classic car forum header
Classic cars forum & vehicle restoration.
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Register     Posting Photographs     Privacy     F/book OCC Facebook     OCC on Patreon

Pre 1939 MOT abolished..is it true?
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Classic cars forum & vehicle restoration. Forum Index -> Classic & Vintage Cars, Lorries, Vans, Motorcycles etc - General Chat
Author Message
john-saab



Joined: 06 Dec 2007
Posts: 341
Location: West Dorset

PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2011 8:52 pm    Post subject: Pre 1939 MOT abolished..is it true? Reply with quote

Sorry if it's been posted somewhere else..
I have been approached by 3 different people today who tell me there was an article in a news paper that said pre-1939 vehicles no longer need an MOT..is it true?
_________________
Rust Junky & oil addict.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Inglewood



Joined: 28 Dec 2010
Posts: 183
Location: Stone, Staffordshire

PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2011 8:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Beaulieu Website News

The requirement to have an annual MOT test for pre-war cars may be scrapped following a meeting between Transport Minister Mike Penning and members of the All Party Parliamentary Historic Vehicles Group, of which Lord Montagu of Beaulieu is President.

The meeting took place 20th January, at the Palace of Westminster between Lord Montagu, Conservative MP for East Yorkshire Greg Knight, who is the Parliamentary group chairman and Transport Minister Mike Penning.

After the meeting Lord Montagu added: “This review is well overdue and I welcome it. I believe that any date of exemption should be a rolling one.”

Mr Knight added: “Accidents involving historic vehicles are extremely rare and the majority of owners are meticulous in keeping their vehicles in good condition. Having to have an annual MOT test for a vehicle which may only travel 100 miles in a year is an unnecessary bureaucratic hurdle”.

Minister Mike Penning said, “The MOT is important in helping to ensure that cars are safe for use on our roads. However, we need to be sure that the regulations we impose are having their intended effect. That is why I am going to look at whether there is a case for exempting older historic and classic vehicles from the MOT test. These vehicles are treasured by their owners who want to ensure they are well maintained, and in most cases they use them irregularly. I have asked my officials to look at the evidence on this issue and we will carry out a full consultation to allow interested groups to submit views”.

Mr Knight added, “If these older vehicles are exempted from the MOT test, owners will still be legally required to ensure that their cars are safe, roadworthy and in a proper condition to be on the road. The Minister has made it clear that the exemption will not relate to historic vehicles that are used commercially.”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rick
Site Admin


Joined: 27 Apr 2005
Posts: 22780
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2011 10:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sounds interesting, so long as they don't slip in any restrictions as to the private use of pre-war cars then I'll be happy enough I suppose, not that there is much to test on anything 1930s anyway...

R
_________________
Rick - Admin
Home:https://www.oldclassiccar.co.uk
Videos:https://www.youtube.com/user/oldclassiccarRJ/videos
OCC & classic car merchandise (Austin, Ford ++):
https://www.redbubble.com/people/OldClassicCar/shop
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RobMoore



Joined: 16 Jan 2011
Posts: 105
Location: Peterlee

PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2011 10:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Personally I think this is a bad idea and will only serve to put vehicles on the road in an unfit state. The current MOT is at best a bare minimum standard and we all know there are plenty of vehicles on our roads with MOT's that should never have been given.
Just because someone only takes a car out a few time a year does not warrant removing the need for an MOT.
I hav seen vehicles sit from one MOT to another then fail.

More and more people are moving towards classic cars in the realization that there is a cost saving - no road tax, average mpg and easy maintenance.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
peter scott



Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Posts: 7211
Location: Edinburgh

PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2011 11:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Like Rick I wouldn't want this if it resulted in some new restrictions on use of pre-war cars.

I don't think many people would choose to use a pre-war car as every day transport on account of the lower insurance cost and lack of road tax.

Peter
_________________
https://www.nostalgiatech.co.uk
1939 SS Jaguar 2 1/2 litre saloon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
P3steve



Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Posts: 542
Location: Great Yarmouth, Norfolk

PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2011 11:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I work hard to keep my vehicle in tip top condition and have no problem with someone once a year confirming this. sometimes someone who is detatched from the car might give a better ballanced view on its condition
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
buzzy bee



Joined: 23 Nov 2007
Posts: 3382
Location: South Cheshire

PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2011 11:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi

The issue is most testers haven't a clue what to test and how to test older vehicles anyway.

If we are not careful, I can see us having to go down the route of taking the cars to special "registered" old car mot centres or such like, which will probably mean traveling vast distances etc.

It is a hard one, as you don't want unroadworthy vehicles ont he roads, but on the other hand, I don't want the above.

The way I am going with old things, mot's are not really a problem anyway. Smile

Cheers

Dave
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
MVPeters



Joined: 28 Aug 2008
Posts: 822
Location: Northern MA, USA

PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 2:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd be a bit cautious about this too. I think the vehicle insurance company would want some assurance that the vehicle is deemed "roadworthy" by S Umbody.

Or to turn it around, if you had an accident now in any car that was not MOT tested, can the insurance company refuse a claim for that reason alone?
_________________
Mike - MVPeters at comcast.net
2002 MINI Cooper 'S'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Salopian



Joined: 05 Jan 2010
Posts: 354
Location: Newport Shropshire

PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 10:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Your insurance is still valid even if your MoT has expired and they cannot - however your obligation to your insurers to have the vehicle in a sound roadworthy condition overides all and is so regardles of MoT statutus.
You may find a payout for your car reduced on the grounds of lesser value without MoT however.
Always worth reading your policy for catch out clauses though!
_________________
Jonathan Butler
Alvis SD 12/50 1928 MG TD 1950
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ukdave2002



Joined: 23 Nov 2007
Posts: 4231
Location: South Cheshire

PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 11:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Personally I have no problem with the MOT; whilst I appreciate many items in the test don’t apply, and it must be a challenge for a young tester who tests 1000 Mondeo’s for every 1 pre war car, I find it satisfying to get a pass certificate. Very Happy

At the end of the day although I believe I maintain my vehicles’ to a good standard, I’m not a trained mechanic , neither do I have the luxury of being able to have a good prod around whilst the car is on the ramps. So an annual, 2nd and better qualified opinion is welcome.

It will be interesting to see if the insurance companies react, although we do have this (no MOT needed) situation currently with some older commercial vehices.

Dave
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Richard H



Joined: 03 Apr 2009
Posts: 2150
Location: Lincolnshire, UK

PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 12:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MVPeters wrote:
I'd be a bit cautious about this too. I think the vehicle insurance company would want some assurance that the vehicle is deemed "roadworthy" by S Umbody.

Or to turn it around, if you had an accident now in any car that was not MOT tested, can the insurance company refuse a claim for that reason alone?


What about old vehicles over a certain weight, such as Rick's Dodge which are MOT exempt?

I think this is a good idea. Certainly there isn't much to test on a pre-war car, and very few testers know where to start with even something like an Austin Seven these days. An example of this would be when the tester decided to fail my dad's Ruby because he couldn't get the trafficators to come out. We had to point out to him that due to the 6v electrics the trafficators won't come out if the headlights are on while the engine isn't running!

Richard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nic Jarman



Joined: 05 Oct 2008
Posts: 1031
Location: Stoke by Clare, Suffolk

PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 1:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have worked for MOD companies and also on aircraft, I am very happy for someone else to check my work. Non of us are perfect and we should all have peace of mind that another pair of eyes have looked at our work. A brake line can look great whilst the car is sitting up on jacks but when it is on the deck there is a possibility of it fouling ( this is just an example ). If the MOT was scapped for my Morris and Talbot I would still have it done voluntarily.
_________________
1936 Morris 8 Series 1
1973 MGB roadster
1977 MG Midget 1500
Dax Rush
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
PAUL BEAUMONT



Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Posts: 1281
Location: Barnsley S. Yorks

PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 2:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As usual, lots of good points made here, but chiefly by folk who have a good deal of mechanical knowledge. This would open the gate to anyone dump on the road just about anything that was of sufficient age. Look at some of the wrecks offered on EBay that would only need a bit of bodging by folk with little or no idea what they are doing, before they set forth on the road.
I do feel that the cost of an MOT for an older vehicle is a little unfair, but I feel that another set of mechanically trained eyes running over your pride and joy once a year is not too onerous.
I always find that the guy who does mine is quite interested and realistic and usually it is more of a case of a discussion than a worry.
I recently heard of a guy with a pristine motor who turned up for a MOT and the examiner discovered - mych to the embarassment of the owner, that one front tyre had an enormous split in it. Lets face it £40-50 is only £1 a week in reality.
Finally, if this actually happens I suggest that some sort of an owners club check every couple of years should be put in place so that vehicles are scrutinised at least occasionally, by someone who has some sort of an idea what he is doing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Keith D



Joined: 16 Oct 2008
Posts: 1164
Location: Upper Swan, Western Australia

PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 2:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am quite surprised at the reluctance of forum members to want the removal of the MOT test for prewar vehicles. Obviously as I live in Australia, it is nothing to do with me, but I was living and driving in Britain when the tests were first introduced in 1960. The screams of horror and predictions of the end of the world would have been heard everywhere! I had to have my first road car tested, a 1946 Austin 10.

Let me ask a very serious question. How many accidents in the UK are actually caused by something being unroadworthy on a motor car? A MOT test is completely irrelevant eleven months and perhaps 10,000 miles later. I have no actual figures, but I suspect the vast majority of accidents are caused by the nut behind the wheel and not by the car itself!

Keith
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BigJohn



Joined: 01 Jan 2011
Posts: 954
Location: Wem, Shropshire

PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 2:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would worry that the removal of an MOT test would come with conditions, to and from shows only, mileage restrictions etc. Would this also see a number of wrecks being taxed and insured purely for number plate transfer, where an MOT is currently required, then being sold on, then driven by the unwary and unknowledgeable. Being hit by an unroadworthy pre 39 car at 30 mph will probably cause more pedestrian damage than a modern deformable plastic flat fronted hatchback.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Classic cars forum & vehicle restoration. Forum Index -> Classic & Vintage Cars, Lorries, Vans, Motorcycles etc - General Chat All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
OCC Merch link
Forum T&C


php BB powered © php BB Grp.