RE: Prior Convictions: MOT rule changes
Discussion
This is a really interesting one. I have a 1974 260z sat in my garage that was imported from the states, I've not yet registered it in the UK but all fees etc have been paid. The lights are converted so technically it's ready to go on the road. Where do I stand with this? Is it a case of register and off we go or will this still need to go through the proper channels. I guess it's really just a hypothetical scenario as I personally believe that the MOT is still a necessary part of a vehicle going on to the road.
Yes unless you live in the Part of the UK that is Northern Ireland in which case the 40 year rule does not apply and all cars regardless of age have to go through the same stringent new rules in designated Government MOT only test centres by testers who jump straight out of a 4 year old car into a 40 year old car expecting it to perform to the same exact standards as the 4 year old car with no room at all for age.
I should add that I think ALL vehicles should be put through some form of MOT even if its every 2 years.
But I also think every driver should be put through a re-test every 5 years.
I should add that I think ALL vehicles should be put through some form of MOT even if its every 2 years.
But I also think every driver should be put through a re-test every 5 years.
Edited by Maranellohouse on Friday 18th May 13:24
MrGeoff said:
This is a really interesting one. I have a 1974 260z sat in my garage that was imported from the states, I've not yet registered it in the UK but all fees etc have been paid. The lights are converted so technically it's ready to go on the road. Where do I stand with this? Is it a case of register and off we go or will this still need to go through the proper channels. I guess it's really just a hypothetical scenario as I personally believe that the MOT is still a necessary part of a vehicle going on to the road.
That is interesting, I'm in exactly the same position, I've got a '74 260z from California that I'm restoring.As far as I'm aware, it's just a case of registering it with the DVLA now, no MOT required, much the same as pre 1960 vehicles. However I will be carrying out a voluntary safety check, once it's ready.
No inspections in NJ, USA - recent cars have a bi-annual emissions test (five minutes), older cars without a OBD thingy don't need it. No inspections for motorbikes at all. I still think it's bizarre having been here 18 years, as I still have to have my UK cars MOT'd even though I only do a handful of miles in them. It still shocks me when I see old Volvo 145's rattling along with a few flakes of rust for sills.
Still the MOT is a just a test of a car that day. Back in the day my old minis would randomly fail at any time - MOT Monday, complete brake master cyl fail Tuesday. I also remember getting away with rotten inner sills because I didn't have seat belts - and the test was for the integrity of the mounting.
Still the MOT is a just a test of a car that day. Back in the day my old minis would randomly fail at any time - MOT Monday, complete brake master cyl fail Tuesday. I also remember getting away with rotten inner sills because I didn't have seat belts - and the test was for the integrity of the mounting.
i run a classic land rover and yes what it needs is what it gets it costs more to keep on road than the other one if it breaks down i can get it going my other car i cant because it needs to be plugged in to find the fault so in answer to it should have an mot because off its age it doesnt
It's a stupid move.
The reason as others have mentioned it because the young MOT testers don't know how to test older cars.
Instead of training them properly, to avoid hassle from complaints, they have exempted them
However most Traders will still get them MOT as it gives customers some comfort and helps the Trader prove they have taken reasonable steps to ensure the vehicle is roadworthy
The reason as others have mentioned it because the young MOT testers don't know how to test older cars.
Instead of training them properly, to avoid hassle from complaints, they have exempted them
However most Traders will still get them MOT as it gives customers some comfort and helps the Trader prove they have taken reasonable steps to ensure the vehicle is roadworthy
Cable said:
MrGeoff said:
This is a really interesting one. I have a 1974 260z sat in my garage that was imported from the states, I've not yet registered it in the UK but all fees etc have been paid. The lights are converted so technically it's ready to go on the road. Where do I stand with this? Is it a case of register and off we go or will this still need to go through the proper channels. I guess it's really just a hypothetical scenario as I personally believe that the MOT is still a necessary part of a vehicle going on to the road.
That is interesting, I'm in exactly the same position, I've got a '74 260z from California that I'm restoring.As far as I'm aware, it's just a case of registering it with the DVLA now, no MOT required, much the same as pre 1960 vehicles. However I will be carrying out a voluntary safety check, once it's ready.
Living in Wiltshire, particularly at this time of year, tractors with various appendages are a fairly common sight on the road. For all the pedestrian impact and crash regulations, these things can have rows of vast metal spikes sticking out the back and so on. I was only yesterday following one and thinking what an impressively nasty end that would be if my brakes failed or something.
However, in terms of numbers and the risk of an accident it's simply not practical to somehow make them 'safe'. I would guess the same logic would apply to classic cars. The latest regs simply do not and cannot apply, but the chance of one being an incident are presumably statistically pretty darn low.
However, in terms of numbers and the risk of an accident it's simply not practical to somehow make them 'safe'. I would guess the same logic would apply to classic cars. The latest regs simply do not and cannot apply, but the chance of one being an incident are presumably statistically pretty darn low.
ukaskew said:
Living in Wiltshire, particularly at this time of year, tractors with various appendages are a fairly common sight on the road. For all the pedestrian impact and crash regulations, these things can have rows of vast metal spikes sticking out the back and so on. I was only yesterday following one and thinking what an impressively nasty end that would be if my brakes failed or something.
However, in terms of numbers and the risk of an accident it's simply not practical to somehow make them 'safe'. I would guess the same logic would apply to classic cars. The latest regs simply do not and cannot apply, but the chance of one being an incident are presumably statistically pretty darn low.
I think if you look at the numbers and the miles that Tractors cover on the road, compared to Classic cars it really isn't comparable.However, in terms of numbers and the risk of an accident it's simply not practical to somehow make them 'safe'. I would guess the same logic would apply to classic cars. The latest regs simply do not and cannot apply, but the chance of one being an incident are presumably statistically pretty darn low.
No one is asking / expecting Classics to meet current regs, but they should meet the regs that were in force at the time.
In the American States were there is no annual check you see all sorts of monstrosities held together with baling twine and hope.
V8RX7 said:
I think if you look at the numbers and the miles that Tractors cover on the road, compared to Classic cars it really isn't comparable.
No one is asking / expecting Classics to meet current regs, but they should meet the regs that were in force at the time.
In the American States were there is no annual check you see all sorts of monstrosities held together with baling twine and hope.
Tractors and similar vehicles like excavators and telehandlers cover a huge road mileage these days, it's quite usual for a tractor to do as much road work as field work, especially on harvest. They're also much quicker with most modern tractors capable of nearly 40mph and can easily travel 20 or 30 miles from their base as a result. No one is asking / expecting Classics to meet current regs, but they should meet the regs that were in force at the time.
In the American States were there is no annual check you see all sorts of monstrosities held together with baling twine and hope.
Classic cars will still have to meet roadworthiness standards in order to be insured and pass roadside inspections.
uk66fastback said:
Cable said:
MrGeoff said:
This is a really interesting one. I have a 1974 260z sat in my garage that was imported from the states, I've not yet registered it in the UK but all fees etc have been paid. The lights are converted so technically it's ready to go on the road. Where do I stand with this? Is it a case of register and off we go or will this still need to go through the proper channels. I guess it's really just a hypothetical scenario as I personally believe that the MOT is still a necessary part of a vehicle going on to the road.
That is interesting, I'm in exactly the same position, I've got a '74 260z from California that I'm restoring.As far as I'm aware, it's just a case of registering it with the DVLA now, no MOT required, much the same as pre 1960 vehicles. However I will be carrying out a voluntary safety check, once it's ready.
V8RX7 said:
I think if you look at the numbers and the miles that Tractors cover on the road, compared to Classic cars it really isn't comparable.
i think a lot of people have a very limited understanding of modern agricultural practice and therefore how far the average tractor travels on the road each week - especially the newer bigger machines that meet the ' fast tractor' specifications ( it;s not just Fastracs, and unimogs that do now, lots of tractor shaped tractors do - notice how many farm trailers are now braked/ suspended with fully functioning lights ... )Still not sure it answers the import question ...
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/governmen...
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/governmen...
QuattroDave said:
What they should have done is removed the RFL for cars over 40 years old and keep MOT's, like the rolling 25 year old scheme they used to have until 1998 when Labour saw fit to scrap it as it was deemed that too many people were driving older, more polluting cars to avoid the RFL.
They have. Vehicles made before 1 January 1978 are tax exempt from 1 April 2018.uk66fastback said:
Still not sure it answers the import question ...
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/governmen...
Unregistered cars will still need to pass an MOT in order to obtain a registration.https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/governmen...
The last paragraph in your linked document states that the changes only relate to the annual testing of vehicles. There have been no explicit changes to the registration requirements.
The T Boy said:
uk66fastback said:
Still not sure it answers the import question ...
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/governmen...
Unregistered cars will still need to pass an MOT in order to obtain a registration.https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/governmen...
The last paragraph in your linked document states that the changes only relate to the annual testing of vehicles. There have been no explicit changes to the registration requirements.
Due to the nature of my work I often get called upon to work on old cars and consequently I know quite a few owners.
When the 1960 rule came in all bar one said that they would still MOT their car/cars, or at least get the local garage to check it/them over.
60% haven't been to a garage since, unless something broke, and are owned by people that couldn't set a set of points.
The worst case is one where he has forbidden his wife from driving their Moggy because he says its unsafe for her as she can't press
the brake sufficiently to slow the car down, and she's a big ol' gal. I didn't dare mention emergency stops.
On the low milage,
IMHO cars that run infrequently are far more likely to have parts seize up, brakes etc, and this can be as dangerous as parts wearing out.
Paul G
When the 1960 rule came in all bar one said that they would still MOT their car/cars, or at least get the local garage to check it/them over.
60% haven't been to a garage since, unless something broke, and are owned by people that couldn't set a set of points.
The worst case is one where he has forbidden his wife from driving their Moggy because he says its unsafe for her as she can't press
the brake sufficiently to slow the car down, and she's a big ol' gal. I didn't dare mention emergency stops.
On the low milage,
IMHO cars that run infrequently are far more likely to have parts seize up, brakes etc, and this can be as dangerous as parts wearing out.
Paul G
finishing touch said:
The worst case is one where he has forbidden his wife from driving their Moggy because he says its unsafe for her as she can't press the brake sufficiently to slow the car down, and she's a big ol' gal. I didn't dare mention emergency stops.
Paul G
Quite what this to do with the 40yo MoT rule is beyond me! Sounds like it’s her that needs it!Paul G
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff