What is the difference between rta and article 75

The spectre of these reforms to the RTA really underlines the importance of building a process designed to protect against unwanted risks by vetting potential insureds and policies at the frontend and then by validating claims at the backend of any claims process. It also heavily emphasises the critical need, again, for insurers to cancel policies expeditiously and on the Motor Insurers Database — or to increase premiums - when something goes awry or they get some indication that a policyholder has undersold the risk in some way at inception.

Read more items in Motor Brief - October Our website uses cookies. Accept Cancel. Location preference. We have offices in multiple countries, and if you are in one of these countries, can we set your preference for content based on your location? No location preference Set location preference. To set or change your location preference, and to help us make improvements to the website based on visitors' usage of the site, please accept cookies. You can change your location preference at any time in the website header, and manage your cookies in the website footer.

Recusar Aceitar. Find out more about cookies and how we use cookies via our Privacy notice. Facet Name Our people. Jo Briggs. Partner - London. United Kingdom. If challenged, is it likely that Section Road Traffic Act would also be deemed incompatible. It is therefore unsurprising that the Road Traffic Act is being amended, irrespective of the position with Brexit. Insurers should note that any Section proceedings will not just need to be issued before 1 November , but the declaration sought must actually be obtained before 1 November It is therefore vital that grounds for policy voidance on the basis of misrepresentation are quickly established and that declaration proceedings are sent to the Court for issue as soon as practicably possible.

Our motor team deal with a number of motor claims on a regular basis. Occupiers' liability. Product liability. Psychiatric and occupational stress. Public authorities and the state. Road traffic accidents. Sports injuries. Trips and slips. Sign-in Help. The claim made is not against the insurer of the vehicle the claimant was a passenger in but against another vehicle of which the insurers have Article 75 status.

Access this content for free with a trial of LexisPSL and benefit from: Instant clarification on points of law Smart search Workflow tools 36 practice areas.

Back Step 1 of 2 Basic information. Step 1 Step 2 Name. Miss Mrs. Name Click to edit. Name No Content These fields are required.

Email Email id Click to edit. Email No Content This field is required. Job role Click to edit. Job role No Content This field is required. Job title. Usually, the insurer's position will then revert to that of Article 75 insurer in accordance with the agreements with the Motor Insurers' Bureau 'MIB'. Article 75 status carries with it various possible advantages.

The insurer will stand in the position of the MIB meaning reliance can be placed on the provisions of Article 75 and the Uninsured Drivers' Agreement to potentially limit the insurer's exposure. The most likely advantage has always been where there is another insurer or insurer with a higher or equal status which may be left dealing with the claim or at least sharing responsibility.

Under the proposals which are to be enacted under powers conferred to the DfT by the European Communities Act , insurers will not be able to avoid Road Traffic Act liability where a post incident declaration is obtained after 1 st November The new law applies to declarations obtained rather than just issued after 1 st November and insurers will want to take stock of policies which have been avoided and where declarations are in progress or anticipated and expedite the court process.

The Road Traffic Act will still provide for a pre-incident declaration of avoidance to take effect, though in practice, cancellation of the policy may well prove a more effective and efficient option in limiting future risks to insurers.

Following the Deregulation Act the option to cancel, as opposed to avoid, had already gained many advantages. Cancellation, if properly invoked, will allow an insurer to avoid Road Traffic Act liability for the remainder of the term and removal from the Motor Insurance Database will remove all liability from the point of removal.

With the proposed amendments to the Road Traffic Act, insurers will not be able to achieve Article 75 status for pre-declaration incidents and the existing advantage to avoidance will therefore be lost.