No MoT for historic vehicles

[roythebus]

Totally unrelated to railway matters, but I'm sure a lot of folk on here have historic road vehicles. From October 2012 ALL vehicles built before 1960 will be exempt from annual testing, including buses used for hire and reward, cars, lorries, bikes, the lot.

 

Linky here: http://assets.dft.gov.uk/consultations/dft-2011-27/mot-historic-summary-consultation-response.pdf for all the details.

 

Historic Buses used for hire and reward will still need a certificate of initial fitness, display a current PSV operators licence, have a psv driver, be insured for hire and reward and have a tacho fitted, as well as being subject to the operator's maintenance regime.

 

Post 1960 vehicles will still need an annual test.

[edcayton]

I can only say that I am glad my 1971 Midget is not going to be covered by this. Yes, I try to maintain it in good order, but I enjoy taking it to the MOT at a sympathetic country garage, and getting a second opinion on things like the amount of wear in the steering and suspension.

We also have a chat about trainy things as Roy is a Swanage line enthusiast, and the guy from the back shop (whose name I forget) is a modeller.

 

Ed

[sunbeam.20]

Fortunately here in Queensland we do not suffer from such a thing as MOT, just a Safety Certificate when a vehicle is registerd after restoration or if a vehicle is sold registered.

Matthew

[meil]

And what do you think the Insurance companies will do? They are going to ask for a road worthiness certificate before they will insure any pre 1960's vehicle! Now I wonder where you will get that from?

[trisonic]

Just 25 years, I think, over here. Mind you they only test for emissions only....

 

However if the Police stop you and anything is faulty (what ever the age of the car) you are for it. Historic vehicles get special insurance breaks too but you have to agree to limited annual mileage in return.

 

Best, Pete.

[Guest Natalie Graham]

I wonder why they didn't make things nice and simple and use the same year as that for tax exemption for historic vehicles. I imagine that was too obvious for British officialdom. It would hardly be worth testing my 1953 MV Agusta anyway as it doesn't have most of the things the modern test covers.

[Oldddudders]

It would hardly be worth testing my 1953 MV Agusta anyway as it doesn't have most of the things the modern test covers.

Steering, tyres, brakes and lights would seem a good start? Googling that model produced the fact that they did a Pullman version. Meals served at every seat?

[Rumblestripe]

Even the historic car clubs were against this idiotic piece of legislation. Some see it as a prelude to limiting use of such vehicles to say Sundays or Bank Holidays? Others think that it will open the use of historic vehicles to people who really don't care for them and simply see them as a way round the legal requirement to operate your vehicle safely. Which might precipitate banning from public roads. I don't think anyone with an old car/truck/bus has any great objection to getting the vehicle checked for safety once a year and why would they?

[Fat Controller]

Steering, tyres, brakes and lights would seem a good start? Googling that model produced the fact that they did a Pullman version. Meals served at every seat?

No- just a seat...

From the early 1980s for a decade, we ran a series of ' collector's cars'- starting with a Wolseley 1500 (1958), we then ran an Austin Somerset A40 (1949) and finally an Austin A40 Farina Mk 2 Countryman (1961, I think). All were used as our everyday vehicles, and each made at least one trip to Lyon from Newcastle. The only time we had a problem with an MoT was with the Somerset; the examiner wanted to fail it because of a hole in the floor; we had to point out that the floor was only there to keep our feet dry, and the structural integrity rested in the rather substantial chassis members. Sadly, such vehicles are hard to find at a modern day equivalent of the prices we paid for them; I don't think we need worry too much about anyone buying a pre-1960 vehicle in order to take advantage of the MoT derogation, as they go for silly prices these days.

[Kenton]

Sheer madness - since when does old mean safe. The test is there for a very good reason - to put those old unsafe vehicles off the road. I really can't see the problem a MoT costs very little and is a price worth paying to ensure that all vehicles on the road have some basic level of roadworthyness. Is this just a result of a very noisy campaign group getting their way? - It seems just as logical to make all white cars exempt one year and red ones the next.

 

Although the MoT is a bit of a farce anyway as it is a spot check, at least it does give warning at that point in time of the more serious problems that might be due (brakes, steering, exhaust ...) as many owners I doubt check these on a more regular and ongoing basis.

[Guest]

Sheer madness - since when does old mean safe. The test is there for a very good reason - to put those old unsafe vehicles off the road.

It seems to rely on a stereotype that all classic car owners are fussy old men with beards. Anyone can buy an old car and they don't come with any magical powers that instil technical prowess in their new owner.

 

One of the reasons for the MOT test was to remove the need for every copper to be able to check all aspects of vehicle safety at the roadside. So now we're back to potentially the only checks done on a car being a quick look over if it gets a tug.

[skipepsi]

I suspect they couldn't be a*sed to write the regulations for older cars anymore they are less than x% of the total is the accountants answer. The fact that some are capable of 100mph is neither here or there! I would like a basic safety certificate for peace of mind personally.

[Baby Deltic]

I'm pretty sure fire appliances are tax and MOT exempt.

[trisonic]

Ah, yes, the English love their pieces of paper saying everything is fine. Let bureaucrats live too!

 

Best, Pete.

[PhilJ W]

There is a lot of confusion already about should or should not a preserved vehicle require an MOT. I have seen vehicles advertised as 'Tax and MOT exempt' and it was not a fire engine! When I pointed out to the vendor that an MOT was required he insisted that it was not. As stated above the only vehicles that are not currently required to have a valid MOT are fire appliances together with ambulances, some categories of electric vehicles and veteran vehicles dating from before 1904 IIRC. As the owner of a classic vehicle I consider the MOT as a necessity as I might not be aware of a fault affecting road-worthiness.

[Kenton]

the only vehicles that are not currently required to have a valid MOT

 

Also foreign registered, diplomatic or 'in-service' military vehicles. Though the later do require a certification of roadworthyness it is not an MoT.

[trisonic]

Don''t jump in feet first show us the stats. Deaths and injuries caused by cars of 1960 or older...if you really want to save lives in the UK ban everyone under the age of 25 from driving - hang on, they've got a licence haven't they? They still represent the biggest cause of "accidents".

 

Similarly an MOT is a snapshot of a car on a particular day, the condition will change as soon as you first step on the brakes. The guy that checks for an MOT is not looking down the road he just wants to see if it passes now.

 

Can you really imagine a chav dumping his GTI in favour of an Austin A35 just because he doesn't need an MOT? OK then, something similar, what? An E-Type an MGA Twin-Cam? so he'll dump his GTI and buy one at considerably more money than a GTI again, just to save the trouble of an MOT?

Doesn't add up which ever way you look at it.

 

Btw if anyone can provide stats that driving a 1960 car or older is the cause of a significant number of death and injuries then I promise to change my mind.

 

Finally if you're relying on the existence of an MOT to prove that a car is safe then I really would worry...

 

Best, Pete.

[mikes rail]

We seem to get by very well without MOTs in the Isle of Man, don't see cars piled up on the roadside due to failures. Mind you the state of some of the driving!

[chris p bacon]

We seem to get by very well without MOTs in the Isle of Man, don't see cars piled up on the roadside due to failures. Mind you the state of some of the driving!

 

wait until you come upon an Austin A35 in the middle lane of the M1/M6 etc.

 

At the college near us in Bedford, the car park has a high proportion of old "classic" vehicles as it is, for some students not having to bother with an MoT is a reason to buy a clapped out piece of scrap.

 

Keep em off the road i say....poop poop

[Unicorn1]

I must firstly declare an interst here, I have for the last twenty years owned many "historic" vehicles, from cars to ex London Buses. Curently I own just the one, a 1948 Austin Devon, which I have been driving now for 17 years. I have a modern car too - a Deisel Rover 75 (my wife comments often when seeing another one on motorways 'oh look dear, an old man in a Rover')

 

I get frightfully anxious at MOT times - with the Austin - mainly because I know there will be some thing the tester does not understand, or will have to find fault with and make the 'advisory note' on the VSOA system. many testing stations are weary of 'passing' too many cars without proving they havn't found something. However I still feel pleased when the car I have personally prepared for the test passes it with just one 'advisroy' , or better still none at all (although as I've pointed out it is now neigh on impossible to achieve the latter).

 

I for one will contine to have my car checked by a second, and more experienced pair of eyes. Just like our modelling - some one else, even the camera, will show up the dodgey leaning signal or not quite staright track.

 

When the fee for Road Tax for pre 1972 vehicles was aboloished the doom merchants predicted that everyone would be driving old bangers, around, well they're not, nor are there lots of MOT exempt lorries and fire engines clogging up the roads. Some people may think that they have saved money by driving an MOT exept car, untill it breaks down, or they need a tyre say - at nearly £100 a pop for a 16" crossply - then it will soon seem less attractive.

 

Les

[Horsetan]

.....When the fee for Road Tax for pre 1972 vehicles was aboloished the doom merchants predicted that everyone would be driving old bangers, around, well they're not,.....

 

I personally look forward to an increased use of proper leaded petrol

[Guest Natalie Graham]

Btw if anyone can provide stats that driving a 1960 car or older is the cause of a significant number of death and injuries then I promise to change my mind.

 

I think the insurance industry will be the people with the statistics on that. I think we can estimate what those statistics tell them if we compare the premiums charged for modern vehicles and classic ones.

 

Finally if you're relying on the existence of an MOT to prove that a car is safe then I really would worry...

 

I couldn't agree more. I like to know my vehicle is safe without having to wait for MOT time to come around again.

[alastairq]

It appears the justification for removing the need for an MoT was that owners of pre-1960 vehicles were more likely to actually take [more?] care of their vehicles, hence a reduction in un-necessary expense and paperwork..[not to mention the reduction in training a MoT tester might have to undergo, to properly examine old technologies?]

 

I don't see a problem arising.

 

[after all, there is still a movement afoot to move all MoT tests to a 2{?} year event]..........................I do not quite understand how the Govt. arrived at the arbitrary date of 1960, though?

 

 

If the fear amongst more 'lay' drivers is an increase in unroadworthy vehicles on the roads, then take a look at the modern stuff already out there?

 

[How many faulty brake lights can you spot in one journey? ]

 

I fear we are rapidly heading towards a 'self-regulating' system of enforcement on the roads, given that Policing levels are nowhere near enough to match the vehicle numbers out there.

 

Gone are the days when a young person out for a drive on a Friday night, made sure the lights worked otherwise they got pulled over!

[skipepsi]

Finally twigged it, if you don't need the car etc MOT'd then you can sell the valuable registration number just by insuring it and getting a free tax disc.

[Ohmisterporter]

It strikes me as rather odd that this comes about at a time when the government is strapped for cash, I would have thought that more fund raising would be the order of the day rather than less. Combined with no duty on pasties, we're doomed.