40+ year old cars exempt from MOT?
Discussion
GoodOlBoy said:
(part quote)
Let's see how many of the 120,00 plus classic car MOT failures last year, voluntarily submit their cars next year. I'm guessing not many.
I'll pass on the debate about owners being qualified to maintain their own vehicles because there's no right or wrong answer; some can, some can't, some do, some don't. We'll never change that, least of all on an internet forum.Let's see how many of the 120,00 plus classic car MOT failures last year, voluntarily submit their cars next year. I'm guessing not many.
But your comment about the number of classics failing the MoT last year has caught me because that's an astonishing number and goes against what I currently understand.
From what I have read, the government says that around 293,000 more vehicles (1% total UK) will now be exempt as well as the 197,000 pre-1960 cars. Now if 120,000 are failing MoT's then that's over 40% failure rate on the 2017 tested classics (120k/293k) which isn't only stunning but higher than the overall figures.
My understanding was that the exemption was based on good experience from the pre-1960 exemption - ie no-one getting pulled for unroadworthy cars/increased accidents/etc.and secondly the claim that the newly exempted category generally had a significantly higher pass rate than the other 99% of UK cars.
Your figures not only dispute the latter fact but blow it out of the water. Where's the 120,000 failure data from ?
Excerpt from a Government consultation document:-
lassic and historic vehicles are often very well maintained by their owners and have a much lower accident and MOT failure rate than newer cars. The current requirement for these vehicles to undergo an MOT test goes over and above the obligations set out in European legislation. As part of the government’s commitment to cutting unnecessary red tape, today’s proposals would exempt private vehicles manufactured before 1960 from the MOT test, reducing costs for owners.
Mike Penning said:
We are committed to reducing regulation which places a financial burden on motorists without providing significant overall benefits. Owners of classic cars and motorbikes are enthusiasts who maintain their vehicles well - they don’t need to be told to look after them, they’re out there every weekend checking the condition of the engine, tyres and bodywork.
That is why I am today putting forward proposals to scrap the MOT test for these vehicles - this will result in savings for the government and for motorists.
Many of the features of the modern MOT test are not suitable for testing classic vehicles built more than 50 years ago. However, owners of classic vehicles will still be legally required to ensure that their cars are safe and in a proper condition to be on the road
lassic and historic vehicles are often very well maintained by their owners and have a much lower accident and MOT failure rate than newer cars. The current requirement for these vehicles to undergo an MOT test goes over and above the obligations set out in European legislation. As part of the government’s commitment to cutting unnecessary red tape, today’s proposals would exempt private vehicles manufactured before 1960 from the MOT test, reducing costs for owners.
Mike Penning said:
We are committed to reducing regulation which places a financial burden on motorists without providing significant overall benefits. Owners of classic cars and motorbikes are enthusiasts who maintain their vehicles well - they don’t need to be told to look after them, they’re out there every weekend checking the condition of the engine, tyres and bodywork.
That is why I am today putting forward proposals to scrap the MOT test for these vehicles - this will result in savings for the government and for motorists.
Many of the features of the modern MOT test are not suitable for testing classic vehicles built more than 50 years ago. However, owners of classic vehicles will still be legally required to ensure that their cars are safe and in a proper condition to be on the road
Yes Lowdrag that's what the consultation paper said and I have made a couple of points when the time was right.
One is that to judge the usefulness of the test by the failure rate is not helpful.
The other is that for many years the MoT Rule Book has had sections defining requirements for older cars with suitable applicability dates. e.g. there is no need for four-wheel brakes pre-1920 and the required "efficiency" figures changed at 1915 (I think it was).
It had always been the intention that the test would reflect the Construction and Use Regulations current when the car was made - apart from lighting where two tail-lamps were needed and dip-and-switch headlamps were not allowed.
One is that to judge the usefulness of the test by the failure rate is not helpful.
The other is that for many years the MoT Rule Book has had sections defining requirements for older cars with suitable applicability dates. e.g. there is no need for four-wheel brakes pre-1920 and the required "efficiency" figures changed at 1915 (I think it was).
It had always been the intention that the test would reflect the Construction and Use Regulations current when the car was made - apart from lighting where two tail-lamps were needed and dip-and-switch headlamps were not allowed.
lowdrag said:
Excerpt from a Government consultation document:-
lassic and historic vehicles are often very well maintained by their owners and have a much lower accident and MOT failure rate than newer cars. The current requirement for these vehicles to undergo an MOT test goes over and above the obligations set out in European legislation. As part of the government’s commitment to cutting unnecessary red tape, today’s proposals would exempt private vehicles manufactured before 1960 from the MOT test, reducing costs for owners.
Mike Penning said:
We are committed to reducing regulation which places a financial burden on motorists without providing significant overall benefits. Owners of classic cars and motorbikes are enthusiasts who maintain their vehicles well - they don’t need to be told to look after them, they’re out there every weekend checking the condition of the engine, tyres and bodywork.
That is why I am today putting forward proposals to scrap the MOT test for these vehicles - this will result in savings for the government and for motorists.
Many of the features of the modern MOT test are not suitable for testing classic vehicles built more than 50 years ago. However, owners of classic vehicles will still be legally required to ensure that their cars are safe and in a proper condition to be on the road
That's all from the consultation prior to the 2012 pre-60 blanket exemption.lassic and historic vehicles are often very well maintained by their owners and have a much lower accident and MOT failure rate than newer cars. The current requirement for these vehicles to undergo an MOT test goes over and above the obligations set out in European legislation. As part of the government’s commitment to cutting unnecessary red tape, today’s proposals would exempt private vehicles manufactured before 1960 from the MOT test, reducing costs for owners.
Mike Penning said:
We are committed to reducing regulation which places a financial burden on motorists without providing significant overall benefits. Owners of classic cars and motorbikes are enthusiasts who maintain their vehicles well - they don’t need to be told to look after them, they’re out there every weekend checking the condition of the engine, tyres and bodywork.
That is why I am today putting forward proposals to scrap the MOT test for these vehicles - this will result in savings for the government and for motorists.
Many of the features of the modern MOT test are not suitable for testing classic vehicles built more than 50 years ago. However, owners of classic vehicles will still be legally required to ensure that their cars are safe and in a proper condition to be on the road
The MOT has always said "Not all of this test is applicable to all vehicles" with "not applicable before" dates across a huge swathe of the test.
b2hbm said:
I'll pass on the debate about owners being qualified to maintain their own vehicles because there's no right or wrong answer; some can, some can't, some do, some don't. We'll never change that, least of all on an internet forum.
From what I have read, the government says that around 293,000 more vehicles (1% total UK) will now be exempt as well as the 197,000 pre-1960 cars. Now if 120,000 are failing MoT's then that's over 40% failure rate on the 2017 tested classics (120k/293k) which isn't only stunning but higher than the overall figures.
Your figures not only dispute the latter fact but blow it out of the water. Where's the 120,000 failure data from ?
We can at least agree that not all classic car owners are qualified, have the knowledge, facilities etc. which already makes a blanket exemption a poor idea.From what I have read, the government says that around 293,000 more vehicles (1% total UK) will now be exempt as well as the 197,000 pre-1960 cars. Now if 120,000 are failing MoT's then that's over 40% failure rate on the 2017 tested classics (120k/293k) which isn't only stunning but higher than the overall figures.
Your figures not only dispute the latter fact but blow it out of the water. Where's the 120,000 failure data from ?
Regarding the figures. The total number of cars that will now be exempt according to the government figures is 293k + 197k = 500,000 vehicles exempt.
I've assumed a 25% failure rate which gives 120,000 plus vehicles which would not currently pass an MOT. I have no way of knowing the exact figure but here are a few more common classics for reference.
MGB 33% failure rate. MG (all) 45% failure rate. Ford Escort (all) 46% failure rate. Ford Cortina 27% failure rate. Triumph Stag 26% failure rate. Triumph Spitfire 38% failure rate. Rover P6 25% failure rate. Rover (metro) 37% failure rate. Honda Accord (classic) 35% failure rate. Land Rover (classic) 40% failure rate.
If we were to re-introduce the MOT in five years time I'll wager the overall failure rate would be closer to 50%. In addition more of the failures would be serious as corrosion takes its toll on 1970's cars that rotted well in period and will now remain uninspected for years.
I will also re-iterate that very few of the current crop of MOT failures will be voluntarily resubmitted for MOT this year and even fewer "barn finds" and home restorations will find their way to the MOT stations for an independent check.
GoodOlBoy said:
(part quote)
I've assumed a 25% failure rate which gives 120,000 plus vehicles which would not currently pass an MOT. I have no way of knowing the exact figure but here are a few more common classics for reference.
MGB 33% failure rate. MG (all) 45% failure rate. Ford Escort (all) 46% failure rate. Ford Cortina 27% failure rate. Triumph Stag 26% failure rate. Triumph Spitfire 38% failure rate. Rover P6 25% failure rate. Rover (metro) 37% failure rate. Honda Accord (classic) 35% failure rate. Land Rover (classic) 40% failure rate.
and
I will also re-iterate that very few of the current crop of MOT failures will be voluntarily resubmitted for MOT this year and even fewer "barn finds" and home restorations will find their way to the MOT stations for an independent check.
Thanks for replying, I can see where you're coming from. After my last post I did manage to find a website with lots of data about classic car MoTs with details about the specific failure categories and the overall rates on the MGBs weren't that far away from what you've quoted. I was slightly surprised to see that my cars (Lotus) have an 80+% pass rate which I find rather amazing given how they were regarded back in their day.I've assumed a 25% failure rate which gives 120,000 plus vehicles which would not currently pass an MOT. I have no way of knowing the exact figure but here are a few more common classics for reference.
MGB 33% failure rate. MG (all) 45% failure rate. Ford Escort (all) 46% failure rate. Ford Cortina 27% failure rate. Triumph Stag 26% failure rate. Triumph Spitfire 38% failure rate. Rover P6 25% failure rate. Rover (metro) 37% failure rate. Honda Accord (classic) 35% failure rate. Land Rover (classic) 40% failure rate.
and
I will also re-iterate that very few of the current crop of MOT failures will be voluntarily resubmitted for MOT this year and even fewer "barn finds" and home restorations will find their way to the MOT stations for an independent check.
But then thinking about our own MoT histories, the cars that have tended to fail have been the ones that have been garaged serviced in line with their handbooks, both our "moderns" have chalked up fails over the last 5-6 years. Perhaps I ought to take more of an interest in them.
On your last point I suspect you're right and that is probably the one aspect of the new exemption that I do disagree with. It's almost sad to see folks being happy to register cars which haven't turned a wheel in years and whilst I don't expect a rash of accidents I won't be surprised to see more roadside breakdowns. It would have made more sense to frame the legislation such that any vehicle coming off SORN must have at least a basic inspection before being classified as exempt in future.
V6Pushfit said:
Being able to look up the MOT history on cars for sale will also be a thing of the past so sellers can hide issues and play ignorant.
That may well end up having an effect on values for forthcoming sales - perhaps those who are more likely to be selling a car on after a few years will continue with testing in one form or another, and those who do not will end up with lower values / harder to sell vehicles. V6Pushfit said:
The MOT is the one time the mileage is recorded and a vehicle has an official third party ‘report’. The first MOT after a rebuild is also the time the chassis plate is checked against the V5.
It will be clocking and ringing adventure playground.
Is clocking much of an issue with 40 year old vehicles? Lots of old cars have had engine rebuilds anyway so I'm not sure mileage is something I'd worry about. It will be clocking and ringing adventure playground.
I'm not sure about ringing either, surely you can check a chassis plate to make sure it matches the number on the V5. I know this doesn't apply if the vehicle has been reshelled or has a new chassis, but such a feature is probably a plus point for many owners, unless they're specifically on the look out for a completely original vehicle.
You can still ask a prospective vendor if they're happy to submit a car for MoT even if it's exempt, if they refuse then it may start alarm bells ringing.
droopsnoot said:
V6Pushfit said:
Being able to look up the MOT history on cars for sale will also be a thing of the past so sellers can hide issues and play ignorant.
That may well end up having an effect on values for forthcoming sales - perhaps those who are more likely to be selling a car on after a few years will continue with testing in one form or another, and those who do not will end up with lower values / harder to sell vehicles. warch said:
Is clocking much of an issue with 40 year old vehicles? Lots of old cars have had engine rebuilds anyway so I'm not sure mileage is something I'd worry about.
