M.O.T. Exemption Rule?

[fussydave]

Milothethedog, while I respect your opinion, I find it strange that someone who was involved in safety testing cars and must have seen numerous potential life threatening problems, averted those potential incidents and, because of this, probably is responsible for saving lives, is happy to see this valuable safety check removed.

It is not the repeater indicator failure or number plate that will threaten lives, it is things like damage to the inner wall of a tyre that is not easily seen without the aid of a ramp, the corrosion of a brake pipe tucked away underneath the car and other such failings that even the most astute of owners may miss or do not have the facilities to carry out such indepth inspections. Further, it is the older cars that are more prone to these problems, not the newer cars, so theoretically it would be better to reduce the frequency of testing on newer cars not remove the annual test on older cars.

Dave

[DJT]

So you obviously didn't, or have the skills or knowledge to identify these items . A voluntary test will still be available to give you your piece of mind but some of us see it differently and welcome the move. Have you read the full consultation document The data makes interesting reading and I for one can see why it is going ahead in May 2018

Yes, and I still can’t see why it’s going ahead..... Much of the data is presented in the way it often is these days when politicians want to get their views across.

We don’t often disagree, Ian. I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one, eh?

[milothedog]

Yes, and I still can’t see why it’s going ahead..... Much of the data is presented in the way it often is these days when politicians want to get their views across.

We don’t often disagree, Ian. I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one, eh?

Would be a boring world if we were all the same Dave.

Merry Christmas to you and your family

[davidf]

I will certainly have my car checked annually, by our local 'classic friendly' family garage that has done my MoT for years. I think I am fairly competent mechanically - apart from having my diff rebuilt, I can say that no-one has put a spanner on either of my Stags apart from myself in 34 years. However, there have been times when the MoT inspection has picked up something that I have missed, and I was very pleased to have it identified.

Like others on this thread, I am concerned that some classic owners will skip this and proceed with unseen defects until something terrible happens.
That something terrible might harm some innocent bystander (my genuine concern for mankind), but it might also lead to a restriction on the use of what will be seen as 'old and therefore dangerous cars' (my selfish concern).

[Andy S]

I wasn’t too worried as I initially thought like most. I will continue to get my car serviced annually and I’m sure some enterprising Classic Car Garages will realise there is money to made in offering a replacement MOT service.

What concerns me is when you go to buy another classic. It really will be “Buyer beware” with no MOT history. No track of mileage, no idea of how roadworthy that bargain with small paint imperfections is.

Andy S

[Ritchie6]

What concerns me is when you go to buy another classic. It really will be “Buyer beware” with no MOT history. No track of mileage, no idea of how roadworthy that bargain with small paint imperfections is.

Andy S

It may turn out to be a blessing in disguise though because any careful and conscientious classic owner would make sure the vehicle was up to scratch and roadworthy so it may help to weed out dodgy sellers. After all for around £35 isn't it worth it? The other thing of course is that any car with a proven history would be more desirable and potentially more valuable.
I was fortunate because when I bought my Stag in July the previous owner was one of those conscientious owner and I have MOT's and old tax discs going back almost 30 years. I also have photocopies of all previous log books so can trace back all 6 previous owners from the car being new.

[edd]

I think every car should pass an mot. Most owners experienced or not don't have a ramp or the correct emmisions equipment. I do think classic mots should be introduced with more age related standards. Safety is paramount and not every experienced person is as clever as they might think. Climbing under you car checking feul lines or exhaust leaks. A tiny exhaust leak killed two not long ago they sat on their drive engine running then fell to sleep. The leak in the exhaust travelled into the heater and gassed them. Once you add choice people won't do it.

[Ritchie6]

I think every car should pass an mot.Safety is paramount and not every experienced person is as clever as they might think.

I quite agree about the safety aspect. I have a mate who used to have a few dodgy contacts who could sell you an MOT certificate but I refused,pointing out that as I was the one driving the car it was my life on the line if something was dangerous and wasn't worth the risk.

[Andy S]

On a positive note I have realised that after May I can fit my Dixie Air Horns without fear of failing the MOT TEST.

Where did I put that orange paint.