54 replies to this topic

[adam_93rio]

If you read the whole thing it says people will still have to prove their cars are road worthy....

SEND THEM FOR AN MOT THEN!

Our country is run by morons

[classicminidriver]

Does anyone know if you can actualy MOT your pre 60's car by law...or will they turn you away at the MOT station? silly question I know but you never know lol

[Jordie]

you wont get turned away. they may advise you dont need one as such.

[JustSteve]

Does anyone know if you can actualy MOT your pre 60's car by law...or will they turn you away at the MOT station? silly question I know but you never know lol

It says in the link, that you can still have an MOT. It will just be a voluntary thing rather than being mandatory

Stupid idea IMO. Every car should have the same rules. Every car needs to be safe.

[mattbeddow]

There was talk a while ago of MOTs including a new test (well not really a test but not sure what else to call it) that allowed the tester to determine when the next test was due.
This ment that pristine and well maintained cars could be tested 2-3 years rather than every year, maybe longer, and terrible cars would be called back after 3-6 months.
Much better and safer idea in my opinion

[iTomKart]

Just because a car will now be exempt from having to pass an annual MOT it won't be exempt from Construction and Use Regs which apply to every vehilce, every day that you use it, so with new(ish) powers like prohibition notices there is still plenty of opportunity to keep unroadworthy vehicles off the road. If you car is in dangerous condition and with defective brakes, tyres, exhausts, steering etc then the Police or VOSA can still take your car off the road or take you off the road via points on your licence so I don't think we will suddenly see an increase in pre-1960 death-traps on our streets or an increase in accidents caused by such vehicles.

But how are VOSA etc going to pull every pre '60 car off the road? Its just not gonna happen man, there might not be an increase with deaths etc but its a daft rule you gotta admit!

They obviously won't have to pull every pre '60 car off the road. Just because they don't have to go through an MOT doesn't mean that people with show-winning classics will suddenly stop caring about them and let them rot away

[classicminidriver]

They obviously won't have to pull every pre '60 car off the road. Just because they don't have to go through an MOT doesn't mean that people with show-winning classics will suddenly stop caring about them and let them rot away

Point taken, but there will be people running a classic car on a budget and simply run it into the ground!

[brum,brum,mike]

working in a garage specialising in vintage and classic cars this is bad news i think.

One point, is the sales will drop, obviously, and the other point is every other mot of vintage cars we do they fail. King pins, fuel leaks, brakes, tyres ready to explode, and the main one rust. I think alot of these cars will be dangerous.

As shifty says, the begining of the end.

[Mini Mad Drakeley]

i was talking to a couple people at a car restoration course im doing who own a couple of pre 60 cars, even they agreed it was a bad idea and it might be better to be every 2 or 3 years due to most pre60 cars not being used on a regular basis

[SA MINI]

Wow this idea is stupid. I've met many of elderly chaps with really nice unrestored cars, purely because theve not used them much.
the only reason they have noticed a problem was when the mot tester pointed it out to them.
This will be very unsafe. I do see where they are coming from as many old cars are well maintained & looked after by the owners & there likely to notice a problem if one occurs but they cannot assume everyone will

[oli8925]

They obviously won't have to pull every pre '60 car off the road. Just because they don't have to go through an MOT doesn't mean that people with show-winning classics will suddenly stop caring about them and let them rot away

You're completely missing the point everyone's making. If you're the type of person that cares about your classic being solid and in good road worthy condition, then MOT or not, you're not going change. You're right there. But there are people that don't care about their cars condition now, with MOTs. They'll do anything to bodge their way onto the road and not give a stuff if it's dangerous or whose life they put at risk. Take a look at the number of people who'll chop springs willy nilly and do powerful engine transplants using stock running gear and brakes, they either have no idea of the dangers of what they're doing or they don't care. Taking away MOTs is just going to make life easier for them. They'll pick up a proper bag of nails, barely weld it up to appalling standards and give it just about enough mechanical attention to make sure it can accelerate and that's it. The only saving grace there is the outright cost of pre-60 cars which is high at the moment and only going to get higher from now on. But some examples are still affordable, even more so if you save £200+ a year on tax and MOT. I just can't see the plus points of taking away an MOT test, classics already have much more relaxed rules.

As someone else said, I choose to take my cars to an MOT centre that I know will pick up the little things and fail my car if needs be. That way I know my car is as safe as I can knowledgeably have it. Not everyone is like that, especially in the world of classics. In fact Minis are probably the most bodged cars in history. It's not good.

Edited by oli8925, 21 May 2012 - 10:03 PM.

[Dan]

why make this the law for pre 1960 cars?.......

The MOT was introduced in 1960, cars designed and built before it was even conceived were built without mandatory testing in mind (nomatter who now owns them, or how much money they have). When it was introduced it was made retrospective and so made to apply to all cars, which it could be argued wasn't really legal in the first place, but it was really a very basic test involving a lot of visual inspection and 'Do the brakes work?' and so forth. Even now a pre-1960 car doesn't have a huge amount of testing performed compared with a newer model. The basic technology in a lot of them is quite capable of going from being perfectly serviceable to very lethal indeed in far less than a year. As mentioned above kingpins come up often, but kingpins and especially trunions will wear out in very little time if not regularly lubricated and adjusted. So is it even worth doing at all?

[ANON]

some of you really need to get a grip!!

[zengrapefruit]

I'm surprised no-one's mentioned it: an MOT does not guarantee that a car is safe to drive. Nor does it mean that the driver is fit to be behind the wheel.

That said, I do think it's a daft idea.

[craig 1010cc]

1960 was chosen to comply to european ruling on historic vehicle testing (which is pre 1960). to get aexempt MOT, your car will have to have had an MOT this year, so no pulling a wreck out a barn and insuring it and hoping for the best