Jump to content

Rolling mot exception ending?


Rustybullethole
 Share

Recommended Posts

I thought it was a daft idea as soon as i heard it came in

personally i think any MOT exemption is stupid

sure the 3 year thing on brand new cars is fine, vast majority will be perfectly safe within that period

however, with classics

rot is a major thing, albeit not the biggest deal most of the time unless it's a wishbone etc that rots through

as said above brakes, that's what scares me

wonder how many classics will be just sat there all winter under a cover silently rotting their brake lines?

a lot i imagine!

plus, most classics will just have single circuit brakes

so therefore a lot of excitement will happen when the line inevitably bursts

oh, another one is tyres, 20+ year old dry rotted death traps that are ready to blow out the moment they get even the slightest stress

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, sierraman said:

I don’t agree on a reduced test, it either meets the standards of roadworthiness set out by VOSA or it doesn’t and it gets a fail. A better way to my mind are notes on individual cars the tester can refer to. In most other countries the inspection where there is one is more frequent. 

The standards of roadworthiness are just that - nobody has an exemption from those.  Nobody.  Even someone popping to the shops twice a week in their un MOT'd Morris Marina.

But why should one test fit all cars?  After all - it doesn't at the moment.  Cars are already MOT'd to various standards due to their age, their fuelling device, the number of wheels - and of course due to the person testing it.

Again, I'm not a huge proponent of either the status quo or sweeping change.  But on the basis we don't have a "One size fits all" for cars even 12 years old, why try to hammer them all into one box?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sierraman said:

In most other countries the inspection where there is one is more frequent. 

More frequent than once a year?  I've not heard of that.  Certainly the French CT is every 2 years, and you don't hear of horrendous rust-buckets killing great numbers of French drivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Talbot said:

More frequent than once a year?  I've not heard of that.  Certainly the French CT is every 2 years, and you don't hear of horrendous rust-buckets killing great numbers of French drivers.

My bad, I meant to put less frequent but more harsh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, BorniteIdentity said:

A good Freedom of Information request would be "How many accidents have been caused by or involved a vehicle classed HISTORIC?"

Then we'd know what sort of problem - or not - it's causing.

I don't know if you even need that. The fact classic car insurance is so cheap is a telling factor. 

That being said, an insurance man told me that a dead person is a lot cheaper to an insurance company than a living. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sierraman said:

My bad, I meant to put less frequent but more harsh

Source?

Googling around finds evidence in states where there aren't inspections don't have any higher rates of mechanical failure causing accidents. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mot on my camper ran out in 2018, I check it over myself regularly and have a mate who is an mot tester check it over on the ramp and brake tester. Since I got it on the road in 2008 it has gone straight through 10 consecutive mot's! 😁 Will look at getting it checked over again this summer. 

Hardly used it because of Covid though, think I have done about 200 miles this year, and half of that was 1 Weekend away in September! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not too fussed about MOT exemption, I’d rather have someone double check my work once a year for piece of mind. And like said before, too many piles of crap pulled out of fields labelled as “barn” finds heading off into the sunset. 
 

definitely need to keep rolling 40yr tax exemption. I’ve been waiting a long time for my classics to become exempt! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Talbot said:

More frequent than once a year?  I've not heard of that.  Certainly the French CT is every 2 years, and you don't hear of horrendous rust-buckets killing great numbers of French drivers.

NZ is every 6 months for pre 2000 cars, although this is a fixed date rather than a rolling one. I'm not entirely sure of the justification for the frequency change

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My 2cv is a 1985 one so I'm slowly approaching exemption. I'm rather torn on this, as cost saving is good, and it has never done a lot of miles each year, since being promoted to "fun car" rather than in normal use. In theory, that means that it should sail through the MOT each year with no problems. Sometimes it does, but sometimes it's bad. Complete new floor bad, a few years ago!

 I do always try and keep it in good shape, but I'm no mechanic and the car does not like me doing any work on it - even the simplest job will take far longer than it should and normally leaves me covered in grease and wounds. So if I'm going to the garage anyway, might as well get an MOT. I do think the idea of the simpler, cheaper MOT is a good one though. The 2cv is a much simpler car than anything modern and must surely take a lot less work to MOT  - once they have worked the controls out anyway!

That said, keep the free tax! The Stepway is free, Clio is about £30 (it's due in October and I can't remember) moped is about £16 and the 2cv is about £140! How does that make sense? Two modern diesels and a moped are far cleaner than an ancient, tiny engined car? Cleaner probably, but not that much.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The MOT exception was such an awful idea. You wouldn't believe some of the stuff I've seen since it came in. 

  • My cousin has an old Mercedes with no indicators, so he carries a loudhailer into which he yells "I am turning left" or "I am turning right"
  • My next door neighbour is running an old Land Rover with no brakes, only a large parachute
  • At a car show I overheard a man boasting that he 3D prints his own tyres out of hard plastic so they don't wear out so quickly
  • My local NHS trust switched its entire ambulance fleet to Bedford CAs so they wouldn't have to MOT them anymore
  • At the same hospital, a man woke up from a 40 year coma and while leaving the car park in his old car crashed into a vending machine, spoiling the snacks inside
  • At another car show I saw a Capri where the speedo was clearly inoperative

I could go on, but these are all made up because it's been like, a decade since the MOT exemption came in and nothing bad has happened. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here, if you want a car on the highway it needs an inspection. 

There is one exemption. 

"Antique", and that involves re-registering the vehicle in said class. That requires an engineer's report to vouch the car is what it says it is, and is factory original with no modifications other than OEM repairs and replacements. The car must be over 25 years old from date of manufacture.

Then you're only allowed to drive it at the weekends or to a pre-booked show, the plate on the back of the car shows it has that status and will be stopped by Plod for questioning if it's in busy downtown traffic. You are also subject to anyway mileage limitations by insurance too in that class, something like a maximum of 1500 miles a year.

Basically that tends to ward away the complete chancers because it costs money to do, and generally leaves only the Model T Jalopy crowd and trailer queens on that particular classification.

Once it's been registered ANTIQUE that's it, too. It cannot be unregistered in the state and re-classed, and that tends to deter the "No limitations" crowd, too- because they might want to go drive the heap about in regular traffic once in a while.

That's why my car has a regular "Pelican" (standard light passenger vehicle) plate on the back and an inspection sticker in the window.

 

Phil

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, BorniteIdentity said:

A good Freedom of Information request would be "How many accidents have been caused by or involved a vehicle classed HISTORIC?"

Then we'd know what sort of problem - or not - it's causing.

Indeed, although you would probably have to compare it with vehicles of the same age that do have MoTs and over distance travelled for both. 

Personally I still think MoT exemption a daft idea. A lack of annual check to confirm a vehicle is roadworthy makes them less likely to be safe and a soft target for further restrictions. 

Road tax is a duff idea other than to check a vehicle has insurance and an MoT. Make it a standard charge to cover administrative costs for these checks and fire the rest of the cost onto fuel duty. Then again, given EVs, that idea will be redundant soon enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you'll always get the same responses on this subject, especially from the (semi) sensible audience of this forum. Apart from a select few we aren't all experienced mechanics with access to a lift/pit and a handbook of what does and doesn't count as roadworthy, so having someone check once a year is well worth the 40ish quid. 

Having said that, even the most eagle eyed MOT tester can miss things.

But again, we aren't of the 'well it passed an mot 8 months ago, I don't understand why something has broken' or 'I thought the Mot WAS the service' mentality, so we should be OK 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, PhilA said:

Here, if you want a car on the highway it needs an inspection. 

There is one exemption. 