I'm not sure about ringing either, surely you can check a chassis plate to make sure it matches the number on the V5. I know this doesn't apply if the vehicle has been reshelled or has a new chassis, but such a feature is probably a plus point for many owners, unless they're specifically on the look out for a completely original vehicle.
You can still ask a prospective vendor if they're happy to submit a car for MoT even if it's exempt, if they refuse then it may start alarm bells ringing.
The mot history for mileage gives an excellent view on the pattern of use over the last 10+ years or since a resto etc. There’s a big thread on PH dedicated to trying to stop the sale of V5’s/ chassis plates etc and I doubt they are best pleased by the changes.I'm not sure about ringing either, surely you can check a chassis plate to make sure it matches the number on the V5. I know this doesn't apply if the vehicle has been reshelled or has a new chassis, but such a feature is probably a plus point for many owners, unless they're specifically on the look out for a completely original vehicle.
You can still ask a prospective vendor if they're happy to submit a car for MoT even if it's exempt, if they refuse then it may start alarm bells ringing.
Basically there’s a whole layer of affirmations/reassurances gone so it’s down to the sellers integrity only now.
CAPP0 said:
I just dug out the V5 for a 1977 bike I have, for which I have an official dating certificate, but which was imported and only registered in the U.K. last year.
The front of the V5 says this:
But the details inside say this:
So will this qualify for VHI or not?
Rather disappointingly, I've now received a V11 asking me to PAY for the tax on this and to make sure it has an MOT. The MOT is neither here nor there but I'd really rather exempt it from tax, it only goes out a handful of times a year.The front of the V5 says this:
But the details inside say this:
So will this qualify for VHI or not?
What's the best way to appeal this?
InitialDave said:
What does it say for taxation class?
You probably need to change that.
This, you'll have to change it to "historic" class. If it still shows as PLG then you'll have to pay tax.You probably need to change that.
https://www.gov.uk/historic-vehicles/apply-for-veh...
CAPP0 said:
CAPP0 said:
I just dug out the V5 for a 1977 bike I have, for which I have an official dating certificate, but which was imported and only registered in the U.K. last year.
The front of the V5 says this:
But the details inside say this:
So will this qualify for VHI or not?
Rather disappointingly, I've now received a V11 asking me to PAY for the tax on this and to make sure it has an MOT. The MOT is neither here nor there but I'd really rather exempt it from tax, it only goes out a handful of times a year.The front of the V5 says this:
But the details inside say this:
So will this qualify for VHI or not?
What's the best way to appeal this?
Edit: first para https://www.gov.uk/historic-vehicles/vehicles-exem...
V8 Fettler said:
It should be the date of manufacture, not registration. VMCC might help.
Edit: first para https://www.gov.uk/historic-vehicles/vehicles-exem...
It will be, just need to "activate" the historic status. Wouldn't have been able to do so until April this year is all.Edit: first para https://www.gov.uk/historic-vehicles/vehicles-exem...
If it were an older bike they'd probably have done it when imported.
V8 Fettler said:
CAPP0 said:
CAPP0 said:
I just dug out the V5 for a 1977 bike I have, for which I have an official dating certificate, but which was imported and only registered in the U.K. last year.
The front of the V5 says this:
But the details inside say this:
So will this qualify for VHI or not?
Rather disappointingly, I've now received a V11 asking me to PAY for the tax on this and to make sure it has an MOT. The MOT is neither here nor there but I'd really rather exempt it from tax, it only goes out a handful of times a year.The front of the V5 says this:
But the details inside say this:
So will this qualify for VHI or not?
What's the best way to appeal this?
Edit: first para https://www.gov.uk/historic-vehicles/vehicles-exem...
- I can amend the taxation class to Historic and not pay for tax, as they can see that the bike was manufactured in 1977 and is therefore exempt.
However:
- I can't get an MOT exemption because the bike was first registered in 2017 and despite me having submitted a stamped and sealed original dating certificate from the VJMC, and DVLA exempting it from tax, they can't confirm that the bike is over 40 years old and therefore it needs an MOT.
I know, I know.....
I should point out that this all came from the same person at DVLA, not two different people. There are some arcane documents which I could produce which might exempt me from MOT but they'd probably take far more time, effort and cash to achieve than trotting down to Matey's MOTs once a year.
Happily though, the bike will be exempt in 2057. So perhaps my heirs will take advantage of that.
Madness.
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff