RE: MoTs scrapped for pre-1960 cars

RE: MoTs scrapped for pre-1960 cars

Author
Discussion

Mermaid

21,492 posts

170 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
iain014 said:
To be honest it would be much more preferable to amend the tax exemption rule to a rolling 40 year basis given that all 1973 cars will be 40 years old from 1st Jan.

That would actually be useful though, hence it wont happen.
+ 1, also an MOT every 2 years is better.

sjp63

1,996 posts

271 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
is this April fools?

As a classic car owner myself (1966), I cant see why they would do this. At least the MoT gave you an idea of the cars condition once a year. Not all classic owners work on their own cars "in all weather". Who are the govt trying to impress?

bizarre!

Chunkychucky

5,942 posts

168 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
I hope this goes ahead, looking forward to using my Austin A35 historic touring car on the road when it's done..

MGGSE

4 posts

193 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
I own a pre 1960 car and use a 1969 car as my daily driver.

This is a bad idea, its the first move towards stopping us using our old cars freely.

I met a chap from Australia recently and he has his 1966 Austin on a show plates, which means he can only go back forth to old car events in it and is not able to use it as transport. At the moment in Australia that is his choice, he can pay more and get the normal plates, but its a portent of things to come.

Any right thinking old car enthusiast should oppose this. The first time anyone is injured in an incident involving an old car the media will rip our hobby to bits, whether the injury is anything to do with the old car's road-worthiness or not.

John


andymadmak

14,483 posts

269 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
jamespink said:
I can see the insurance report now. MOT present... No... Fine tooth comb inspection of the post prang pre '60 car in question to ascertain on how many counts the insurance company can justify not paying out! "We regret to inform you we will not cover your or the third parties claim as (insert any MOT fail point here) was defective. The current MOT test sets a standard of road-worthiness that is not questioned currently. Just watch the insurers revoke £5000 claims on a £100 per year policy "because they can". Good plan!
You do realise that this is the case already? In a big enough prang, if the car is deemed not road worthy for some reason (bald tyres, defective brakes etc?) then the insurance company can (and does) wriggle!
An MOT means nothing other than that the car was roadworthy on the day of inspection! It is not a guarantee that the car will remain roadworthy for the next 12 months.

School boy

1,006 posts

210 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
You could still get done if the car is not roadworthy by the Police if they ever see you so it's not completely pointless. Those who go and get a shed and use this as a loophole are probably those that would not bother to MOT their car anyway. There are probably as many pre 1960 cars owned by idiots as there are tractors and other vehicles that are MOT exempt anyway so I doubt there will be a wave of accidents from this.

carinaman

21,224 posts

171 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
This makes no sense whatsoever.

What is there to be gained by more accidents, more injuries and fatalities on our roads that such a move may cause?

austin

1,274 posts

202 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
I'm not sure about the restricted use concerns, it hasn't happened since the tax has been free so not sure that it will start now.

As for the cut off date, I believe it is to bring it into line with rule about pre 1960 commercial vehicles not needing an MOT either.

Redmax

752 posts

212 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
This is madness.

marshalla

15,902 posts

200 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
I think this article presents an interesting take on the situation - not least about the way to voting happened (or rather, didn't) : http://www.classicsmonthly.com/2012/05/21/mot-exem...

M40RKC

2 posts

172 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
Seams an odd move! This could be where insurance company's now come into their own tho, they would be perfectly within their right to refuse to insure someones pre 60 car that doesn't carry a valid mot. So no mot = uninsured and if your uninsured then I'm sure Robbie the bobbie would happily send you an invite to the 6 points and a fine party!

neilr

1,512 posts

262 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
Can anyone honestly see Classic Car Insurance policies (or regular ones for that matter) still being available to those cars that don't have a valid MOT? I think it's unlikely isn't it.

It's the 'Owners of pre 1960s vehicles will still have to prove they're in a road worthy condition...." that is the worrying part. How? By whom? Will that be a sanctioned body of testers? If so why not just keep the current MOT arrangement going?

In the case of you being involved in an an accident will that mean policeman plod decides if you're car as road worthy? Thats a worrying prospect isn't it, as quite frankly I wouldn't trust your average copper to make toast without fking it up.

Strange move IMO.




Aids0G

492 posts

148 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
FWDRacer said:
This thread proves that PH is a healthy barometer of oppinion.

You can't argue with the logic tho' in many older cars being "very" roadworthy - witness the beards checking the washer bottle levels on their MG's on a Sunday morning.
We dont all have beards i struggle to grow one haha!

Then again i wouldnt describe my mg as 'very roadworthy' it dosent go backwards hmmm really should look at that!!

AG

windy1

393 posts

250 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
You still have to comply with the C&U regs if using on the road (legal tyres, working lights etc)
Owners of these types of cars need to know how they work to operate them, so having a mechanical understanding of their vehicles from a maintenance perspective is a necessity.
I can't see what all the fuss is about.

marshalla

15,902 posts

200 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
<cynic>
Could it be that this move has been introduced because there just aren't enough MOT testers around with sufficient knowledge of older vehicles to be able to test them properly ?
</cynic>

windy1

393 posts

250 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
And I suspect most need the assistance of the owners to advise - e.g. axle hasn't got a diff so don't you dare put it on the rollers or you'll break it please.

jagracer

8,248 posts

235 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
marshalla said:
<cynic>
Could it be that this move has been introduced because there just aren't enough MOT testers around with sufficient knowledge of older vehicles to be able to test them properly ?
</cynic>
An MOT test is an MOT test, age is immeterial as there's different regs for different ages of cars. As someone who has a reasonable knowledge of older cars I tend to be more lenient with classics with some items so I can see where this idea is coming from. Things like tyre condition etc. will still be picked up by VOSA and BIB on roadside checks.

KM666

1,757 posts

182 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
andymadmak said:
KM666 said:
I'm off down the scrappy later see if I cant find something pre 1960. Shove a V8 in it, remove the brakes and fit racing slicks... When I plough into a bus queue of schoolchildren it'll be fine because the car was legal afterall.
FFS NO IT WOULD NOT BE LEGAL!!!!!!!!!!!!

You still have a legal responsibility to ensure the car is fit for the road. Just like, if your brake lamps failed the day after your MOT on a 5 year old car you would be legally responsible for getting them working again!
Jeez!
And who is qualified to perform a roadside assessment of the roadworthyness of a car? Policemen are not MOT testers or mechanics. Besides what are the chances of coming across a policecar these days?

Re-windy1 I thought there was room for allowence for period details, i.e. period tyres, brakes, etc. I wouldnt classify 1960s tyre technology as roadworthy myself.



Edited by KM666 on Monday 21st May 17:57

jagracer

8,248 posts

235 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
KM666 said:
And who is qualified to perform a roadside assessment of the roadworthyness of a car? Policemen are not MOT testers or mechanics.
Any VOSA examiner and quite a lot of BiB are qualified.

SuperHangOn

3,486 posts

152 months

Monday 21st May 2012
quotequote all
Odd but irrelevant.