"Antique", and that involves re-registering the vehicle in said class. That requires an engineer's report to vouch the car is what it says it is, and is factory original with no modifications other than OEM repairs and replacements. The car must be over 25 years old from date of manufacture.

Then you're only allowed to drive it at the weekends or to a pre-booked show, the plate on the back of the car shows it has that status and will be stopped by Plod for questioning if it's in busy downtown traffic. You are also subject to anyway mileage limitations by insurance too in that class, something like a maximum of 1500 miles a year.

Basically that tends to ward away the complete chancers because it costs money to do, and generally leaves only the Model T Jalopy crowd and trailer queens on that particular classification.

Once it's been registered ANTIQUE that's it, too. It cannot be unregistered in the state and re-classed, and that tends to deter the "No limitations" crowd, too- because they might want to go drive the heap about in regular traffic once in a while.

That's why my car has a regular "Pelican" (standard light passenger vehicle) plate on the back and an inspection sticker in the window.

 

Phil

 

Doesn't the need for an inspection for your average motor car vary from state to state? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, R1152 said:

Doesn't the need for an inspection for your average motor car vary from state to state? 

It sure does. It varies from county to county within the state, too.

The main difference between county here is the requirement for exhaust emissions testing. 

This county doesn't require it but in the city they have that as part of the inspection.

 

Other states have either a very similar inspection or some have none at all. 

Then some states don't even mandate car insurance... Driving to Alabama is a risk for someone out of state (crash for cash).

But that's a different story altogether.

Phil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Conrad D. Conelrad said:

The MOT exception was such an awful idea. You wouldn't believe some of the stuff I've seen since it came in. 

  • My cousin has an old Mercedes with no indicators, so he carries a loudhailer into which he yells "I am turning left" or "I am turning right"
  • My next door neighbour is running an old Land Rover with no brakes, only a large parachute
  • At a car show I overheard a man boasting that he 3D prints his own tyres out of hard plastic so they don't wear out so quickly
  • My local NHS trust switched its entire ambulance fleet to Bedford CAs so they wouldn't have to MOT them anymore
  • At the same hospital, a man woke up from a 40 year coma and while leaving the car park in his old car crashed into a vending machine, spoiling the snacks inside
  • At another car show I saw a Capri where the speedo was clearly inoperative

I could go on, but these are all made up because it's been like, a decade since the MOT exemption came in and nothing bad has happened. 

 

Worth quoting BECAUSE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PhilA said:

It sure does. It varies from county to county within the state, too.

The main difference between county here is the requirement for exhaust emissions testing. 

This county doesn't require it but in the city they have that as part of the inspection.

 

Other states have either a very similar inspection or some have none at all. 

Then some states don't even mandate car insurance... Driving to Alabama is a risk for someone out of state (crash for cash).

But that's a different story altogether.

Phil

ISTR New Zealand doesn't have compulsory insurance either. 

I'm astonished at just how variable/inconsistent (delete as applicable) standards are in the US. I know it's a big country, but... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, R1152 said:

ISTR New Zealand doesn't have compulsory insurance either. 

Am I right in understanding that you do all pay towards a government-run 3rd-party cover arrangement though, and that additional insurance (IE fire, theft, comprehensive cover etc.) is then voluntary.

Sounds like a superb way to run things IMO.  Makes it very difficult to be hit by an uninsured driver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, SiC said:

I don't know if you even need that. The fact classic car insurance is so cheap is a telling factor. 

That being said, an insurance man told me that a dead person is a lot cheaper to an insurance company than a living. 

I suspect cheaper insurance is down to usage rather than death rates. 

Dead people are far cheaper to an insurance company in general. When you hear about multi-million payouts, it's more often than not due to nursing care for the rest of the person's life, ongoing treatment, and the cost of building/converting a house which accommodates their disabilities. 

You're far more likely to be seriously injured in an older car, even at a lower speed. With moderns, most of the time you're either fine or dead; there's not as much middle ground as there was with older cars-they're very good at protecting you, but if you're going fast enough nothings going to protect you from internal deceleration injuries, which will kill you. 

