GOOD NEWS!!!!!!!!!!

[dave bushell]

The government has just announced that all vehicles registered before 1960 will no longer require a MOT after the 18th of November this year.

Check out the following link – https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18146326
Dave

[chris wastell]

Not so sure it is good news. I trust my own enineering ability but I know plenty of owners, especially of classic cars, who dont have a clue. Personally, I feel my 25 quid a year is a bit of an insurance policy to save being hit by an un-roadworthy “classic vehicle” Its also a second pair of eyes over my own machines.

[bitsa1927]

Hi all,

Good news????? Sorry but I have to agree with Chris. Rust buckets will being dragged out and driven which couldn’t pass an MOT and even some WITH an MOT shouldn’t have one. How about a car with badly adjusted brakes that the MOT station passed because they didn’t have the equipment (Tapley meter) to check it properly? When set up right the difference was astounding. Or not one but two motorcycles with brake shoes right down to the metal AND a brake cable that felt like it was on a ratchet on one?

These are just some of the bodges I have come across on vehicles I have bought so god alone knows the state some being put back into use will be in.

I give it less that two years before this stupid piece of legislation is axed through abuse by the few like the 25 year tax exempt rule. A three year MOT would have been FAR better for historic vehicles.

James

P.S.

I voted for pre 1920 vehicles to be exempt because they are least likely to be owned by the clueless idiots who wouldn’t know an oil filter from a coffee filter!

[BRIAN MARSHALL]

Hi,
Yes, I must agree that some very unsafe old vehicles WILL hit the road next year. With bikes the only person likely to come to real harm is the rider and maybe a pillion passenger, but with cars and other vehicles it is entirely another matter. When MOT testing was first introduced it drove tens of thousands of rust-buckets off the roads and into the scrapyards where they belonged. Old Ford Populars, Morris Eights, and Morris Series E’s, and countless other almost brakeless, swaying, lurching, and generally awful heaps disappeared almost overnight.
With truly vintage, ie. pre-1930 cars I am sure there is a lot more mechanical knowledge and empathy, but with “classic” cars it is a very different picture, and many owners literally haven’t a clue what goes on under the bonnet, or anywhere else unseen. They will proudly polish the bodywork of their pride and joy totally unaware that it is rotting away underneath, and have to go to the local garage for the most trivial things mechanical. My son-in-law works in a fairly typical old-established village garage, and he gets these old car owners all the time. Cars like Hillman Minxes, old Jaguars, MGB’s, Fords of all shapes and sizes, and so on, and they have no proper chassis to rely on for their structural integrity. They can LOOK good but be lethal.
Bikes CAN be as bad, and I’ve bought some in my time ! Bent forks, bent frames, wheels out of line, loose handlebar levers, and so on.
The more I think about this “concession”, the more I think it is not good news……
Brian

[dave bushell]

On second thought, maybe I should have used question marks after the subject title and not exclamation marks!!!!
Dave

[chstorm]

You must not be so pessimistic! Pre-1960 motor vehicles have been exempt from MOT in Norway for 20 years! Motorcycles have not had any MOT requirements in Norway for at least 40 years. No problems whatsoever related to the absence of MOT have been recorded. Accidents with historic vehicles are very rare, and accidents caused by technical problems or lack of maintenance are almost unknown. Historic vehicle insurance in Norway is extremely cheap – fully comprehensive insurance for less than £40 per year. If there were any special problems with accidents caused by lack of maintenance, the insurance companies would be the first to react. I was responsible for the Norwegian Federation (LMK) Insurance Scheme for 25 years, and I have followed accident statistics in Norway closely.
It is also a fact that owners of historic vehicles as a rule take good care of their cars and motorcycles, and will also help fellow owners.

There have been several studies analyzing vehicle accidents and the reasons behind them. It appears that technical problems and lack of maintenance very seldom is the cause. Accidents are mostly due to human errors – whereof distraction is no. 1. Mobile phones, loud music, tiredness, alcohol, narcotics, medicines and senile dementia are among the main causes mentioned as being behind accidents. Failing eyesight is also a common cause. Many fatal motorcycle accidents are caused by car drivers who say that they did not see the motorcycle.

I feel that you ought to welcome the new MOT regime.

Cheers! 😀

Carl

[David J Waring]

Thank you Carl for injecting a welcome note of optimism into this discussion.

Some 15 or so years ago, when our Government decided to exempt pre 1973 vehicles from road tax (vehicle excise duty), countless people put on their pessimistic heads, thinking that it was the beginning of controlling and curtailing the use of such exempt vehicles. The sooner the current negative views fade, the better, and we await the response of insurers.

Regarding Carl’s comment “Many fatal motorcycle accidents are caused by car drivers who say that they did not see the motorcycle”, I always wear a high visibility bib, or reflective flash, which I would recommend to all bikers, even those with modern machines that have good lights – the bike may be well illuminated at night, but if you come off, following motorists may not see you in the road, only the bike.
Safe riding !

[jampotrdann]

you will still be breaking the law if your bike is not 100% roadworthy,and i for one wouldnt ride one that wasnt,the way mot s are going pricewise is a joke based on a london garage with very high overheads.

[bitsa1927]

Hi all,

Originally the rule on pre 73 vehicles was a rolling 25 years but the reason it became a set date (or one of many I suspect) was the number of ‘pre 73’ Land Rovers suddenly turning up in barns; too many to be real and I’m betting there were duplicate applications for the same chassis number from different people. Luckily rather than drop it completely it became a fixed date with no grey area to be exploited by the dishonest.

While I agree that some places charge a small fortune for an MOT I can see this legislation being abused with some poor unfortunates buying ‘roadworthy’ vehicles that turn out to be a rotboxes full of filler which an MOT tester SHOULD spot if they are switched on.

An MOT may not guarantee a vehicle is safe to be on the road but at least it is a measure of protection that the vehicle isn’t going to fall apart at the first speed bump or pothole.

James

[dave bushell]

Jampotrdann is right about the law requiring a vehicle to be roadworthy, a side effect of this change could be more roadside spot checks if the police see that you are riding one of our favourite weapons of mass destruction.
Dave

[Erik]

In Holland bikes never had an MOT, both modern and classic. Every once in a while the government tries to change this but so far without succes. I never saw this as a risk as bikers rely on the good condition of their bikes to ride safely.
For cars it recently changed. New cars get their first MOT after 3 (diesel) or 4 years. And then every other year. Cars registerd before 1-1-1960 are exempt. I do think there might be some risk there as classic car drivers are much less aware of the state of their cars. But, given the milage those > 50 years old cars do this risk probably is not that big.

Cheers,
Erik

[chris wastell]

I see the point that Erik and Carl are making however Britains roads are far more crowded than those in Holland and Norway, probably than anywhere else in Europe. Legislation regarding the requirement for a vehicle to be roadworthy is usually only applied after the event, usually a crash. Most British people can’t help being cynical about changes in legislation as historically we end up shafted as a result 🙁 . I suppose its a debate that could go on for ever 😕 .

[Phil Frost]

Superficially, good news.
For an agreed valuation for our bikes, cars etc with our insurance company we submit pictures, nice and easy. If we want to insure our bikes, cars etc we contact the insurance company and they give a quote. This quote relies on a mandatory government test of the vehicle per year (MOT) if the vehicle is to be used on the road. This ensures the vehicle is roadworthy. Therefore a relatively safe risk for the insurance company.
If the MOT is cancelled for all pre 60 vehicles the insurance companies will want some form of guarantee of the vehicles roadworthiness before issuing a certificate of insurance.
I suspect there are several options.
1. Insurance cost will escalate.
2. An engineers report of the vehicle will be required by the insurance company, I would think considerably more expensive than the MOT. Plus this puts the non-government mandatory reports into private companies, therefore no government subsidy.
3. Death and carnage due to leaking, corroded, perished or broken brake pipes. Etc etc etc.
No matter what develops we won’t be better off, probably worse off. The decision was made by politicians and would you buy a second hand car from one? NO

Phil

[Erik]

@chris wastell wrote:

I see the point that Erik and Carl are making however Britains roads are far more crowded than those in Holland and Norway, probably than anywhere else in Europe.

Huh? With a population density of 403 against 251 per km2 I am pretty sure the Dutch roads are a lot more crowded than in the UK! I have been in the UK a lot and find the roads always very nice and quiet… 🙂

[chris wastell]

Ah well, Erik, lets agree to differ on that one. We each must visit the emptiest bits of each others countries. I have to agree with Phil above on the points he makes although I am generally of optimistic nature ( I ride a Scott after all!) Safe riding to all 🙂

[Author]

Posts