E-petition opposes Govt plans to scrap classic MoT
Don't like the plans to scrap a compulsory MoT for older cars? Voice your opinions here!
Well, it seems like Classic & Sports Car's James Elliott quite agrees; he's set up an online e-petition opposing the Government's plans
"Clearly a lot of people strongly disagree with the Government's plans, so I have started one of those e-petition thingies to oppose it," he says.
The petition reads as follows:
"The Government has announced its intention to scrap the MoT for all pre-1960 vehicles from November. This petition recognises the critical importance of an annual inspection of all older vehicles by a qualified third party and calls for the hopelessly unsuitable current MoT not to be abandoned, but to be replaced with a mandatory, more appropriate annual basic safety check for all classic and historic vehicles of more than 25 years old."
If you are so minded, you can sign James's petition here.
When was the last time you saw a pre-1960 car cause any form of accident due to a failure which would have been prevented by an annual MoT, or which isn't captured by the obligation to maintain your vehicle in a roadworthy condition?
Yes, the MoT is irrelevant to older cars and in an ideal world it should should be replaced by some other more relevant form of test, but is it really worth the time and effort to come up with this new system and train all the MoT testers to deal with it? There are many more important things going on at the moment...
Come on, people, get a grip.
Seems like an utterly absurd plan to me. The fact that someone owns an old car does not mean they look after it properly. I don't see the problem with the current system really.
Seems like an utterly absurd plan to me.
1. Rusty old snotters which require total restoration
2. Restored or preserved cars which are kept shiny in garages
The first category would be very obvious if anyone tries to use them on the road, and are covered by existing legislation without any reference to MoT testing. The second category aren't a danger to anyone.
I have two pre-war cars tucked away in pristine condition. I don't get to use them very often, but they are maintained perfectly and nothing ever goes wrong on them - there is nothing to break or wear out. Quite often I find that I can't use them when I want because the MoT has lapsed and I haven't had it renewed. It's not easy to take two old cars over to the other side of the county to find a sensible MoT tester who is able to look at a car like that, and it is a completely pointless exercise.
My everyday car is more modern, gets used all the time, suffers more wear and tear and has more consumable and perishable parts so an MoT is absolutely necessary. It's a massive waste of time and effort on the older cars though.
Seems like an utterly absurd plan to me. The fact that someone owns an old car does not mean they look after it properly. I don't see the problem with the current system really.
However, I also understand the argument that a tiny number of (usually) scrupulously maintained classics doing a handful of miles a year at low speeds aren't really a significant factor in road safety.
From that point of view I applaud the minister responsible for this proposal for trying to do something nice for once. It may have been seen as a low-risk vote winner, but motoring is very much a minority interest these days and I think it's great to see an MP supporting that rather than trying to curry favour with the NIMBYs by further restricting it.
So perhaps not the best idea in practice, but I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment.
It has been led by the All Party Parliamentary Historic Vehicles Group. Details here: http://www.historicvehicles.org.uk/
I'm surprised parts of the more modern Classic Car lobby are against it. In 20 years time, I bet they'll be the ones lobbying for similar changes to enable their preferred era of cars to get through MOTs.
Anyway, I see why they want them scraped and also why others want them to stay. Looking at 1960 however I can see why they chose this date. I don't think there will be any deathtraps comeing out. If it went later I thinke we would sudenly see a whole load of MG B's and Minis etc. being pulled out of garages accross the land which people have not wanted to put through an MoT for a few years because they know something is going to fail.
In these straitened economic times, better to do this that waste money cooking up separate tests for older vehicles.
As has been pointed out, you can still be busted for driving a wreck, so why not choose a simple, sensible solution for once.
I agree, we Brits are a schitzophrenic lot, we both bh about "the rules", but can't seem to get enough of them.
Also, the basic requirements for roadworthyness still apply to these older vehicles, so the hysterical nonsense I have seen about people being freely allowed now to visit their local scrappy and pull a wreck off the yard for use on the road is simply not true.
The only argument in favour of keeping the MOT for these very old vehicles is that it provides some sort of sanity check in case the owner has missed something that is crucial to the safe operation of the car on the road. But do we need a full-on MOT for that? Surely a system that combines a second tier inspection at designated centres coupled with self certification and the existing roadworthyness laws is all that would be required (if that even)
On one hand I'm happy that my 1951 car won't need an MOT, on the other, I'll probably take it for one anyway so that I have a second opinion on the work I've done but it will be nice to know that if I don't get round to it by the expiry date I can still go to a show and sort it out later.
The minimal requirement should be for an annual MOT (possibly bi-annual) to at least ensure basic items such as steering and brakes are functional (at least to the standard of when the car was registered) and no major damage has happened to chassis etc since the last test. This could be provided at an approved specialist if the regular MOT testing stations do not want to do the work and would provide another (albeit small) income stream for the specialists we all rely upon to look after our older cars.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff