New MOT rules from May 2018
Discussion
Breadvan72 said:
A slightly daft additional measure was to allow cars to have black plates that could never have had them when new, but never mind that.
I didn't know that.. off to buy some black and silver plates for a '73 camper 
Cheers
No real rush though, MOT has run out so won't be back on the road until May next year.
Red Devil said:
Incorrect: it's not all. Some do not require such markings. See - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2001/561/schedu... - Part 3 A & B.2
You win.Breadvan72 said:
History of "historic": Quite a few years ago, cars over a certain age (I think it was 25 years) were exempted from VED. IIRC, after an initial rolling exemption, the exemption was fixed at a date in the early 70s. Then a few years ago a 40 year rolling VED exemption started. A slightly daft additional measure was to allow cars to have black plates that could never have had them when new, but never mind that. Now the MoT exemption is to be set at 40 years. E Type or Allegro, it matters not - car s old enough are historic.
By the way, a few years ago, PH and other car fora were awash with doom and gloom threads asserting confidently that classic cars would be abolished by the evil EU. In fact the contrary has occurred, and it has become easier to own classic cars.
You are correct and I am old enough to have experienced it. Kenneth Clark (bless 'im) bought in the VED exempt status for classic cars in the mid 1990s (about 1994 I think), for 25 y.o. cars, on a rolling basis. Gordon Brown stopped it in 1997 when Labour got in, so it only applied to cars manufactured, not registered (if you could prove it) before 1/1/73. It made a heck of a difference to classic car values either side of the cut-off. Those who persevered with their 1973 / 74 cars and so on were rewarded in 2015 when Osborne reinstated it, but this time at 40 y.o. The MoT exemption for pre-1960 cars was introduced in 2012:By the way, a few years ago, PH and other car fora were awash with doom and gloom threads asserting confidently that classic cars would be abolished by the evil EU. In fact the contrary has occurred, and it has become easier to own classic cars.
http://www.classicandsportscar.com/news/general-cl...
98elise said:
Mr Tidy said:
HazzaCrawf said:
EML is now a fail, as is “contaminated” brake fluid
That's a bit of a worry - is EML a failure on amber, or only on red?I have a car that throws up an amber EML from time to time for cats, but passes emissions tests every time regardless!
hairyben said:
98elise said:
Mr Tidy said:
HazzaCrawf said:
EML is now a fail, as is “contaminated” brake fluid
That's a bit of a worry - is EML a failure on amber, or only on red?I have a car that throws up an amber EML from time to time for cats, but passes emissions tests every time regardless!
Her car will be a failure after May then. I guess we need to get the mot done before the rule change.
justinio said:
surveyor_101 said:
I was under the impression Jan 1992 onwards you would need a cat.
'96 if it's a JDM import.* i.e. Date of first use: in Japan, not when first registrered in the UK. See Vehicle Details Items B & [B.1] on the V5C.
Shaoxter said:
surveyor_101 said:
Shaoxter said:
Whew, looks like my decatted 1994 imported MR2 Turbo is safe then... (I think)
I was under the impression Jan 19 92 onwards you would need a cat. But according to the flow chart on page 100 of that document, if the car is pre Aug 1995 and there isn't an "Exact match in EGA database or the In-service Emissions book" then it's eligible for a non-cat test
Hence why the 3S-GTE engine is not listed for the MR2 on page 145 of the In service exhaust emission standards for road vehicles Eighteenth edition (whereas it is for the ST185/ST205 Celica).
There are a fair number of UK MR2s running 3S-GTEs which can give rise to fun and games with some MOT testers...
The decat position is made unequivocally clear by the following wording.
Paragraph 8.2.1.1
Exhaust emission control equipment
This inspection only applies to vehicles requiring a full catalyst emissions test (disregarding the Basic Emissions Test) and is restricted to components that are readily visible and identifiable, such as catalytic converters, oxygen sensors, exhaust gas recirculation valves etc.
The flowchart in Section 8 page 6 does the rest. It is laid out differently from Section 7. page 9 of the current version but the end result is exactly the same. As long as you can pass the non-cat test emissions figures without one you're good to go.
cmsapms said:
The MOT manual says my Q plate should be tested as if it was first used before a particular date in 1973, even though the car (Westfield) was registered in 1997. Is it exempt? It's not been modified in any way from the manufacturer's (my) spec!
What the MOT test is saying is that the emissions standards test is to that of the age of the engine. Your vehicle will have to wait until 2038 until it's MOT exempt.cmsapms said:
The MOT manual says my Q plate should be tested as if it was first used before a particular date in 1973, even though the car (Westfield) was registered in 1997.
If you are referrng to the 2018 draft document try again. A Q plate usually means its age cannot be adequately determined.
Introduction Section pages 6 & 7.
6. Vehicle ‘first used’ Dates - Application of Test Criteria
Tester’s will normally be provided with the vehicle details as part of the registration process. This will
usually include the vehicle’s ‘first used’ date. Where this information is available, the tester should
only use defects applicable to the vehicle’s age.
However, in cases where this information is not available or incorrect, the tester should determine
the vehicle’s ‘first used’ date as follows:
a. Its date of manufacture, if the vehicle was originally used without being registered in GB,
such as an imported vehicle or ex-HM Forces vehicle.
b. Vehicles having a Q plate registration when presented for MOT are to be treated as
follows:
- for emission purposes only, they are to be considered as first used before 1 August 1975
- for all other testing purposes they are to be considered as being first used on 1 January 1971
after it was manufactured, for example; an anti-theft device is not required on vehicles first
used before 1 September 2001. However, a vehicle first used after that date, but
manufactured at least 6 months before that date (i.e. before March 2001) would still not
require an anti-theft device to be fitted.
See also Section 8 Nuisance 8.2.1.2 top of page 3,
For emissions purposes only the following are to be considered first used before 1 August 1975:
- Kit cars and amateur built vehicles first used before 1 August 1998
- wankel rotary engined vehicles first used before 1 August 1987
- All Q plated vehicles
SMB said:
cmsapms said:
Is it exempt? It's not been modified in any way from the manufacturer's (my) spec!
What the MOT test is saying is that the emissions standards test is to that of the age of the engine.SMB said:
Your vehicle will have to wait until 2038 until it's MOT exempt.
See Introduction Section 3 on page 5 According to that it will have to be registered with DVLA as being of historical interest.But who can tell what qualifying requirements the DVLA will have in place 20 years from now?
Does this mean you can't drive a car that has failed with a 'Dangerous' failure away from the MoT station...?
EVO website said:
Speaking to our sister title Auto Express, Neil Barlow, head of MOT policy at the DVSA, the organisation that regulates the MOT test, explained, ‘we’re changing the wording on the certificate. We’ve done a lot of research with motorists to find out what sort of information helps’. Barlow hopes the changes will encourage motorists to see to the problems in order to avoid facing punitive action outlined in the Road Traffic Act, which states that: ‘A dangerous item means that a vehicle should not be driven away from the garage,’ ‘driving a vehicle in a dangerous condition is a criminal offence.’
I'm not sure if I'm worrying unnecessarily so any help here would be awesome.
I've got a 2002 Mazda Bongo which is a JDM import, imported here a couple of years ago.
Because of its age on import it didn't need an IVA or whatever they call them now, just an MOT and registering.
My van has factory fitted (but Japanese spec) Xenon headlights. These are a reflector housing with a little domed cover over the HiD bulb. There's no washers and no automatic levelling, there is however a manual knob in the dash for headlight adjustment.
My understanding is that my vehicle wouldn't pass an IVA with these lights, I've seen plenty of posts about replacing JDM xenon lights for the IVA on things like JDM 350z.
They've already passed 2 MOTs and should have no problem in a couple of weeks when mines due next. But what happens next year after these changes?
I've got a 2002 Mazda Bongo which is a JDM import, imported here a couple of years ago.
Because of its age on import it didn't need an IVA or whatever they call them now, just an MOT and registering.
My van has factory fitted (but Japanese spec) Xenon headlights. These are a reflector housing with a little domed cover over the HiD bulb. There's no washers and no automatic levelling, there is however a manual knob in the dash for headlight adjustment.
My understanding is that my vehicle wouldn't pass an IVA with these lights, I've seen plenty of posts about replacing JDM xenon lights for the IVA on things like JDM 350z.
They've already passed 2 MOTs and should have no problem in a couple of weeks when mines due next. But what happens next year after these changes?
funkyrobot said:
My wife's trusty old 2003 petrol Polo has had the EML on for ages now. Its been in the garage for it, they said don't bother with it because of the value of the car. It also passed the last two mot tests with no emission issues, despite it being on.
Her car will be a failure after May then. I guess we need to get the mot done before the rule change.
This part is idiotic. Her car will be a failure after May then. I guess we need to get the mot done before the rule change.
My van has recently started putting the light on because it is failing on the swirl flap test at startup (bulls
t emissions device).When running, however, everything appears OK and performance is unaffected. So if the light wasn't there you'd be none the wiser.
I've had the EGR valve (more emissions bulls
t, does anything other than this stuff ever regularly cause problems?) sticking before and performance was affected and it smoked like buggery if caned. No engine management light and the MOT centre said they had to run the emission test 5 times before it scraped through.BertBert said:
Does this mean you can't drive a car that has failed with a 'Dangerous' failure away from the MoT station...?
I was talking to my friendly tester about this last week.EVO website said:
Speaking to our sister title Auto Express, Neil Barlow, head of MOT policy at the DVSA, the organisation that regulates the MOT test, explained, ‘we’re changing the wording on the certificate. We’ve done a lot of research with motorists to find out what sort of information helps’. Barlow hopes the changes will encourage motorists to see to the problems in order to avoid facing punitive action outlined in the Road Traffic Act, which states that: ‘A dangerous item means that a vehicle should not be driven away from the garage,’ ‘driving a vehicle in a dangerous condition is a criminal offence.’
His view was that at present, if he thinks a car is dangerous that will be clearly marked on the fail. Most customers will still drive it away. Nothing will change. The piece of paper will say that in the testers view the car is dangerous to drive on the road and most customers will jump in and drive it home..
grumpy52 said:
Getting close to the German standard for MOT or their equivalent, but they do test your brake fluid .
The end of the " such and such light is on but doesn't effect the running "
The manufacturer declared emissions requirement might frighten a few ! Especially the mapped and Barried crowd .
What do you mean by mapped and barried?The end of the " such and such light is on but doesn't effect the running "
The manufacturer declared emissions requirement might frighten a few ! Especially the mapped and Barried crowd .
cmaguire said:
funkyrobot said:
My wife's trusty old 2003 petrol Polo has had the EML on for ages now. Its been in the garage for it, they said don't bother with it because of the value of the car. It also passed the last two mot tests with no emission issues, despite it being on.
Her car will be a failure after May then. I guess we need to get the mot done before the rule change.
This part is idiotic. Her car will be a failure after May then. I guess we need to get the mot done before the rule change.
My van has recently started putting the light on because it is failing on the swirl flap test at startup (bulls
t emissions device).When running, however, everything appears OK and performance is unaffected. So if the light wasn't there you'd be none the wiser.
I've had the EGR valve (more emissions bulls
t, does anything other than this stuff ever regularly cause problems?) sticking before and performance was affected and it smoked like buggery if caned. No engine management light and the MOT centre said they had to run the emission test 5 times before it scraped through.I think we'll get the next mot done early in May before the new rules kick in.
funkyrobot said:
hairyben said:
98elise said:
Mr Tidy said:
HazzaCrawf said:
EML is now a fail, as is “contaminated” brake fluid
That's a bit of a worry - is EML a failure on amber, or only on red?I have a car that throws up an amber EML from time to time for cats, but passes emissions tests every time regardless!
Her car will be a failure after May then. I guess we need to get the mot done before the rule change.
Turn the lights off, get the MOT and carry on until next year - which makes me think it's all a load of b
s!Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff