Partner caught driving on provisional licence, no mot

[Eveh13]

I am currently lost and fuming at this situation. I apologise for the long post.. I am currently 7 months pregnant and my partner was caught driving alone on a provisional and without MOT (the appointment was on a same day but daytime, and he was caught at 2 a.m.). He has 3 charges against him and obviously needed to be removed from the policy. We want to plead guilty without attending a court but we Don't know how to explain himself, to try and lower a sentence. He was caught coming back from work at around 2 am but the officers did not include this in the report (to where he was going). He said to the officers that he needed the car to get into work. The police officer on the report quoted, ""I cautioned the driver who made no reply to caution". What does this actually means? I'm so confused. 🤔 He had shown the police officer his provisional licence and on the report says, quote "the vehicle was not displaying any L plates and the driver was unsupervised. The driver identified himself and the police checked it and he was free to leave walking. (Car was seized and under my name, I have full licence).
The thing is, how do we plead guilty and so can he explain himself? He wants to tell the court that he took the car to "help" me because I'm 7 months pregnant and we have a disabled child at home. We just don't know how to write it officially. I will be giving birth soon and I am dreaded and exhausted from pregnancy and this situation. Thank you

Actually a variety of reputable websites say that most insurance policies are invalid if you have no MOT. Maybe not every single policy on the market, but most.

https://www.webuyanycar.com/guides/car-ownership/car-insurance-and-mots/

https://www.comparethemarket.com/car-insurance/content/insurance-without-mot/

https://www.gocompare.com/car-insurance/guide/car-insurance-with-no-mot/

https://www.theaa.com/mot/advice/driving-without-an-mot

Please don’t believe everything you read on websites like those where in the main articles are written primarily for search engine ranking purposes and often by some junior in marketing who may have no special knowledge - they often put together articles by searching the internet thus propagating online myths!

2 sources for accuracy - the law which underpins it all and then the detail in any individual insurance policy which is the legal contract between insured and insurer. The vast majority of insurance policies do not invalidate insurance on lack of MOT & I have given an example above where UK law allows you to drive on public roads without a valid MOT which would make it hard for any such contractual terms to exist (contractual terms can not redefine the law)… so if the law allows you to drive without an MOT (assuming you are going to an MOT appointment) then no insurance contract can change that - makes it very difficult for an insurance contract to state that your insurance is invalid if you have no MOT - it would have to be a much more complex clause…

There is also case law (UK law is created by Parliament and the courts) where insurance companies who have tried to claim no insurance due to no MOT have been over-ruled and forced to pay out.

it is far more common to have a clause stating that your car must be safe / road legal, but the insurance company can’t rely on the existence or otherwise of an MOT to cover that clause as an MOT only makes a statement of condition once a year… the insurance company would have to prove unsafe condition directly (eg bald tyre etc)

so, no - as standard no MOT does not invalidate insurance…

Your example of 'any car' insurance is unusual and mainly for those in the trade - having looked through the policy documents of the last five car insurance policies I have had, all with different insurers, every one specifies that the policy is invalid if the car does not have a valid MOT. So for most people, there is a significant risk that no MOT = no insurance.

Not trade policies - private client car insurance (usually insuring fleets of cars but not always)... but also available on the mainstream insurance market - e.g. Adrian Flux offer it for c. £20 extra p/a

As mentioned - the key is UK law first then contract law - and there are enough case law examples of insurance companies being overturned on this issue to make that a generically unenforceable contractual term. As per above - how would such an insurance clause be valid when driving legally to an MOT centre with an expired MOT certificate. Where UK law allows it - contract law can say what it likes, it can't overturn UK law...

anyway, enough diversion from the main thread - happy Christmas

@notmorezoom hi, used to work in car insurance and can confirm the car is to be roadworthy. I have settled and seen others settle many a claim with no MOT. The shocker was that most just deducted the cost of an MOT from the payout. Most deduction I saw was 10% due to damage and length of time with no MOT.

However, when you take out the policy, you confirm that it is taxed and MOTd etc so if it wasn't when you took out the policy they can and do decline payout.

@Eveh13 any feedback for those who were kind enough to take their time to give you advice? how did it go with the police?