All pre-1960 cars to no longer need an MOT - a good thing?

[classictyres]

The government announced today that all pre-1960 cars are due to be MOT exempt.

Roads Minister Mike Penning said: 'We are committed to cutting out red tape which costs motorists money without providing significant overall benefits. Owners of classic cars and motorbikes tend to be enthusiasts who maintain their vehicles well - they don't need to be told to look after them, they're out there in all weathers checking the condition of the engine, tyres and bodywork. Owners of classic vehicles will still be legally required to ensure that they are safe and in a proper condition to be on the road but scrapping the MoT test for these vehicles will save motorists money.'

So whilst it is true that this will cut out red tape for many classics owners - is this a good thing?

We supply lots of customers who only change their tyres when they fail the MOT - and the tyres they take off are often ancient, bald, cracking up or otherwise very dangerous. Is it a good thing that someone could be running around in their daily-driver Morris Minor with the floor hanging out, untested brakes and bald tyres?

There are lots of people who keep their classics in pristine condition - but there are an equal number who always do just enough to keep it on the road, or scrape through the next MOT.

I have to say it sounds very worrying to me - but what do you guys think?

Charlie
Classictyres.com

[Grease Monkey]

It's a very bad decision, leaves the door wide open to unscrouplous persons out to make quick buck.




John Simpson

[rich.]

i dont agree with it, id prefer cheaper fuel & road tax...

[classictyres]

There are quite a few floors that are springing to mind..

What about all those dodgy cars we see with a quick respray to make them shiny but dangerous mechanicals below?

What are the repercussions of an increase in accidents involving untested classics for the whole of the hobby?

How will insurance companies have confidence in insuring untested vehicles - and will it be very easy for them to back out of paying claims?

Maybe a better plan would be for a different type of MOT for earlier vehicles that is more relevant to them.

Charlie
classictyres.com

[arceye]

On the one hand a sensible owner will maintain their car, and as I would do as a minimum drop by a MOT garage and ask for a basic mot type check of the running gear / brakes etc, then I can put anything untoward right without the need to return for re tests etc.

On the other hand, an unscrupulous type may just bodge things or see it as a cheap way to run a wreck and save a few quid, I would hope though that the law would temper this by the prosecution of those using an unfit vehicle. After all an MOT is only valid on the day, it is the drivers responsibility to ensure the car is fit for road use the other 364 days of the year. The up side of the MOT is it catches those who don't, at least once a year.

So, from my point of view it frees things up for us, but I do wonder at the consequences of the actions of a minority who will abuse it. Those people can get round it anyway, and it is surprising how easy it is to get a lenient or outright dodgy MOT if you are determined to do so, and I have even known people who in the past would offer to sell you an MOT from a friends garage without them even seeing the car.

So for those who don't care, they can already get round a lot of the issues of an MOT, currently though this does not reflect on my hobby or useage of classic cars, the worry is it may in the future.

So in an ideal world and from a personal point of view as a responsible owner I like the idea, sadly though we don't live an ideal world so had better keep our fingers crossed it doesn't bite us on the behind. I think I would have preferred to keep the MOT but perhaps a seperate slightly relaxed one more in keeping with our cars than the modern day one.

I guess we will have to wait and see what happens, in the meantime I think we all have a responsibility to make damn sure our cars are kept in bloody good order in order to try and offset any repercussions.

[Martin Evans]

I think it could lead to the assumption, on the part of “Pleb motorists”, that old cars are not safe (If they don’t assume it already – I use the word assume, not think). This assumption would no doubt be helped along by the fact that most peoples’ experience of old cars is as old bangers.

If the government wished to be genuinely friendly towards classic cars (Historic vehicles if you prefer a less contentious term), they would do something about the hideous anomaly, whereby for example, a 1972 MGB gets free road tax but a 1973 one is subject to a punitive rate of road tax. They could do this by one of three means.

1 - Reintroduce rolling tax exemption based on age.

2 - Scrap road tax as a direct tax and transfer the duty to fuel (See below on MOT)

3 - At least extend free tax to the end of Y reg (July 1983), perhaps with a view to review rolling exemption at a later date. I don’t want to turn this into a “What is classic” debate (In my opinion anything is classic once it’s old enough) but my feelings are that relatively fewer cars will survive into preservation, from the post Y reg era (i.e. From 1983 onwards) and such a cut off date (Whilst not ideal) would leave fewer cars out in the cold than does the 1972 cut off.

As to the issue of MOTs, perhaps there would be a case for giving “Historic” vehicles (That share a level playing field) an extended MOT interval of perhaps two or three years or more sensibly, say that they need an MOT every so many miles. Granted this is open to abuse but insurance companies seem to manage to give limited mileage policies based on the integrity of the policy holders. Presumably where vehicles don’t have odometers, some other means of recording usage is used (Perhaps a cycle computer).

If road tax were abolished as a direct tax, the tax disc could be replaced by an MOT disc. It used to be the case that in order to obtain road tax, you needed to provide details of valid insurance. This no longer seems to be such an issue, as the powers that be know who is insured and who is not. However, if in order to obtain an MOT, you had to produce valid insurance, that would cover this aspect.

[classictyres]

Thinking about it, I think it may all be null and void in the long run - as you can still put in for an MOT "on a voluntary basis" and insurance companies are always looking to minimise risk, surely what will happen is that Insurers will refuse to insure without a valid MOT. So all cars will still get tested as before.. but in the meantime the government gets to look like it is being generous!

[alfaSleep]

..... Arthur Daley 'Speciale'

http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?q=1959+h ... 2,s:0,i:76

No Tax or MOT....No, REALLY!!

FleeBay will E..X..P..L..O..D..E

alfaSleep

[johnc]

Ah! should be more careful in reading all recent posts before I put finger to keyboard and avoid duplication. Although I do think the government could have adopted the French arrangement of Cts (MOT) every five years for vehicles registered as classics and not just old

[Minxy]

Well I for one am well cheesed off ....I had mine tested last week (three weeks before it was due). Grrrrrrr