DVLA changes

[danthecapriman]

Where I used to live non of the local garages would touch carburettors! 
Not even obscure stuff, but just basic like my Capri. When I asked (nicely!) why, they just said because they never see them come in anymore and nobody is trained or experienced on stuff like that anymore. Which, is right!

Thats why the MOT exemption is good. Things have moved on a lot since stuff officially called ‘classics’ were made so trying to test them to the same standards as new cars is stupid. Likewise trying to get a person who isn’t trained, experienced and competent to carry out that test is pointless. It’s just going to result in unnecessary fails where someone who doesn’t know better has failed something that shouldn’t be a fail. That leads to customers being frustrated and complaints to VOSA/DVLA etc.    

It’s far better to just remove the old variables from the test and put the onus on the driver to look after their vehicle if that’s what they insist on having. As @LightBulbFun has said, yes you don’t have to have it MOT’d but your not exempt from using a roadworthy vehicle. 
Likewise in the years since this came in, there’s not been hordes of nuns and kittens killed by un-MOT’d Morris Minors!

In my opinion, the far greater risk and likelihood of something bad happening is from cars with no MOT because they’re under 3 years old. These are the cars more likely to be getting used and abused with minimal maintenance or checks while racking up the most mileage. Just because a car is under 3 years old doesnt stop it having worn out brakes or bald tyres for example yet these are things you do see. 
How many 3 years old old cars fail their first MOT? Are those failures from things that happened recently or has the car been driving around for months and months or even years in that condition.

 

[JJ0063]

47 minutes ago, danthecapriman said:

As @LightBulbFun has said, yes you don’t have to have it MOT’d but you’re not exempt from using a roadworthy vehicle. 
 

Difference being that because they’re exempt, the only time they’re realistically getting caught is when something goes tits up, or they get stopped by a copper who knows what they’re doing. 

The lack of needing an annual test to drive on the road means these people can take a vehicle on the road potentially falling apart and get away with it for years.

Of course there’s the argument of dodgy MOT testers but to have a blanket annual test for everything (including under 3 years old) would be a fair and safe practice IMO. 

[danthecapriman]

1 hour ago, JJ0063 said:

Difference being that because they’re exempt, the only time they’re realistically getting caught is when something goes tits up, or they get stopped by a copper who knows what they’re doing. 

The lack of needing an annual test to drive on the road means these people can take a vehicle on the road potentially falling apart and get away with it for years.

Of course there’s the argument of dodgy MOT testers but to have a blanket annual test for everything (including under 3 years old) would be a fair and safe practice IMO. 

But if you did drive something technically exempt that was falling apart or dangerous then you’re just waiting for a copper to pull you over. You might get away with it for a while but it will happen sooner or later. Then your screwed.

The MOT really isn’t the great be all and end all people here seem to make out. The test is only as good as the moment it’s carried out. Testers can be dodgy, testers can & do miss things, testers might not know the intricacies of the vehicle they’re supposed to be testing and fail or pass it wrongly. The MOT test has been open to abuse from its earliest days when a £10 note could be left conveniently on the front seat, the testers mate wants a pass so the tester goes easy, people submit a car for test with parts refitted for the test to get a pass then after leaving they refit or remove things that they shouldn’t and drive around all year like that. 
I remember when a load of blank certificates got stolen from a garage I worked at… god knows how many of those got sold and used.

Imho fairness would be what we have now. Submitting vehicles to pass tests and standards they weren’t designed to by testers not trained or experienced to test them fairly and properly isn’t fair at all.