Obviously we're talking about the story of classics we'd have; insurance isn't going to be cheap on a rare Ferrari. But a Morris Minor? Parts are readily available and cheap. Anyone* can fix them. There's no complex systems like radar to recalibrate or bonnet airbags. 

I'm not entirely comfortable with trusting people to be responsible for the condition of their own cars. People in general are fairly inconsiderate and not that clever. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose the logical extension of the argument against MoT exemption is that people shouldn’t be allowed to repair their own cars either. 
 

Things like agricultural tractors are not and have never been subject to MoT regulations despite the possibility of 30 tons of tractor and trailer going off piste should a wheel bearing fail or the brakes pack in. 

Most MoT exempt vehicles aren’t used regularly but are owned by enthusiasts. It isn’t cost effective to run a 40 year old car as a money saving proposition so skinflints and corner cutters won’t be interested. The scene tax surrounding virtually any car that is 40 plus years old is another deterrent, you aren’t going to spend 10 grand on something that does 25mpg on a run to save 50 quid a year on MoT testing and 300 odd quid road tax.

 

edited to add, My 13 year old motah  is currently unroadworthy (despite just having recently  passed an MoT). The onus is still on owners and drivers to take responsibility for the safety of their vehicle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, R1152 said:

ISTR New Zealand doesn't have compulsory insurance either. 

I'm astonished at just how variable/inconsistent (delete as applicable) standards are in the US. I know it's a big country, but... 

The US behaves more like a group of countries that choose to adhere to a set of rulings that govern the really important* things. It feels more like the EU in terms of individual jurisdiction.

Just... Not quite like that. 

Phil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm indifferent to the MOT exemption as I do crawl all over mine regularly but do find it removes a level of transient paper based bureaucracy , driving an mot exempt wreck is asking for trouble in one way or another for the owner and potentially other road users but will usually stand out usually in traffic noticeably to the police.

I have had a few classic car none fails that did cause a fail due to a lack of experience.

Insufficient braking effort:  

push harder its not a 19plate VW 

Beam pattern undefined:

look at the mot section on british american sealed beams!

Excessive rear wheelbearing play: misread, part of an obsolete swing axle design not a fault

Kingpin play :

necessary slight play in the tapered wheel bearings, not the newly replaced kingpins.

Catalyst lada riva emissions: LOL! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Jikovron said:

I'm indifferent to the MOT exemption as I do crawl all over mine regularly but do find it removes a level of transient paper based bureaucracy , driving an mot exempt wreck is asking for trouble in one way or another for the owner and potentially other road users but will usually stand out usually in traffic noticeably to the police.

I have had a few classic car none fails that did cause a fail due to a lack of experience.

Insufficient braking effort:  

push harder its not a 19plate VW 

Beam pattern undefined:

look at the mot section on british american sealed beams!

Excessive rear wheelbearing play: misread, part of an obsolete swing axle design not a fault

Kingpin play :

necessary slight play in the tapered wheel bearings, not the newly replaced kingpins.

Catalyst lada riva emissions: LOL! 

Heaven help the tester if presented with, say, a Jowett Doctor's Coupé... one of many cars with the brake and accelerator swapped. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, R1152 said:

Heaven help the tester if presented with, say, a Jowett Doctor's Coupé... one of many cars with the brake and accelerator swapped. 

Given the number of testers who can't even cope with a front-axle handbrake, I can just imagine the hilarity* when they try to jump on the brake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, R1152 said:

Do MoT stations still have Tapley meters? 

Yes.  They're still needed for 4x4 vehicles where you cannot rotate one wheel at a time due to viscous couplings.  It's also much easier to get a pass using a tapley than it is on the rollers.  This would be one of the items I'd think was reasonable in the "reduced" MOT mentioned above.. just a simple tapley meter deceleraton test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...