| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Oz34
United Kingdom
2571 Posts |
 Posted - 06/06/2012 : 11:26:50
|
Yes Colin, you are so right however, have they actually enacted anything yet? Just possibly if they get enough signatures they may choose to use Parliamentary time more wisely.
Dave |
 |
|
|
DavidK
United Kingdom
14 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2012 : 11:40:40
|
A couple of thoughts from an Austin 7 Forum:
"All of the points above are based on opinion and not fact.
1 is a guess, the insurer that is sponsoring the VSCC has stated that they see no reasons for premiums to rise because of this.
2 & 3 are just plain wrong, as pointed out before a car exempt from MOT CANNOT have it's number transferred.
4. Possibly.
5. Scare mongering, hasn't happened with the historic tax class.
6 & 7. Possibly (in the case of a serious accident an engineers report will be requested, as they are at the moment for all cars.)
8. Commercial vehicles are already exempt so not sure what this has to do with this issue???
9. Guess.
Not sure why there is so much scare mongering and mis-information going around about this issue.
I would have thought that some would be happy that there is less red tape for us to go through to enjoy our cars.
The MOT as it stands doesn't work for us and it would be to expensive to train garages to run a two tier system so this is the obvious outcome."
and
"Think carefully before you do that.
If you want to be subjected to a new MOT procedure,with new requirements and with no age related concessions, then sign it. If you think your brakes, lights, emissions, suspension and steering are up to modern standards,(really up to it) sign it.
Otherwise, accept what you've been given, you can always ask your garage to do a safety check, but insistance that we be judged by the MOT test as it will develop is not a good thing."
David Kenny
PA2038 |
|
|
|
Colin McLachlan
United Kingdom
994 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2012 : 12:06:01
|
quote:
If you want to be subjected to a new MOT procedure,with new requirements and with no age related concessions, then sign it. If you think your brakes, lights, emissions, suspension and steering are up to modern standards,(really up to it) sign it.
This is no more a guess or scaremongering than the earlier comments on the list.
My main concern is that the first time there is a serious accident or fatality involving a classic car with no MOT, the tabloid press will have a field day, and any chance of rational discussion on what actually caused the accident (and whether it could have been prevented by an MOT test) will go out the window, with calls from the uninformed to have us all banned.
In supporting this petition, I believe I am supporting the status quo. That may be politically naive, but I feel it is better than doing nothing, and, Colin B, it may well be "worth nothing whatsoever", but it only takes a few seconds.
Colin
PA 0613
MG3242
Register No. 2591 |
|
|
|
Keith Wallace
United Kingdom
367 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2012 : 15:13:05
|
I am in agreement with David Kenny,
The present M.O.T test and most of the test engineers are not suited or trained to test our cars, (the last 4 x tests my car has had, have been no more than a casual glance).
I am sure the MOT has realised this, so rather than devise a new set of specialised test and set up further testing stations (which may well cost us more per test) they now believe it unnecessary to have a test because classic cars are involved in so few accidents.
I think we should at least give it a chance to work.
Keith Wallace
|
Edited by - Keith Wallace on 06/06/2012 15:14:33 |
|
|
|
Bob Stringfield
United Kingdom
854 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2012 : 16:05:38
|
If what my experienced and knowledgeable tester describes as the automated 'shaking plate' future of MOT technology were to be applied to pre-war cars, then most of us will need to find a museum to take them, or convert them to track cars.
All of the concerns which were expressed about restrictions being imposed were unpaid Road Fund Licences to be introduced have, so far, come to naught.
It was argued that the original MOT was to encourage motor-car sales by scrapping old vehicles, as was the recent 'scrappage' scheme and dated number-plates and so will be future changes be directed, modern vehicles lasting for far too long, according to the trade
We are a tiny and statistically insignificant - but picturesque and popular with the public - part of motoring which it is cost-effective for the government to ignore - so far.
Encourage the FBHVC to watch for our interests, keep calm and carry on.
Bob. ( who pushed PA 0627, BEV 307, out of my first-ever MOT, in 1960, the starter having failed.) |
|
|
|
Ged Segrave
United Kingdom
206 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2012 : 17:32:15
|
Done
Ged Segrave |
|
|
|
talbot
United Kingdom
718 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2012 : 18:46:20
|
Each of the nine points has a strong financial connection. Safety is not mentioned at all. Of the 270 repondents so far how many actually own a pre 1960 car? A classic car insurance policy is far cheaper than for a modern. I thought this was because small mileages and pride of ownership equated to lower risk. Why should I pay the same to MOT a modern car, travelling 15000 miles in the year, as my 1932 one covering ony 1000 miles?
Jan T |
|
|
|
Colin Butchers
United Kingdom
1487 Posts |
Posted - 07/06/2012 : 10:02:52
|
Lots more very interesting views. But disappointed that no one has commented on my point about crack-testing steering knuckles and steering drop arms. Those of you who seem to believe that holding a valid M.O.T. Certificate means that your car is totally safe and will never have a faulty component related accident during the next twelve months, please tell me how the current MOT Testers can be certain that the steering components are not full of cracks (as they most probably are after 80 years of bouncing about on British roads.)
I know that twenty or more years ago, John Thornley was very concerned about these items, especially where roller bearings had been fitted, and he said that he had to close his eyes when the T Register lads were racing at Silverstone! The T Racers also insist on crack-testing of these bits every year as part of their race regulations.
Come on David Allison. As a former M.O.T. Tester, what did you do to be certain that they weren't cracked ?
Colin B. |
|
|
|
bigtony12461
United Kingdom
103 Posts |
Posted - 07/06/2012 : 13:45:04
|
Having read the various documents at http://www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/dft-2011-27/ I'm convinced that the current MOT is not the way forward for our cars, although I'm not convinced that no testing at all is the way forward either.
Many of the points raised in the original email are commented on in the documents.
Tony
NA0795 |
|
|
|
Rodney Collins
United Kingdom
424 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2012 : 10:02:54
|
I have to agree that an MOT is a must, however it is down to the owner to find an MOT station who understands the limitations of a 1935 car but still has the know how to make sure that the car is road worthy. When I bought my PA from a well known dealer it had an MOT with it that had a almost a year to run I never saw the car for a further 6 months as it went to have a complete engine rebuild. When I went down to collect the car and drove it back to Norfolk, some 100 miles the car went where it wanted to go not where I wanted it.The front near side spring had no location notch and could move an inch back and forth. I don't know who did the MOT but he should have been shot. Pehaps I should have driven the car before BUYING!! (Cav. Emp.)The garage who did my MOT's from then on wre 1st Class
Rodney
PS at point of collection I had spent £29,000 on a non road worthy car!!! it took a furter £11,000 to get it right. be warned MOT are a must for meny reasons. |
|
|
|
spitfire
United Kingdom
371 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2012 : 10:45:52
|
Rodney, I know exactly what you mean. Its depressing to catalogue the major faults throughout the car. You also mention bought the car from "a well known dealer"...ditto!
It was described as the company runabout. It might have been driven around a flat field, but on the Queen's highway one cable operated 8" brake working! I don't think it could have exerted any stress inertia, more like sailing a yacht!
|
Edited by - spitfire on 08/06/2012 13:41:03 |
|
|
|
Dow
United Kingdom
490 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2012 : 13:14:59
|
The VSCC newsletter June 2012 page 6 on this subject says "Owners of affected vehicles will still be able to take exempt vehicles for an MOT test on a voluntry basis" This apparently comes from the the 21 May 2012 press release by the Department for Transport.
Regards
David D |
|
|
|
spitfire
United Kingdom
371 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2012 : 13:38:23
|
That seems to have sorted matters for  both sides of the argument. |
Edited by - spitfire on 08/06/2012 13:39:44 |
|
|
|
Robin Macmillan
United Kingdom
415 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2012 : 14:55:47
|
Surely Rodney you cannot state the MOT is "a must" and support your position by recounting how our car had an MOT that was essentially worthless. A finding that you yourself determined.
PB 0527 |
|
|
|
Terry Andrews
United Kingdom
546 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2012 : 17:38:19
|
| Done |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked
