Govt proposals for MoT changes

[Barry Cade]

I don't think the gubbermint would or should get involved in actual testing, would be better to have a TUV type body, or even the like of the AA or ADAC type thing. Standalone testing stations with fixed price and countrywide tester compliance testing. I'd go even further and test trailers and caravans.  

But, this would never make Brits think like Germans who seem to like rules and regulations.. but they can also do 160 on the Autobahn. 

I really do think the DVLA are skirting round the edges. That testing manual needs re written for a start, instead of appendix 1 ,section 3 ,revision 4 etc. Start again for this century at least.

[Gentil79]

12 minutes ago, Matty said:

My two pennorth.  The MOT is every 12 months for a reason. For most people, that is the only qualified attention that motor will see for 12 months. Bald tires, dangerously compromised suspension systems et al are the norm these days. As cars have become increasingly reliable people will do absolutely fuck all but drive them. Not trying to be alarmist or sensationalist but lengthening the test period will sign some poor fuckers death warrant. And like as not it won't be the bone idle selfish prick driving the mobile death trap.

For what it's worth, I also think the MOT exemption is bollocks, and I own a 55 year old car. I'm a time served mechanical engineer whose been in the game since 16 (just turned 42 this week). I know my way around a piece of machinery, whatever its job, I'm in heavy industrial plant it's what I'm paid for. However, my classic will be presented to my trusted MOT tester every 12 months cos he knows what he is on with. He tells me it's safe, I'll not be deciding for myself.

In the wrong hands, in poor running order, a ton and a half of steel will seriously hurt or kill someone. End of.

100% this

[sheffcortinacentre]

Premier Boris Johnson??

Vosa deal with Mots not DVLA.

 How old is this?????

[artdjones]

55 minutes ago, Matty said:

My two pennorth.  The MOT is every 12 months for a reason. For most people, that is the only qualified attention that motor will see for 12 months. Bald tires, dangerously compromised suspension systems et al are the norm these days. As cars have become increasingly reliable people will do absolutely fuck all but drive them. Not trying to be alarmist or sensationalist but lengthening the test period will sign some poor fuckers death warrant. And like as not it won't be the bone idle selfish prick driving the mobile death trap.

For what it's worth, I also think the MOT exemption is bollocks, and I own a 55 year old car. I'm a time served mechanical engineer whose been in the game since 16 (just turned 42 this week). I know my way around a piece of machinery, whatever its job, I'm in heavy industrial plant it's what I'm paid for. However, my classic will be presented to my trusted MOT tester every 12 months cos he knows what he is on with. He tells me it's safe, I'll not be deciding for myself.

In the wrong hands, in poor running order, a ton and a half of steel will seriously hurt or kill someone. End of.

A car will pass the Mot with all the tyres at 1.7mm tread depth and some play in the ball joints and rack. Maybe we should do bi- monthly inspections.

The modern attitude to rules seems to be " there are morons around, so let's make everyone's life a mass of regulations."

[Mrcento]

1 hour ago, Zelandeth said:

The MOT is a bloody good idea and great value for having a second pair of eyes run over the car and my work.  I'm only human, I miss things sometimes.  Plus I don't have a two post lift, brake rollers or decent emissions tester...

Absolutely this. As much as having less hassle for a yearly test would be nice for us with old shitters, an annual checkover up on a ramp is still a good thing.

Let's be honest, how many cars out there barely scrape an MOT/have a very generous tester (Specifically thinking of things like Discovery 2's with chassis rot setting in) and within a month, are in no fit state to be near the road?, These things will now have 2 years grace and will be driven until something snaps because 'its fine its got an MOT m8'. The amount of stuff for sale with 10 months MOT that you wonder how the fuck it even got past the last one is already scary, removing even the incentive to keep on top of maintenance for a lot of people is going to create a lot of deathtraps, and likewise, people buying a car will be lulled into a false sense of security over its safety/condition because it has 19 months MOT on it.

Might be workable in a hot, humid, dry country where cars don't really ever rot, or if they do it's mega slow, but in a climate like the UK, wet, salted roads, coastal areas etc, it's asking for trouble.

[Matty]

6 minutes ago, artdjones said:

A car will pass the Mot with all the tyres at 1.7mm tread depth and some play in the ball joints and rack. Maybe we should do bi- monthly inspections.

The modern attitude to rules seems to be " there are morons around, so let's make everyone's life a mass of regulations."

Aye, but we are talking about relaxing the current rules here, not increasing regulation. And , for what it's worth, my uncle is a self employed mechanic of 40 years standing. I occasionally help out on days off. The state of some of the cars brought in for faults completely unrelated to other dangerous states pre existing takes the piss. When you bring it to their attention, they don't want to know. "Just fix the thing that's stopping it from moving and I'll be on my way". I'm no namby pampy but lengthening the period of inspection ain't going to improve that state of affairs is it.

[Barry Cade]

1 hour ago, sheffcortinacentre said:

Premier Boris Johnson??

Vosa deal with Mots not DVLA.

 How old is this?????

VOSA went away in 2014... its really DVSA, who deal with everything now..

[Gentil79]

1 hour ago, sheffcortinacentre said:

Premier Boris Johnson??

Vosa deal with Mots not DVLA.

 How old is this?????

I mention DFT, not DVLA and the first time the idea was mentioned was when Johnson was PM. 

[RoverFolkUs]

They could reduce fuel duty to save the average motorist £50 a year? That would be much safer, but hang on, that then has to come out of their pocket and not an independent business. 

[RoverFolkUs]

It's going to do sod all for the cost of living. It's just going to defer the replacement of those metal to metal brakes or bald tyre for another year or until someone dies. Whichever comes sooner. 

The only way they could make it work is having a cheaper yearly safety inspection (defects that could directly cause loss of control of the vehicle, e.g tyres, brakes etc) and bi-annual for emissions, lighting, nuisance, wear+tear 

Or a 1 year/2 year pass. E.g if a tyre is advised as below 3mm then it needs to be MOTd next year. If no defects are advised then a 2 year expiration is granted. 

But what would be the point of doing that? It would be a huge logistical headache to implement and enforce it without creating a load of grey areas. All for saving less than £50 a year. 

[RoverFolkUs]

If I wished to be cynical, you could view it as a method of diverting business away from independents to slim down the number of older vehicles being kept on the road

My final point would be that the MOT is not fit for purpose and never has been. It's meaningless as soon as the vehicle leaves the test station (seriously, bulbs do blow 5 minutes after the test. Or the tester can drive the car out and then the EML comes on. etc etc) Also the number of non testable items that arguably should be

One gripe I have is the use of the advisory system for what should be test notes, eg undertrays fitted, headlamp adjuster altered, items removed prior to test. 

(Edit, I know it's bad forum etiquette to make multiple posts consecutively but I didn't want to post one great wall of text)

[vaughant]

2 hours ago, Gentil79 said:

That’s true, however there are insurance implication that people don’t realize. If they have an accident and the vehicle is t roadworthy, there won’t be a payout and they can have more severe consequences if they are to blame for any collisions

In my experience that's highly unlikely.

Agree with everything you've said as regards the MOT system being kept as is but in almost every car I ever had come though as damaged I can't ever recall an assessor looking at anything to do with roadworthiness.

Half/60% of the time if the car was over a certain age they'd just turn up to check it was what it said it was and write it off there and then, I think one guy asked me over the phone what I thought, told him, he agreed and he never even turned up!!

Rarely do assessors turn up within a week, really on the ball insurance companies maybe 3-5 days. By that time the car could have theoretically almost been stripped bare of decent tyres, battery, stereo (probably not so much these days 🤣🤣), goodies and the like. Poor cover from someone like Fresh insurance? Sorry sir/madam but you failed to tick the recovery home option so your car will stay at the side of the road/layby until Monday when our own "team" will collect it, despite the windows being smashed from the crash leaving any local scumbag to strip out what they want undisturbed.

It's shocking how little they care about such things, really is and I'm not condoning it. Remember you don't even need a MOT to be using the car on the road (of course under certain circumstances) and bald tyre limits are very debatable unless the assessor turns up with a depth gauge, something I'd never seen in practice.

This was 10 or so years ago but I'd doubt anythings improved much, probably gone the other way with the time Vs money culture...

and of course pictures being able to be sent off the damage rather than someone turn up in person.

[artdjones]

1 hour ago, Matty said:

Aye, but we are talking about relaxing the current rules here, not increasing regulation. And , for what it's worth, my uncle is a self employed mechanic of 40 years standing. I occasionally help out on days off. The state of some of the cars brought in for faults completely unrelated to other dangerous states pre existing takes the piss. When you bring it to their attention, they don't want to know. "Just fix the thing that's stopping it from moving and I'll be on my way". I'm no namby pampy but lengthening the period of inspection ain't going to improve that state of affairs is it.

Seriously, I hope your uncle gets these people to sign something to say that he's advised them that their heap is unsafe. It's just that I've heard of several cases where unsafe cars have been pulled over and the owners have said that their car has just been professionally serviced and the garage hasn't picked it up.

That's why a lot of main dealers won't fit wipers and bulbs as a goodwill gesture, even if the customer is in need of help, because it could be miraculously transformed into a "main dealer inspection" later.

[Schaefft]

Considering I'm used to a 2-year interval from Germany I am in favor of introducing a similar system here, it's just less regular hassle for me personally. However that does also mean that more stringent guidelines for what is considered roadworthy need to be put in place so that a car passing can actually safely stay on the road for the next 2 years. In most cases that should be possible aside from tyres and in cases of accidents after a test.

On the other hand I'm usually keen to find out if something isn't in order on my cars, the mot is a welcome chance to check everything in a professional manner.

[sheffcortinacentre]

The amount of cars I come across with basic obvious faults ( many dangerous ) bald tyres brakes /steering that pull violently mainly family cars ( many with child seats) is unbelievable with the regular excuse being shouldn't the garage/mot/ partner have noticed/said ( often 6 months or more ago) .

More driver education is what's needed.

Again this is more to do with buck passing than sorting the countries/world's current problem of the haves not wanting to part with any wealth but the sheepeople  giving even more to them.

The politicians are hoping the banks are gunna sort things, the banks are hoping business is gunna sort things & business is hoping the politicians are gunna sort things.

None of them have a clue. None want it to cost them anything  but they'll all wanna take credit for fixing things.

Things are gunna get worse come spring as people start realising that they can't pay for all the smartarse phone 27's, playbox 8's, & all the other stuff they didn't need for Christmas & they can't go to Costa benicante this year .

It's gunna be the 80's again as the trickle down effect finally collapses  with some big players going to the wall & the others having to put staff before share holders to fix it.

[twosmoke300]

11 hours ago, sheffcortinacentre said:

Premier Boris Johnson??

Vosa deal with Mots not DVLA.

 How old is this?????

Vosa been gone for years now 😂

[New POD]

13 hours ago, Justwatching said:

So I won't have to get an overzealous safety inspection from a rip-off merchant as often?

Fine by me.

But it will need to be more rigerous ? 

[Rust Collector]

1 hour ago, twosmoke300 said:

Vosa been gone for years now 😂

But they live on forever in our hearts 😅

[EyesWeldedShut]

Keep it as it is in my book or you'll maybe end up in the DVSA world of pain that is HGV plating here in West Wales. One private testing station who does one morning per week and you have to book a place six to eight weeks in advance.
Having said that the testing 'window' is greater (I have from 1st August this year for plate that expires end September) but if you need a retest it means your screwed or else have to go 40 miles the other direction. OK that's not the case 'up country' but you get the drift. 
I'm almost in favour of putting cars and light commercials under the same 'test after a year' rules too but that's not going to fly

As an expert window shopper of autoshite the gov MoT checking site is well visited - how many cars have consistent failures on them? Seems to be particularly tyres and I truly despise folks that run around on bad tyres - relax the MoT periods? Nope.

[EyesWeldedShut]

21 minutes ago, Rust Collector said:

But they live on forever in our hearts 😅

The latest DVSA/VOSA guy that did my plating looked about 18 years old and was a really nice guy - only one I ever met that I didn't like was a guy at Exeter VOSA who looked like the wee guy from Robson & Jerome, surprised he didn't goose step out of the pit.

[Chris2cv]

Working in a garage, I can confirm that we get a LOT of cars that come in for MOT with bald tyres and other dangerous faults. Often they'll say "but it was serviced last year", which turns out to be that it was MOTd last year and has never been serviced.  I know that nobody has much money, but I don't understand taking these gambles, we see cars that need thousands spent to repair things that could have easily been prevented by servicing.  I know all of the "main stealers" rants. If you don't want to pay our prices, go somewhere else! Some back street garages are brilliant, but some aren't. I'll even recommend some if the boss isn't around!

On the other hand. My 2cv does a very low mileage, even less now that I'm busy with my friend most weekends. It's a load of aggro to know in advance when I can get down to the garage (it lives with my parents, 70 miles away) and get it booked in on a Saturday which is normally booked weeks in advance. But, last year they found that the shocks were knackered. Another year they found rather horrific rot. If it was down to me, I would have seen that there was no obvious rot (it was rather buried), everything worked (or seemed to) and it had only done a few hundred miles, so I could have put myself and others at risk.  

Some on here could undoubtedly safely manage to maintain their cars, probably better than standard, but I think that for the rest of us it is  a dangerous risk to think that everyone will do so.

[MikeR]

it would put a strain on the tyre buisness if it went to every over year , some people only get the cars looked at at mot time .

once a year is ok with me , and thats on top of the fact I lift each car corner , wheels off and a check over every school holiday ...

not that I am fussy , but I dont fancy breaking down with the wife in the car ..

[bunglebus]

My question is why do they want to make changes anyway? I'm old and cynical enough to think there has be be a financial motive behind it

[83C]

6 minutes ago, bunglebus said:

My question is why do they want to make changes anyway? I'm old and cynical enough to think there has be be a financial motive behind it

It looks to me like an easy change to make to ‘prove’ they’re trying to save people money when in fact it’ll make fuck all difference, rather than actually tackling the reasons for everyone being financially raped.

I’m not a fan of extending it to two years either - it’s a small price to pay for checking the vehicle is roadworthy. What there needs to be is some sort of education of drivers so that most people understand basic faults like bald tyres and broken wipers/bulbs, know that an MoT is not a service, and know that ‘FULL VOSA SERVICE HISTORY M9’ wankers are basically advertising that the car hasn’t had spanners set on it at any point in the last 150,000 miles.

[bunglebus]

Like other posters, I see enough bald tyres at Asda, and spent long enough in the trade, to know 97% of people treat a car like a mobile phone or domestic appliance - it's just expected to work without any maintenance or checks.

We need annual tests as a minimum 

[Rustybullethole]

The chance once a year to see exactly how many holes have developed and need welding up is a joy not to be missed for the curb side fettler. 

[juular]

After around three grand a year got added to household costs, I for one am overjoyed at saving £20 a year.

*Tugs forelock*

[Andy F]

They should make all new cars use points ignition and need regular greasing of suspension and steering parts. That way they wouldn't work without some attention every week. The general public would have no excuse not to notice bald tyres then. It would keep the unmaintained cars off the road 😂😂

[Conrad D. Conelrad]

Scrap the whole thing. No more MOT tests. If you're regularly seeing bald tyres in supermarket car parks, it clearly does not work. It is an excuse for crooked garages to invent failures, and inept garages to invent bizarre advisories and fat finger a mileage discrepancy onto the car's permanent history file. 

[Spiny Norman]

Definitely not in favour. For about half the cars on the roads these days the MOT is the only time they'll see any sort of professional attention in their entire lives unless they FTP and result in a tow, and even then only the cause of the FTP will be fixed, not the tyres down to the wires/wafer thin brake pads, knocking suspension etc. It's scary how many people know absolutely fuck all about even the simplest car maintenance, how to check the oil, coolant, tyres, listen for odd noises etc, I always thought it was still part of a driving test  but I guess nobody bothers once they have the slip of paper saying they're a better driver than Lewis Hamilton.

I'm quite happy to pay someone £40 to check the parts of my car I can't see/reach every year and anyone who says they can't afford it can't afford a car, period.