| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Colin McLachlan
United Kingdom
991 Posts |
 Posted - 13/01/2012 : 10:55:19
|
I have seen mention recently in classic car mags that the gummint is considering dropping the requirement for an MOT test for older classics. I'd like to start a thread on this subject, and get the views of the team on this idea.
Personally I have mixed views. On the one hand I'd rather not have the stress each year of worrying whether or not the PA will get through, or perhaps be failed as much because the tester doesn't understand old cars, and the rules pertaining to them. On the other hand, it is reassuring to have a disinterested party give the car a thorough examination on a hoist (something I can't do) each year, and perhaps spot that some critical part is about to fail.
It occurs to me that perhaps a lower level of test could be applied to older cars, much like the way the test was when originally introduced. Or, it could be performed on a mileage rather than annual basis. A test every two years would be another option.
I think we should consider whether a dropping of the MOT for classics could later on lead to a restriction on use being imposed. I also shudder to think what the tabloids would make of a fatal accident involving a classic with no MOT, whether or not the car was roadworthy at the time.
Over to you.
Colin
PA 0613
MG3242
Register No. 2591 |
|
|
mgptype
United Kingdom
709 Posts |
Posted - 13/01/2012 : 11:39:37
|
Talk of scrapping the MOT test has been going on for some time.
I remember hearing about it I think early last year.
I personally would like to see a bi annual test or at every 5,000 miles whichever comes first. I would also welcome the test fee to be reduced by 50% as the test takes half the time of a modern car and test stations are getting money for nothing.
I don't think restrictions will come into it, didn't they say that when they scrapped the road tax.
Also I read somewhere that pre 1960 HGVs are MOT exempt already.
The other concern is how will this effect our insurance.
Fred. |
 |
|
|
David Allison
United Kingdom
665 Posts |
Posted - 13/01/2012 : 11:44:11
|
Personally I think it only fair that all road vehicles should have a ministry of transport test every 12 months - this test is rightfully stringent and thorough.
Although it is the case that some testers lack knowlege of old cars and their failings - all ministry approved inspectors (I used to be one) have to pass a lengthy training program and are picked ont he basis of their qualification as a motor mechanic.
Most time served mechanics have a decent knowlege and a fair degree of common sense - if a guy is telling you that his old car should have an inch of free play in the steering otherwise it doesnt work - then I was always of a mind to take it for a drive and make sure that the guy isnt giving me a line.
Unfortunately testing is only a statement of fact ont he day of the test - you can have a fault appear following the test so I do not think that a test every two years is a very good idea.
Also faults tend to happen on vehicles used less often - caused by deterioration and this is something which is often ignored by owners.
OOh I never thrash it and the crankshaft broke - when another well used car thrashed to within an inch of its life seemingly never breaks.
I honestly think that we should put up with the annual test and work to encourage the ministry of the value of having these old cars in a roadworthy condition - the alternative is that the cars become museum pieces and die a terrible death!
Regards David |
|
|
|
Ian Bowers
United Kingdom
941 Posts |
Posted - 13/01/2012 : 11:50:32
|
You can find the whole consultation process here. The closing date for responses is 26 Feb 2012.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/dft-2011-27
Remember the proposals relate to pre-1960 vehicles, considered to be of 'historic interest'. Any suggestions to move the boundary from that date will run into very heavy resistance from the second hand car sales industry since it would reduce the number of 'old' cars sent for scrap and reduce their turn-over!
IanB |
|
|
|
Bill Abbott
United Kingdom
61 Posts |
Posted - 13/01/2012 : 12:24:27
|
| I feel we need to be very careful what we wish for.I agree that most of the time spent testing our cars is waiting for the clock to tick by once the computer has ben logged on for the timed test. However, if we go the way of the rest of europe on vehicle testing it could have far eaching implications for our "Old Cars". As I understand it, in France, unless a vehicle has passed the "Control Technique" test it can only be diven in the departement in which it is registered unless it is on a specific organised run arranged by a car club with suitable event insurance etc. This Control technique is a test similar to our commercial tests and stricter than the current MOT our cars have to pass. It involves a lot automated equipment and a lot of shaking of the car etc. It is carried out at registered centres, not your local friendly garage. Perhaps one of our members the other side of the channel could comment. Bill |
|
|
|
DickMorbey
United Kingdom
3677 Posts |
Posted - 13/01/2012 : 18:06:18
|
In my personal opinion (and this is not 'The Register' speaking) there are good reasons for retaining some sort of statutory test for our types of cars. As David says, the test is only a measure of the condition of the car at a particular point in time and prolonging the interval between tests or eliminating them altogether could allow subsequent mechanical or other faults to go undetected.
A further point occurs to me and that concerns rebuilds, whether of Triple-M cars or any other type of 'classic'. Not all of us, and that includes me, are trained engineers or mechanics and it is by no means impossible to assemble a vehicle incorrectly or with defects of one sort or another. An objective test carried out by those qualified to do them (with suitable coaching/indoctrination by the testee's owner!) is more likely to reveal these defects.
I, like others such as Bill Abbott harbour a suspicion that prangs caused by defective cars may encourage the opponents of vintage/classic motoring and hasten the demise of our movement.
Best wishes
Dick |
|
|
|
leafrancis14
United Kingdom
323 Posts |
Posted - 13/01/2012 : 19:39:45
|
Not a good idea in my opinion. Beware of polititions bearing gifts.
Getting an MOT is no issue at all for people that look after their cars properly and is a vital second check. I use my cars as much as possible all year round and would hate to think of any restrictions.
The key is finding the right people to do the job and this is what they should be looking at - offering a simpler road safety test at specialist garages. Doing that would help a few small businesses out. |
|
|
|
Oz34
United Kingdom
2539 Posts |
Posted - 13/01/2012 : 20:16:57
|
I have been reading this suggestion with much trepidation. As Barny says, if the car is properly maintained, the annual "medical" should hold no horrors. In addition, is there any one of us who would be seriously inconvenienced by failure? i.e. couldn't get to work or something similar. Yes, it's annoying to miss the natter or go in a modern, but it's not the end of the world.
I'm very much in agreement with those who welcome the regular scrutiny of the car by a professional (and fortunate to have mine done at a garage which maintains pre-war cars).
The public perception of the "old car world" would indeed take a bad knock were an untested car to cause a fatal, or indeed serious injury accident, and then of course we would ALL be rich playboys with nothing else to do.
Restrictions in use? Maybe no mention initially but, as with ID cards introduced by a benign government (sorry, hobby horse), when Hitler comes to power, half his work is done already. It's only a Parliamentary debate after the event to change that. The All Party Parliamentary Car people are nowhere near a majority; I could easily see a bill being sent through "on the nod".
How would our Continental friends view this? We're not exactly flavour of the month anyway. Would France continue to allow us the freedom of their roads if our cars were "self certified"?
I say keep the annual test but I do like the idea of a cheaper rate. This presumably could only be done by agreeing a reduced time for the task as the tester at present has a specified minimum time which he must fill.
Dave |
|
|
|
PeterL
United Kingdom
1723 Posts |
Posted - 13/01/2012 : 20:34:07
|
I came back fro Australia in 1986. The system they had there for vehicle excise and historic vehicle use struck me as sensible.
You took your car for its MOT, when you paid the bill you paid, all at once, for MOT, tax and minimum insurance. Simple, I liked it.
historic vehicles were treated as such, no tax as here. However they were only permitted to use they road if on club business. If you wanted to use your historic vehicle as a regular road car you treated it as such and paid regular road tax.
Thus my view is that if you want to use your historic vehicle on a regular basis you should treat it like a normal road car and tax and MOT it accordingly. This strikes me as fair although I do appreciate the present generosity shown to us historic vehicle owners.
So, for me, annual MOTs please.
Peter
|
|
|
|
spitfire
United Kingdom
371 Posts |
Posted - 13/01/2012 : 23:07:48
|
Yes Peter, I was reading about proposed changes throughout the MOT testing specs, in the MG Owners Club magazine.I helped start the club.
Having recently bought a J2 from an MMM and T type specialist for some years... I got it to my mechanics AND UP ON THE HOIST.
NO COTTER PIN ON THE NEARSIDE CASTLE NUT OF THE STEERING ARM.
With the full width jack, running off the horizontals of the inspection ramps, the engine mountings, that had been made in the past, pitched the engine over a few degrees.
With said jack under the sump, released the bolts to the mounting bracket, in the vice and hacksawed it to dead flat status.
Then back in, engine dropped. Done up. Ten minutes. No effort.
The back nearside brake shoe had come away from the shoe.
The offside rear tyre had oil streaked down the inside of the tyre.
Seal to halfshaft had gone.
BLATANTLY OBVIOUS FAULTS THAT SCREAM OUT AT YOU WHEN THE UNDERSIDE IS AT EYE LEVEL IN FULL LIGHT.
I like what you point out about inspection ramps.
Due to their right angled geometry, massive jacking potential, and access... I think ALL of US should find a place that LETS US come and INSPECT WITH THE OTHER MOT INSPECTOR.
Remember, there is much safety related elements to an old fabrication, that is not covered by an MOT.
The car is a culture shock to many testers.
CAN'T WE HAVE NOMINATED MMM FRIENDLY MOT STATIONS ON THE CLUB DATABASE?
I know we are a scattered bunch, but no harm in building something up. As it is an invaluable resource to our particular breed of fragile cars.
It is quite literally an EYE OPENER to what lies beneath the ply!
Always refreshing to have a new perspective. |
|
|
|
bahnisch
Australia
674 Posts |
Posted - 13/01/2012 : 23:17:21
|
| Many years ago, perhaps 20 from memory, the South Australian Government introduced a "concessional" registration scheme for vehicles over 30 years old. Cars and motor cycles must be practically authentic and unmodified and registered clubs must certify this annually. Owners are issued with a "Log Book" to record vehicle usage (there is no restriction as to purpose) and a total of 90 days per year are allowed. The cost is approximately one quarter of the combined normal registration/insurance fee. It seems to be a "win/win" situation for owners and authorities alike. Moreover, I think that the scheme has encouraged interest in older vehicles in this State, the local MGCC has approved about 1000 cars and our annual Bay to Birdwood Rally has had as many as 2,000 entries! |
|
|
|
spitfire
United Kingdom
371 Posts |
Posted - 13/01/2012 : 23:30:26
|
Sorry, I was answering/backing up Colin McLachlin's point on hoists.
Also it was the pad that came away from the shoe at the rear. This car had nine months MOT to run. The split pin would NOT have been in at the MOT, as I took this up with the seller.
I rebuilt a 1955 Harley Davidson Servi Car Trike.
The place I took it for an MOT, VOSA send their staff for a gen up on what unique points to take into account, with a particular vehicle.
|
|
|
|
Bob Clare
United Kingdom
278 Posts |
Posted - 13/01/2012 : 23:55:10
|
On both road safety and public perception grounds I favour enforcing an MOT requirement for all road vehicles. I was astounded and alarmed to learn that old commercials are already exempt.
However, I oppose any suggestion that road tax should be re-introduced. It's OK for folks who can afford it but us old retired souls with, in my case, 2 Triple-M cars, would find the extra cost a real problem.
Bob Clare |
|
|
|
greg
United Kingdom
833 Posts |
Posted - 14/01/2012 : 00:36:24
|
| Theres a lot of people who build cars who cut corners to save a few quid if there is no MOT required they will build them even worse and more dangerously. I think they will be more accidents if they stop the MOT To save more money. Generally most cars are built well and maintained to MOT standards. I think the MOT should stay. It's a shame for people who have and MOT 10 cars a year. |
|
|
|
Blue M
United Kingdom
1472 Posts |
Posted - 14/01/2012 : 07:48:55
|
| I think the MoT will stay, but in a different form. Insurance companies will undoubtedly demand an Engineers Report every year before insuring the car - which may well cost a good deal more than the current MoT. This would naturally be supplied by existing MoT stations but in a private capacity. Like all unregulated systems it would be open to abuse of course. |
|
|
|
Ray Masters
United Kingdom
568 Posts |
Posted - 14/01/2012 : 09:18:22
|
On the VSCC forum members have publised the MOT stations which they use for their pre-war cars & which they consider take a 'friendly & reasonable' (my words) approach to the MOT on old cars.
I think there is a good case for this forum to do the same. I know many members are members of both clubs, & therefore have access to this information, but not all by any means.
Input from members around the UK would quickly build a list of MOT stations best suited to our cars. What do you all think ?.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked
