Is the new 40 year MOT exemption too dangerous?
Discussion
I visited a local classic car show yesterday evening. It's been a regular monthly summer event for a few years now. I have attended two of these shows this year and I have to say that the condition of some of the vehicles on display thi summer was truly appalling, compared to previous years.
Rust everywhere, wheel arches completed rotted away, God knows what the undersides, inner sills, fuel and brake lines were like. The one thing these vehicles had in common was that they were all 40+ years old and hadn't been seen at the show in previous years, when MOTs were necessary.
Has this MOT decision created a new kind of car owner, who simply acquires a 40+ year-old death trap that's been rotting away in someone's back garden for ages, pumps up the tyres and drives it around under the illusion of being a classic car enthusiast?
Rust everywhere, wheel arches completed rotted away, God knows what the undersides, inner sills, fuel and brake lines were like. The one thing these vehicles had in common was that they were all 40+ years old and hadn't been seen at the show in previous years, when MOTs were necessary.
Has this MOT decision created a new kind of car owner, who simply acquires a 40+ year-old death trap that's been rotting away in someone's back garden for ages, pumps up the tyres and drives it around under the illusion of being a classic car enthusiast?
You cannot just dig up a car and stick it on the road, it has to be Mot tested before you can apply for historic status, there after you are exempt.
Unfortunately there is a "fad" for rat look cars where they look rusty but run okay. I have seen too many of these recently and just look horrid to my eyes, not necessarily unsafe
Unfortunately there is a "fad" for rat look cars where they look rusty but run okay. I have seen too many of these recently and just look horrid to my eyes, not necessarily unsafe
I've been to a few of the smaller local meets this year and haven't really noticed much of a change from previous years in the quality of the cars.
There always was the odd one or two rolling wreck/restoration that always looked a bit worse than they probably are.
The change I have noticed at least local to me is the level of interest in classic cars does seem to be up from previous few years.
If that has anything to do with the 40 year old exemption I don't know.
I know one of my cars is exempt and as much as I wanted to use it this year its stayed in the garage till I am 100% happy with everything.
There always was the odd one or two rolling wreck/restoration that always looked a bit worse than they probably are.
The change I have noticed at least local to me is the level of interest in classic cars does seem to be up from previous few years.
If that has anything to do with the 40 year old exemption I don't know.
I know one of my cars is exempt and as much as I wanted to use it this year its stayed in the garage till I am 100% happy with everything.
spaximus said:
You cannot just dig up a car and stick it on the road
My understanding was that's exactly what you're now able to do, provided the vehicle has not been 'substantially altered'. Hence the problem.spaximus said:
, it has to be Mot tested before you can apply for historic status, there after you are exempt.
No requirement for a test at all according to https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/histori...
RichB said:
Any car on the road has to be roadworthy. MOT or not.
I think we may already have covered this point 
It seems that some have difficulty in understanding the difference between what is, and what should be. Or perhaps they're just being pedantic.
The law regarding "roadworthiness" clearly has zero effect on maintenance standards. It is almost never applied to owners, but occasionally to traders. I doubt it even crosses the mind of most classic car owners who are now left to their own devices, conscience, and worryingly, knowledge, to maintain their cars.
More than 7 million cars fail the MOT every year I wonder how that compares to the number of prosecutions ?
Information and statistics from the last 50+ years categorically show that owners can't be relied upon to maintain their vehicles to an acceptable standard without mandatory inspections.
I'm amazed that anyone should think otherwise.
deggles said:
spaximus said:
You cannot just dig up a car and stick it on the road
My understanding was that's exactly what you're now able to do, provided the vehicle has not been 'substantially altered'. Hence the problem.spaximus said:
, it has to be Mot tested before you can apply for historic status, there after you are exempt.
No requirement for a test at all according to https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/histori...https://www.gov.uk/historic-vehicles/apply-for-veh...
V8covin said:
RichB said:
Any car on the road has to be roadworthy. MOT or not.
Who's policing that then ?Seriously though, whilst there maybe a slight increase in "iffy" old cars on the road temporarily until they die due to mechanical failure or the owner loses interest, are they any worse than the mother with 3 kids in a zafira (insert your own model) with 3 baldy under-inflated tyres.
And yes I don't "get" rat cars either.
GoodOlBoy said:
The law regarding "roadworthiness" clearly has zero effect on maintenance standards. It is almost never applied to owners, but occasionally to traders. I doubt it even crosses the mind of most classic car owners who are now left to their own devices, conscience, and worryingly, knowledge, to maintain their cars.
really?! roadworthiness never applied to owners?! any policeman who stops a car is likely to inspect it if concerned - VOSA will also pull private cars - the reality is that there isn't the man-power to check all cars, but equally there isn't the need - statistics on accidents show that mechanical failure / lack of roadworthiness is not the biggest issue - drink / drugs / bad driving / driver error / etc. are all far bigger issues...and that the majority of people want their cars to be safe - and those with a passionate interest in the car, and a car where you need more mechanical sympathy / understanding (such as a 40+ year old car) are more likely to have that interest than someone buying a 12 year old shed for rock-bottom motoring...
a far higher percentage of classic car owners are likely to have the knowledge to maintain their own cars than owners of something 8-12 years old
GoodOlBoy said:
More than 7 million cars fail the MOT every year I wonder how that compares to the number of prosecutions ?
And how many of those were cars 40+ years old - surprisingly small statistically, which was a part of the test applied when looking at this - ergo, the average owner of the average 40+ year old car takes more care of it than those with younger cars... A large number of those cars failing the MOT will have been not roadworthy for a while prior to the MOT test (they don't suddenly break on that day), so in reality there is a far bigger issue with cars < 40 years old running around in a un-roadworthy condition, than with cars 40+ years old.GoodOlBoy said:
Information and statistics from the last 50+ years categorically show that owners can't be relied upon to maintain their vehicles to an acceptable standard without mandatory inspections.
That same information and statistics show that it is a very small % for those with cars 40+ years old - the worst age bracket of car is undoubtedly the point where that car hits shed status - people are not bothering to fix suspension issues / put on 2nd hand tyres / etc. - that approach to motoring is not uncommon, and is far more of an issue than a classic car with non structural rust on a wing which may not be an MOT failure.when was the last time you saw a classic car in an un-roadworthy condition but on the roads - I can't remember it - but have seen plenty of very poor condition younger cars...
GoodOlBoy said:
I'm amazed that anyone should think otherwise.
live and learn 
there is clear evidence that the statistics support the changes - there is no difficulty in anyone who wants to, to still get an MOT certificate, the majority of classic car owners look after and maintain their cars - I know quite a few who will rebuild to perfection their classic car, but also drive around in a tatty modern car to which no care is givenJust to add some more meat to this thread. I am talking about 1% of the cars at the show, the other 99% were fine, even the rat-look rusted ones with collapsed suspension.
However, that is 1% more than last year. Considering the 40 year exemption has only been in place since May, I dare say that figure will rise each year as more vehicles become eligible and more such chancers come out of the woodwork, so this could become a real problem in the years to come.
One car in particular stood out to me. It was a Hillman Imp, a type of car I am very familiar with. There was a variety of Imps at the show, ranging from concours, via well-looked after, to just scruffy and then there was one that looked downright dangerous. It was only held together by fresh air and wishful-thinking and was clearly nowhere near MOT standard.
What happens if this car is involved in an accident where someone gets hurt, or worse? It's a bit late taking the owner to task on the condition of his/her car by then. I just can't see the police investing much time in pre-emptive roadside checks.
Can insurance companies demand a valid MOT on 40+ year-old cars? I guess there will always be companies who don't, so that probably won't solve the problem.
To be honest I really don't get the mentality of a classic car owner NOT wanting to have his car professionally checked-over once a year. An MOT is 55 quid and an hour or so of your time each year, so hardly a burden.
However, that is 1% more than last year. Considering the 40 year exemption has only been in place since May, I dare say that figure will rise each year as more vehicles become eligible and more such chancers come out of the woodwork, so this could become a real problem in the years to come.
One car in particular stood out to me. It was a Hillman Imp, a type of car I am very familiar with. There was a variety of Imps at the show, ranging from concours, via well-looked after, to just scruffy and then there was one that looked downright dangerous. It was only held together by fresh air and wishful-thinking and was clearly nowhere near MOT standard.
What happens if this car is involved in an accident where someone gets hurt, or worse? It's a bit late taking the owner to task on the condition of his/her car by then. I just can't see the police investing much time in pre-emptive roadside checks.
Can insurance companies demand a valid MOT on 40+ year-old cars? I guess there will always be companies who don't, so that probably won't solve the problem.
To be honest I really don't get the mentality of a classic car owner NOT wanting to have his car professionally checked-over once a year. An MOT is 55 quid and an hour or so of your time each year, so hardly a burden.
[quote=LotusOmega375D]...I really don't get the mentality of a classic car owner NOT wanting to have his car professionally checked-over once a year.../quote]
The new rules suit me because it means I don't have to get a piece of paper every 12 months on the dot. I get them MOT'd approx every 18 months but usually when they go to the specialists for some work. So yes I get them MOTd and no not every 12 months.
The new rules suit me because it means I don't have to get a piece of paper every 12 months on the dot. I get them MOT'd approx every 18 months but usually when they go to the specialists for some work. So yes I get them MOTd and no not every 12 months.
LotusOmega375D said:
However, that is 1% more than last year. Considering the 40 year exemption has only been in place since May, I dare say that figure will rise each year as more vehicles become eligible and more such chancers come out of the woodwork, so this could become a real problem in the years to come.
I suspect that it will be more complex than that - the recent change in regs. will have meant more people looking at a project in their barn and thinking that it is worth doing something with it - however, they will either run out of energy and put it back for another 40 years (i.e. off the road), or they will do something to get it usable, and therefore roadworthy - so those cars will improve. The % of people who will:- enjoy classic car motoring and all the inconvenience and involvement it brings
- take a car out of storage / off sorn
- decide to drive it occasionally or even regularly
- decide to not fix anything
is I suspect vanishingly small - the evidence found by the government before making the change was that statistically speaking those who have an interest in driving older cars are not the same set of people as those who sill drive cars in an un-roadworthy condition - and for the vast majority if they don't have the confidence to be their own mechanic and check for safety, then they will either have a voluntary MOT on it, or issues will be picked up when they bring it out of storage each spring and have a recommissioning check from a mechanic.
my cars are stored in a unit at my mechanics and he has a brief to fix anything that needs fixing and to send me the bill - my M5 is in on Monday for new rear tyres - the current ones are on c. 3mm - way over legal limit, but I don't mess around - I only now have one vehicle left over 40 years old (tractor which has different MOT regs anyway) but no vehicle would go on the road unless I and the mechanic are absolutely sure that it is 100% working and roadworthy - he could do an MOT test, but actually his own inspections are more detailed and more thorough, so why would I bother with an MOT test which is a compromise anyway...
generally speaking, the person who is ignorant / careless enough to drive cars on the road that are not safe, is not driving a 40+ year old classic car...
yes, there will be an initial rash of people getting cars out in the recent sunshine and with the recent changes - but I doubt it will be a growing issue...
akirk said:
live and learn there is clear evidence that the statistics support the changes - there is no difficulty in anyone who wants to, to still get an MOT certificate, the majority of classic car owners look after and maintain their cars - I know quite a few who will rebuild to perfection their classic car, but also drive around in a tatty modern car to which no care is given
I have lived and I have learned. You should give it a shot there is clear evidence that the statistics support the changes - there is no difficulty in anyone who wants to, to still get an MOT certificate, the majority of classic car owners look after and maintain their cars - I know quite a few who will rebuild to perfection their classic car, but also drive around in a tatty modern car to which no care is givenThe majority of classic car owners do not rebuild to perfection nor do they all maintain their cars to a high standard. Some do, some don't.
The MOT failure rate for Classic cars doesn't support your rose-tinted theory.
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff