Now you definitely can't use a car once it's failed its MOT
Discussion
DaveCWK said:
It does seem fairly explicit. Has that wording actually changed recently does anyone know?
It changed on Sept 11th.It used to say:
"Driving a vehicle that’s failed
You can still drive your vehicle if it fails the MOT and its existing MOT certificate is still valid (ie you got it tested before the MOT ran out)."
Now it says:
"You must not drive the vehicle on the road if it fails the test, even if the MOT hasn’t run out, except to:
have the failed defects fixed
a pre-arranged MOT test appointment"
Stupid change really, as the current 30 day allowance to have one done early was there to allow time to get the mot done well in advance of due road tax, and often used, whether intended or not, to address faults within the cover of the existing 12 month certificate, bearing in mind the issue of the certificate was only based on the condition of the car at the time of test anyway.
It has always been an ambiguous point, always confirmed previously, as the prevailing certificate stands until expiry!
I wouldn't be surprised to see that changed back, as the certificate is valid for twelve months. The new system shouldn't allow this to be overridden, and I believe it is a legal point for argument.
It clearly displays an expiry date, on an official document, where the issue already is conditional on the vehicle only meeting standards on the date of the original test, and any variance on condition after the issue date would not be necessarily obvious to a driver for the duration of the certificate. It does not state the expiry date is conditional and subject to change should the decision be made to test within the 30 day period, and if the vehicle has something wrong that would cause it to fail.
We all may just refrain from early testing perhaps, which won't bother many of us much. Nobody tests the car early other than sometimes a few days out of convenience. Shame, as it was a good way of keeping on top of the requirement for all of us in time.
You are still allowed to take the car home, interesting that is saved for the next page, but the 'you csn't drive the car unless taking for repair' is on the first page, creating unnecessary initial confusion.
Dodgy garages will exploit this just as they used to do, by telling owners they shouldn't drive the car away, bullying them into leaving it at the test centre. We will see the return of pre Mot testing, which was supposed to be illegal, but it will just be marketed as a condition check, essentially doing the Mot unofficially a month early as before, so customers are looked after a bit.
It has always been an ambiguous point, always confirmed previously, as the prevailing certificate stands until expiry!
I wouldn't be surprised to see that changed back, as the certificate is valid for twelve months. The new system shouldn't allow this to be overridden, and I believe it is a legal point for argument.
It clearly displays an expiry date, on an official document, where the issue already is conditional on the vehicle only meeting standards on the date of the original test, and any variance on condition after the issue date would not be necessarily obvious to a driver for the duration of the certificate. It does not state the expiry date is conditional and subject to change should the decision be made to test within the 30 day period, and if the vehicle has something wrong that would cause it to fail.
We all may just refrain from early testing perhaps, which won't bother many of us much. Nobody tests the car early other than sometimes a few days out of convenience. Shame, as it was a good way of keeping on top of the requirement for all of us in time.
You are still allowed to take the car home, interesting that is saved for the next page, but the 'you csn't drive the car unless taking for repair' is on the first page, creating unnecessary initial confusion.
Dodgy garages will exploit this just as they used to do, by telling owners they shouldn't drive the car away, bullying them into leaving it at the test centre. We will see the return of pre Mot testing, which was supposed to be illegal, but it will just be marketed as a condition check, essentially doing the Mot unofficially a month early as before, so customers are looked after a bit.
.Dixy said:
Has the law changed or is this just a civil servant web designer giving an opinion.
As mentioned earlier in this thread I see no sign that the law has changed. As such, I think the webpage is simply to discourage idiots from thinking they can carry on driving an unroadworthy car after a fail "because the old MOT's still valid, mate".IIRC the rules are clear,
1. Car must have a valid MOT issued within the past 12 months (up to 13 months if renewal).
2. It is illegal to drive an unroadworthy car on the road at any time, with or without an MOT.
I notice they've changed the page again (last update 7th December) - now says you can drive the car away if the old MOT is still valid and the vehicle is roadworthy.
Same link: https://www.gov.uk/getting-an-mot/after-the-test
Same link: https://www.gov.uk/getting-an-mot/after-the-test
So they've changed it back, to the correct stance, that you are able to use a vehicle which has failed MOT as long as you still have time left to run on your previous certificate. (So long as the car is in a roadworthy condition, of course).
I thought it would be a lot longer before anything was done about the mistake - perhaps my detailed email using the 'There's something wrong with this page' button had an effect after all?
I thought it would be a lot longer before anything was done about the mistake - perhaps my detailed email using the 'There's something wrong with this page' button had an effect after all?
Steve H said:
I would assume that 90% of MOT fails would be on items that would render a car legally unroadworthy anyway..........
Maybe not 90%, but a few that wouldn't:Minor suspension bush worn to XS
Exhaust leak
Damage to screen >40mm but not in central zone
No horn
Tyre sidewalls in poor condition but not dangerous and fit to pass a roadside check
Handbrake inefficient one side
Corrosion
Empty screenwash (yes, it's a fail!)
Exposed sharp edge to rusty wing
Cracked or cloudy light
The spirit of the regs always USED to be that unless the guy ticked the dangerous box and the thing was still roadworthy (to the level of a roadside check) then you could ignore the fail and drive away on the old MoT. I drove one away with the dangerous box ticked in September for a rusty brake pipe, I even asked the tester and he said "no problem".
I can't see this change going through, as it will put an end to anyone doing early testing as a means of ascertaining what's required and having time to get it sorted. It will increase the number of cars driving without test, because if your choices are test it at 11 months, have it fail, drive it for a couple of weeks while you get it sorted (illegal) and push it all the way to 12 months, have it fail and drive without test (illegal) while you sort it then you are going to do the latter, obviously. May as well be hanged for a sheep as for a lamb.
battered said:
I can't see this change going through, as it will put an end to anyone doing early testing as a means of ascertaining what's required and having time to get it sorted. It will increase the number of cars driving without test, because if your choices are test it at 11 months, have it fail, drive it for a couple of weeks while you get it sorted (illegal) and push it all the way to 12 months, have it fail and drive without test (illegal) while you sort it then you are going to do the latter, obviously. May as well be hanged for a sheep as for a lamb.
I'd expect to see a rise in the number of pre-MOT MOT style inspections at 11 months. If it fails, you can still drive the car away legally, the same as now. If it passes a cheap full MOT would be done as all the inspections have been completed. Net result is many drivers of old cars are £20 worse off and the same number of cars that would fail an MOT being on the road. battered said:
Steve H said:
I would assume that 90% of MOT fails would be on items that would render a car legally unroadworthy anyway..........
Maybe not 90%, but a few that wouldn't:Minor suspension bush worn to XS
Exhaust leak
Damage to screen >40mm but not in central zone
No horn
Tyre sidewalls in poor condition but not dangerous and fit to pass a roadside check
Handbrake inefficient one side
Corrosion
Empty screenwash (yes, it's a fail!)
Exposed sharp edge to rusty wing
Cracked or cloudy light
While you are unlikely to get a pull for many items as they may not be immediately obvious, roadworthiness is, for the most part, judged by MOT standards.
Steve H said:
A good number of those would be make a vehicle officially unroadworthy.
While you are unlikely to get a pull for many items as they may not be immediately obvious, roadworthiness is, for the most part, judged by MOT standards.
It's actually defined on the website as others have said. The website says that you MUST comply with Construction and Use and Lighting Regs, that's all. The MoT tests more than this, critically wear, which is why an MoT fail does not necessarily mean a C&U or lighting fail and doesn't automatically mean it's not roadworthy.While you are unlikely to get a pull for many items as they may not be immediately obvious, roadworthiness is, for the most part, judged by MOT standards.
Sheepshanks said:
I notice they've changed the page again (last update 7th December) - now says you can drive the car away if the old MOT is still valid and the vehicle is roadworthy.
Same link: https://www.gov.uk/getting-an-mot/after-the-test
yOU ALWAYS COULD.Same link: https://www.gov.uk/getting-an-mot/after-the-test
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff