Vehicles over 40 years old are to be exempted from MOT
Discussion
It puts the responsibility on the owner to insure the car is roadworthy.
At the moment if i took one of my cars out and there was a mechanical failure that caused a fatality there would be an investigation into the condition of the car,at present the MOT is proof that on that day and time the car is safe to drive and in a way is a bench mark as to the condition of the car in that period.
We all have a responsibility to insure our cars are always safe on the road not just on the day of the MOT.
In a way an MOT is getting a bit pointless and maybe there could be specialist Classic garages that will give classic cars certificates of safety and condition.
Just a thought.
Maybe there is a business opportunity there for someone.
Andrew
At the moment if i took one of my cars out and there was a mechanical failure that caused a fatality there would be an investigation into the condition of the car,at present the MOT is proof that on that day and time the car is safe to drive and in a way is a bench mark as to the condition of the car in that period.
We all have a responsibility to insure our cars are always safe on the road not just on the day of the MOT.
In a way an MOT is getting a bit pointless and maybe there could be specialist Classic garages that will give classic cars certificates of safety and condition.
Just a thought.
Maybe there is a business opportunity there for someone.
Andrew
Some owners of classic cars don't even know what it looks like under their car.
As for checking over for safety they don't know their brass from their oboe.
I like the idea of an adapted technical check done by someone with some knowledge of classic cars. Not someone with a garage trying to drum up business and pull wool over your eyes.
Alan
As for checking over for safety they don't know their brass from their oboe.
I like the idea of an adapted technical check done by someone with some knowledge of classic cars. Not someone with a garage trying to drum up business and pull wool over your eyes.
Alan
The moment there’s a paid ‘technical check’ someone becomes liable for it so it would generate its own beaurocracy and might as well be an mot.
For me it’s handy not having to have a test each year with the time and resulting faff if there’s something minor to be done, but tbh as I do stuff needed it’s all too easy to plan to do the brake pipes ‘tomorrow’ and then forget about it for another year.
The MOT is part aimed at prevention of faults, a no-MOT system makes it much more a case of fixing a fault after it happens so that’s not good.
For me it’s handy not having to have a test each year with the time and resulting faff if there’s something minor to be done, but tbh as I do stuff needed it’s all too easy to plan to do the brake pipes ‘tomorrow’ and then forget about it for another year.
The MOT is part aimed at prevention of faults, a no-MOT system makes it much more a case of fixing a fault after it happens so that’s not good.
TVRMs said:
TwinKam said:
Who in their right mind can object to another pair of eyes checking over their car, particularly from a safety point of view?
I know that there are MoT testers and MoT testers, but you can choose who you go to...
I think this decision, like the one before it, was made on the misguided belief that people with old cars cherish them and wouldn't dream of driving them unless they were 100%; I believe that ALL vehicles that share the road with me and my loved ones should have a meaningful annual safety certification... including trailers. caravans, bicycles.... horses (actually, their carriages
)
There are other random exemptions too... recovery trucks! wtf is that about?! No, this is a retrograde step.
How do you feel about the drivers or operators of the vehicles you list being checked at least once beyond eyesight between passing their test and passing away?I know that there are MoT testers and MoT testers, but you can choose who you go to...
I think this decision, like the one before it, was made on the misguided belief that people with old cars cherish them and wouldn't dream of driving them unless they were 100%; I believe that ALL vehicles that share the road with me and my loved ones should have a meaningful annual safety certification... including trailers. caravans, bicycles.... horses (actually, their carriages
)There are other random exemptions too... recovery trucks! wtf is that about?! No, this is a retrograde step.
Edited by TVRMs on Saturday 30th September 21:40
So I would propose that we all should be assessed say every 10 years, much in the style of the current test. Maybe that should become more frequent over a certain age (70?). An eyesight check, a knowledge and a hazard awareness test, followed by an accompanied half hour drive. For say a £100 fee and an hour of your time, it's a small price to pay for the benefits in safety and general driving standards I think it would bring.
Anyone else seen the recent '100 yr old drivers' TV programs? Terrifying!
Sorry, rant over, and a bit off topic, but you did ask
TwinKam said:
Good point! It's a privilege to be allowed to drive, not a right. It's one of the few things we do where we get no corrective training (unless we transgress) and most drivers can't accept critique, least of all from tbeir spouses! As I understand it, even eyesight is 'self certificated' for the over 70s.
So I would propose that we all should be assessed say every 10 years, much in the style of the current test. Maybe that should become more frequent over a certain age (70?). An eyesight check, a knowledge and a hazard awareness test, followed by an accompanied half hour drive. For say a £100 fee and an hour of your time, it's a small price to pay for the benefits in safety and general driving standards I think it would bring.
Anyone else seen the recent '100 yr old drivers' TV programs? Terrifying!
Sorry, rant over, and a bit off topic, but you did ask
So I would propose that we all should be assessed say every 10 years, much in the style of the current test. Maybe that should become more frequent over a certain age (70?). An eyesight check, a knowledge and a hazard awareness test, followed by an accompanied half hour drive. For say a £100 fee and an hour of your time, it's a small price to pay for the benefits in safety and general driving standards I think it would bring.
Anyone else seen the recent '100 yr old drivers' TV programs? Terrifying!
Sorry, rant over, and a bit off topic, but you did ask
Didn't see that one,but saw one with a bunch of younger drivers,that was pretty terrifying,will that do.
pete.reeve said:
Why not take it for pre mot or mot. Unless you to want save money. And it will help with the resale value.
Whats £50 for a car that's worth £18 to £30 Grand...
Maybe I am being dense
Pete
No Peter your correct however as the years have gone by the MOT seems to be less relevant to older cars not sure what the answer is.Whats £50 for a car that's worth £18 to £30 Grand...
Maybe I am being dense
Pete
Edited by pete.reeve on Sunday 1st October 18:44
A failure on a washer bottle pump not sending water to the windscreen or the headlights that hardly ever get used being slightly out all seems silly when the state of more important things get missed.
Andrew
Gassing Station | TVR Classics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff