| Author |
 Topic  |
|
LewPalmer
USA
3251 Posts |
 Posted - 22/05/2012 : 19:18:21
|
I really don't understand why the UK caved in and joined the rest into the EU. Every day it seems as you folks are being more and more reined in by crazy restrictions and taxes, and bogged down by other country's economic woes. For example, I am the designated driver for our trip to the UK in September, because I am still under the age of 70 and can actually rent a car in the UK. Ditch the beauracrats. Seceed!
Lew Palmer
Registrar, NAMMMR |
 |
|
|
Jerry Preston-Ladd
United Kingdom
20 Posts |
Posted - 22/05/2012 : 20:23:03
|
I know at least one classic enthusiast who has 2 pre-war cars (not MGs) and who's definition of maintenance is, once something actually breaks - repair it as cheaply as possible. He doesn't even do oil changes because "they don't do much mileage". I'm sure there are many other owners like him out there with little mechanical knowledge or sympathy and they're the ones that will start having the accidents that the rest of us will end up suffering for in one way or another. This 'relief' from red tape is not to be welcomed.
Jerry
PA0417 |
|
|
|
spitfire
United Kingdom
371 Posts |
Posted - 22/05/2012 : 20:23:36
|
Lew. They don't like that we speak American! |
Edited by - spitfire on 22/05/2012 20:24:02 |
|
|
|
Robin Macmillan
United Kingdom
415 Posts |
Posted - 22/05/2012 : 20:46:01
|
It would seem that I am in a minor minority in thinking that this is a good move. The option of an external inspection of your vehicle has always been available, though those with sufficient knowledge of what they were looking at is another question. We all moan about excessive regulation, Health and Safety, lack of appreciation of vintage machinery, quibble about the interpretation of regulations for MOT testing as applicable to cars manufactured in the 1930's. Current topics seem to be debating the use of flashing indicators and stop lights. My view is that stop , side and indicators are a good idea and a safe one. I regard safety as an important issue and doubt that the MOT test as currently applied offers more that that I would wish for myself driving a tea chest on wheels with a large iron rod directed towards my chest at all times.
regards
robin
PB 0527 |
|
|
|
LewPalmer
USA
3251 Posts |
Posted - 22/05/2012 : 20:58:55
|
Don't get me wrong. I feel a thorough inspection and maintenance is an excellent idea. My point was simply that the UK seems to be suffering from a burdensome "central" government.
Lew Palmer
Registrar, NAMMMR |
|
|
|
Richard Hardy
United Kingdom
2165 Posts |
Posted - 22/05/2012 : 23:12:56
|
The trouble is Robin, there are few enthusiasts who have access to a 4 point lifting ramp. I always have a good look at the underneath of the car when it is up having its MOT and it is an excellent opportunity to keep on top of the car in terms of those less accessible areas, not to mention the more important aspect of having a regulated inspector checking it over
I recall that last time, the MOT chap noted small rust dust marks around the u-bolts on the back axle and said that the hoops had stretched and needed tightening up. Sure enough, he was correct and there is no way I could have identified this problem myself grovelling around the floor, even with ramps
It will often be the irresponsible owners that spoil it for everyone else. And for example, what is there to now stop a barn find going straight on the road or half finished restoration projects which are hardly road worthy. Maybe I should put 3 hours in on my half finished F type and get it on the road! Pretty terrifying prospects
Regards
Rich
Vintage MG Parts |
|
|
|
Blue M
United Kingdom
1474 Posts |
Posted - 23/05/2012 : 06:16:22
|
It seems that one reason for the change is that classic cars have a much lower failure rate than moderns. This is probably just because we have all been desperate to pass! Now any old heap will be on the road with predictable consequences - including police checks back again. I just hope they don't bring in speed and mileage restrictions. Unfortunately most classic car owners - including MG - are 'polishers' rather than 'users', and rarely go over 35 or exceed 300 miles a year, so will not make a fuss if and when restrictions are applied. I am lucky as I am able to use my car almost as regular transport - not everyone can for all sorts of reasons - and usually clock up 5,000 quite fast miles a year. A gleaming classic stuck in the garage is no use to me and I would probably sell up.
The last MOT I had seemed to be jumping the gun a bit - they hardly checked anything and were more interested in chatting; so what about the things I forgot to look at and they didn't look at? |
|
|
|
David Allison
United Kingdom
665 Posts |
Posted - 23/05/2012 : 09:04:53
|
The ministry test was bought in to stop the kind of potential issues highlighted here in this forum.
In the late 50's and early 60's it was apparently NOT uncommon for cars to be driven around with bald tyres, bad brakes and defective steering.
The number of people who modified their cars to conform to regulations that they didnt need to was caused by advice by ill informed "experts".
I personally agree that fitting twin stop and tail lights is a good idea - and that replacing the original tail lights with larger lamps is similarly a good idea.
I have never been a great "originality freak" - but I do actually have admiration for those not prepared to compromise - I also admire these people for avoiding night time driving in bad weather because they know that they are to all intents "invisible" to other traffic.
As a former tester I can tell you that the ministry is NOT a difficult task master - the advice they give is always valuable to both testers and road users.
Unfortunately there are a number of testers who impose a rather draconian view - but these are in a small minority.
Most testers are very knowlegable and where this knowlege is lacking they are encouraged to seek advice (either from the customer or a colleague).
If the customer seems to be technically savvy then the tester will often seek their help - bishop cam steering boxes being one of these!
The handbrake on a MMM car being more effective than the foot brake always causes hillarity!
I am very concerned that this latest (lack of) regulation may result in the eventual ban, on cars older than a certain base line, being put in place.
Without a ministry test it is difficult to see how the insurance companies can find an excuse not to increase premiums and even refuse to insure!
Sorry guys I think that this is a retrograde step.
Regards David |
|
|
|
spitfire
United Kingdom
371 Posts |
Posted - 23/05/2012 : 20:15:38
|
What, is the situation going to be, if YOU WANT an MOT for you 1930s car?
Should it not be a "right" to be included in the mainstream?
Technically, an MOT doesn't really cover you getting to the end of the road BUT it is a damned useful LEGAL DOCUMENT to have in your pocket.
It will create a polarity, where MOTed will mean Safe, legal, of a set standard . The "others" will become a catalogue of Unsafe, illegal and anarchic . I can't see one thread of logic in how it is becoming law. Thanks for taking the lid off Pandora's box.  |
Edited by - spitfire on 23/05/2012 20:17:59 |
|
|
|
Nick Dean
United Kingdom
445 Posts |
Posted - 23/05/2012 : 21:23:08
|
I agree with Richard, also let all of us not forget, anyone can be an MP with no qualifications whatsoever. Most of our current lot at Westminster have never had a real job in the real world.
Nick Dean.
N A Dean |
|
|
|
Colin Butchers
United Kingdom
1487 Posts |
Posted - 25/05/2012 : 10:02:17
|
It has been interesting to read the various arguments for and against the abolition of the MOT requirement for cars born before 1960.
For those who believe in looking a gift horse in the mouth, could I mention that the Federation of British Historical Vehicle Clubs exists to protect the unrestricted use of old vehicles on our roads. Member Clubs to the FBHVC include the VSCC, the Bentley Drivers Club and the Bugatti Owners Club (and I hope the MGCC) who include some fairly influential people. If a future Government or that shower in Brussels try to introduce any limitation as to use, there will be an almighty row.
It sounds like one more good reason for us to wave goodbye to the EU and to reclaim the God Given right for Britain to be ruled exclusively by British people. Thank you Lew for introducing that topic ! If someone who lives 3000 miles away can see what is happening to us, why can't more people who live over here see it.
Colin. |
|
|
|
JMH
United Kingdom
915 Posts |
Posted - 25/05/2012 : 10:58:01
|
Yes Colin, the MGCC is a member of the FBHVC & you're right about there being some very influential bodies in there!
The following tale of an early MMM MOT (at a garage long gone) has been recorded for posterity:
When MOT Tests were introduced in 1960 they were phased in. Older cars went first. The J2 was “done” in February. I took her to a garage near my work, left her there in the morning and picked her up in the evening. She had passed. When I got home and lifted her bonnet I was horrified. The whole thing was covered in oil spray, just as if she had just done a 10 lapper at Silverstone. Clearly, the garage had taken her for a joy-ride and thrashed her. So, in April, when Brian’s TC (lodged with the J2 and the one whose radiator muff I won) was done, I arrived for the MOT with a witness who noted the odometer mileage reading. Come the evening I was again given a pass certificate, the odometer reading had not changed one bit and there was a dry patch under the car where it had rained all day. Our trap was not sprung.
...............................................
Then, as now, there are good garages & bad ones. My "local" is good, but she (yes, the tester is a lady), but does the one MMM a year & even the best of drivers need more practice than that with the gearbox!
Still, 12:30 today is zero hour for the J2, perhaps for the last time? But, I wouldn't count on it as I notice the published blurb gives a cop-out clause for the government (small g) to impose just about what ever it wants instead of the MOT, so I can see something coming our way before November.
JH |
Edited by - JMH on 25/05/2012 10:59:56 |
|
|
|
MaGic_GV
United Kingdom
868 Posts |
Posted - 25/05/2012 : 14:39:16
|
My MoT testers, at small local garages, have usually been happy for me to drive.
I can't imagine our insurance companies will be very happy about the new ruling though, particularly when vehicles that haven't seen the light of day for fifty years come out to play. When I first insured my car I was asked for an 'Engineers Report', which my MoT man produced - I don't think he charged me anything, perhaps in sympathy for the impecunious (and naive) youth before him. Something like that will be the order of the day, I reckon, but probably not always free!
Graham
"I'd rather be happy than right anyday" Slartybartfast, Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy |
|
|
|
Martin Warner
United Kingdom
85 Posts |
Posted - 25/05/2012 : 16:24:50
|
Maybe I am naive but I have watched this discussion over MOTs with growing incredulity. I was brought up with a clear attitude about what was right or wrong or at least what was sensible. We spend our lives these days reading unbelievable articles in the paper about complete morons getting into serious trouble and simply looking for a Simon Cowell character to sort their lives out for them and give them loads of dosh. When road tax was made free for cars of 1973 or older the same arguments occurred. Was this a conspiracy to take older cars off the road? It never happened. We flatter ourselves that they really care. We all know that politicians have far more important things to think about than us (lets hope that they realise it too). I appreciate the need for an independent appraisal of one's car from time to time. I think it is called a service. If you want to live in a health and safety world please don't drag me into it. I and Esther Ranzen can give you un-arguable reasons for reflective jackets, crash helmets, fire proof trousers etc. Perhaps a Toyota Prius with your Triple-M car in an air-conditioned trailer with police outriders will cover all concerns. Can we please all get a life!
I will now hide under my desk waiting for the Liberal responses.
Martin |
Edited by - Martin Warner on 25/05/2012 16:28:13 |
|
|
|
kimber
United Kingdom
1529 Posts |
Posted - 25/05/2012 : 19:53:19
|
Martin, I have to confess to a) being slightly pissed (long lunch) at the time of reading and responding to your posting an b) not entirely understanding what you are saying. (The 2 may well be related!). So perhaps not a good time to respond. Anyway, .....
Personally, I can live with the no MOT requirement as I have complete confidence in the standard to which my cars are maintained. However, my concern is the attitude of an insurance company when there is a 3rd party fatality (heaven forbid) or serious injury arising from a serious mechanical defect on an MOT exempt vehicle. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked
