed the contents of the previous email is correct.

In order for us to offer insurance on your vehicles you would need a current MOT and they cannot be declared SORN unless they are a pre-1986 bike, in which case we can insure them if they are SORN. Please note vehicles made before 1960 do not need an MOT, however you will need to ensure that they are safe and in proper condition to be on the road.

To enhance our service to you, if replying to this email, please do not remove the reference number."

So now I know.....

 

[JohnnyBoxer]

Well, as an update and for the record, this is what I've now had from CN as the 'definitive' answer to my queries:

CN - "Thank you for your email.

We can confirm we will provide insurance for a bike without MOT, however the only time we will cover the vehicle for road use is for a booked appointment to an MOT station.

To enhance our service to you, if replying to this email, please do not remove the reference number.

Kind regards,

The Carole Nash Help Team"


Me - "Thanks for this which is contrary to what I was told by two separate advisors in your company on Tuesday. In both cases I was told I would have to trailer/transport the bikes to an MOT station as they wouldn’t be covered on the journey.

Can you also confirm that bikes SORNed and stored offroad in my premises are also unable to be covered for any risks i.e. they can’t be insured unless they have an MOT which is what I was told in the same series of calls."


CN - "Thank you for your email.

We are sorry for the conflicting information however we have checked with the insurers and they have confirmed the contents of the previous email is correct.

In order for us to offer insurance on your vehicles you would need a current MOT and they cannot be declared SORN unless they are a pre-1986 bike, in which case we can insure them if they are SORN. Please note vehicles made before 1960 do not need an MOT, however you will need to ensure that they are safe and in proper condition to be on the road.

To enhance our service to you, if replying to this email, please do not remove the reference number."

So now I know.....

Email 1, kinda is contradiced by Email 2

Are you any further forward?

So you can't SORN a bike over winter, even with a current unexpired MOT?

 

[daveg]

Email 1, kinda is contradiced by Email 2

Are you any further forward?

So you can't SORN a bike over winter, even with a current unexpired MOT?

Yes, it is a bit contradictory!

By definition if a vehicle is SORN it isn't legal to use it on the road so insurance would be for storage only but they don't seem able to grasp this.

It seems they won't insure a post-1986 bike without an MOT unless you are on your way to a booked MOT appointment.

They will insure a post-1986 SORNed bike but it must have a current MOT....

I'm going with Peter James for renewal. On the face of it a much better policy with very few restrictive conditions and only a little bit more expensive, but we aren't comparing like for like so it seems a good deal.