Why did he not have a V5 before the car was stolen? Even if he only bought the car on the 9th I'd have thought he'd get a V5 by now.

The policy was in force when the car was stolen so it should be covered for stuff like this, and the costs will probably be enough to make a claim worthwhile. Does he have any NCB to lose yet?

There's also the fund for uninsured losses that might help. I don't know much about it but the police or his insurer should be able to point him in the right direction.

I'm pretty sure that if he hasn't told the insurer about the theft that could invalidate his current policy and will give them something to argue about on the old policy.

Finally, telling them the car was only worth £100 stikes me as pointless. The value of the car I'm insuring is of less importance than cost of compensating the 7 people it might run over at the bus-stop or the cost of the damage it might do to a line of Ferarris that it might destroy on Altrincham high street one Wednesday afternoon.

It could also be another excuse for the insurer to wriggle over a payout as they weren't given all the info but, perhaps more importantly, maybe it actually increased his premium instead of reduced it?

I don't know if insurers look at it the same way, but if I'm the insurer and someone wants to insure a £100 shed, I have to wonder how much care they will take of it, either in maintaining it or driving it, and that increases my risk. It's also why I don't take my car to run-what-ya-brung days - I don't want to share the track with a team of lads who chipped together to buy a banger to hammer round the track all day and just abandon it at the end of the event.