Now you definitely can't use a car once it's failed its MOT

[Sheepshanks]

Government has updated its 'guidance':

"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"

https://www.gov.uk/getting-an-mot/after-the-test

[tumble dryer]

Sheepshanks said:

Government has updated its 'guidance':

"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"

https://www.gov.uk/getting-an-mot/after-the-test

Bit ambiguous. What's the agenda?

[Jimmy Recard]

This isn't really a bad thing, I feel.

[danlightbulb]

Thats a blow. I deliberately had my MOT 4 weeks early this year so that IF the car failed on something big I had time to find another. This new rule would stop that.

[Leptons]

About time that was clarified!

[Sheepshanks]

tumble dryer said:

Bit ambiguous.

I thought that as well. I'm not 100% sure it means what it says, as it seems to assume a failure would render the car un-roadworthy.

Discussions elsewhere seem to have taken it very literally though.

[Dogwatch]

Surely failing an MoT does not of itself mean that a vehicle is in a dangerous condition? For example a leaking exhaust - or even 'misplaced' letters/numbers many annoy Authority but aren't a hazard to other road users.

[InitialDave]

I assume that a friendly garage would be willing to carry out a "pre MOT" consisting of all the checks required of an MOT without actually registering that the car had been subject to one?

So you could ask them to do that if you're concerned that you may be looking at a lot of rectification work for a pass.

[Ozzie Osmond]

So far as I am aware this is simply guidance on the website - I'm not aware of any change to the law (which is the bit that counts).

As previously, the use of an unroadworthy vehicle on the road is a criminal offence at any time with or without a valid MOT. Whether a vehicle is unroadworthy depends on all the facts. Compare,

A. Fail MOT test on a blown rear foglamp. Continue driving the car on the road during good weather. Involved in an accident. Any problem?

B. Fail MOT test on seriously defective brakes. Decide to drive the car home to fix it. Involved in an accident. Any problem?

[cb010]

They're right that it's an offence to drive a vehicle in a dangerous condition but that's where the accuracy of their advice ends.

What if both rear numberplate lights had failed due to a a corroded wiring connector causing MOT failure? Would it really be an offence to drive the vehicle back home in daylight?

[TheAngryDog]

InitialDave said:

I assume that a friendly garage would be willing to carry out a "pre MOT" consisting of all the checks required of an MOT without actually registering that the car had been subject to one?

So you could ask them to do that if you're concerned that you may be looking at a lot of rectification work for a pass.

You can already get a pre mot

[Jimmy Recard]

Ozzie Osmond said:

So far as I am aware this is simply guidance on the website - I'm not aware of any change to the law (which is the bit that counts).

As previously, the use of an unroadworthy vehicle on the road is a criminal offence at any time with or without a valid MOT. Whether a vehicle is unroadworthy depends on all the facts. Compare,

A. Fail MOT test on a blown rear foglamp. Continue driving the car on the road during good weather. Involved in an accident. Any problem?

B. Fail MOT test on seriously defective brakes. Decide to drive the car home to fix it. Involved in an accident. Any problem?

This is my understanding.

If necessary I'd just ask for an MOT check but without actually filling in any paperwork. Then I'd know what I had to do with the car.

It'll cost the same as two MOTs but it's not the end of the world.

[Andyjc86]

What it doesn't say is 'your old valid MOT will be considered void, should your car fail'


So I'm reading as the dangerous vehicle vs failed MOT argument.

[DaveCWK]

It does seem fairly explicit. Has that wording actually changed recently does anyone know?

[Jimmyarm]

The guidance on that site is rubbish.

On the next page is says you can only take your vehicle away for repair if the old certificate is still valid, it then contradicts itself underneath that.

I emailed them about this page a while ago as it didn't make any sense, they never responded but it has changed (although it still is a load of rubbish)

[frisbee]

Andyjc86 said:

What it doesn't say is 'your old valid MOT will be considered void, should your car fail'


So I'm reading as the dangerous vehicle vs failed MOT argument.

Also, how would you prove that you are taking it home to fix it? "It's ok officer, you can call up my wife and confirm that I've booked an appointment to repair the my car myself on my drive."

But the next page says:

"You can take your vehicle away if your MOT certificate is still valid.

You can only take your vehicle to or from somewhere to be repaired if your MOT has run out."

So its a typically ambiguous government website, written in the style of the highway code but with threats instead of the relevant act or law under the "must" statements.

[Dixy]

Has the law changed or is this just a civil servant web designer giving an opinion.

[saaby93]

Jimmyarm said:

The guidance on that site is rubbish.

On the next page is says you can only take your vehicle away for repair if the old certificate is still valid, it then contradicts itself underneath that.

I emailed them about this page a while ago as it didn't make any sense, they never responded but it has changed (although it still is a load of rubbish)

Yeah they wont respond thanking you for changes as it implies you know more than they do. They do change things if you write in and it's sensible even if thats naturally not in response to you having written in

[Steve H]

TheAngryDog said:

InitialDave said:

I assume that a friendly garage would be willing to carry out a "pre MOT" consisting of all the checks required of an MOT without actually registering that the car had been subject to one?

So you could ask them to do that if you're concerned that you may be looking at a lot of rectification work for a pass.

You can already get a pre mot

You can but it would involve paying twice which most drivers wouldn't be keen on. It's much harder now the testers have to be logged on and VOSA (or whatever they are called this week) could be just round the corner watching online what is supposed to be on the MOT ramp........

In fact, isn't an MOT ramp supposed to be used exclusively for official MOTs during the garage's published testing hours?

[battered]

My own experience from 3 weeks ago:
Took car for test, say 2 Sept, current Mot expires say 21st.
Fail. Sidelights, one side handbrake U/S, susp bush, rusty brake lines. Tester ticks "dangerous" box for the last one.
"Oh sh*t" says I, does that mean I can't drive it?
"No mate" says MoT tester. "You can drive it until the current test runs out".

Now of course this doesn't mean I can drive a defective vehicle according to a roadside check, but I was surprised I was allowed to drive away in a "dangerous" car. However this has to be a daily event at the tester, I'm hardly the first car in with rusty brake pipes and a fail, and if he weren't allowed to then there would be a procedure where he notifies DVLA and tells me in no uncertain terms that I can't drive it. I'm sure this will exist for a car with (say) no functioning brakes, and I have heard of it happening for a car with seriously bald tyres, but I have first hand evidence that a fail, even a "dangerous" fail, isn't a show stopper.