Classic cars forum & vehicle restoration.

[ukdave2002]

Take a look at this video; a modern car with a lethal fault that was about to pass an MOT, having passed all the visual checks.
The presenter has a annoying style , but the content is relevant.

https://youtu.be/KLstwt2MM3A?si=yMwZzs7GArrhS6kP

[Ray White]

Hi Keith. Thank you for your kind words. I really don't deserve such high praise. One thing is for sure; we are among friends here.

[lowdrag]

Returning to the OP, here in France an MOT has been from 4 years from new and every two years thereafter sice before I came here 24 years ago. Classics over 30 years old need an MOT every five years, so the new proposal in the UK is nothing new.

[bjacko]

The video may show a rusty pipe that will burst is concerning. Very poor design and if someone has an accident they could sue Vauxhall.
The messages indicate that the MOT is mostly a waste of time and money because of the number of failures shortly after an MOT.
The organisation that represents motor repairers here in Victoria are always agitating for annual MOT's. I believe NSW has annual testing and their accident rate is no better than Victoria.
I also noticed in the comments that the people who had failures did not mention using their handbrake to stop? Back in the 50's my Morris 8 pedal ball end dropped out of its socket and thus no brakes, just as I was approaching a crossing with people on it, so I pulled hard on the handbrake and stopped in time. Of course a lot of "modern" cars have no easily accessible handbrake lever, even though they have a dual circuit system not a very wise design in my humble opinion.
_________________
1938 Morris 8 Ser II Coupe Utility (Pickup)
1985 Rover SD1 VDP

[Ray White]

The videos shows how an inaccessible brake pipe can rust badly and lead to a dangerous car inadvertently passing the M.O.T.

I think it implies that cars with hydraulic brakes should have their pipes replaced every so many years because of what may be going behind the scenes, but sometimes the tester is just not thorough enough.

Years ago I had a brake failure at 60 mph in a Morris Marina which, as a Company car, was always serviced and had just passed an MO.T.

I also found badly rusted brake pipes in my first Range Rover. I had just bought the car and it had a new M.O.T.certificate. I was replacing the brake discs and pads when I found the pipes were crumbling. Again the problem should have been flagged up but for some reason the car passed when it shouldn't.

Not having any kind of legal test requirement for historic vehicles in my opinion is a mistake. I fully accept that legally the owner is responsible for the car to be road worthy but sometimes serious issues are disguised by the unscrupulous when they are selling a car.

For example, the brakes failed on my 1949 MG TC just as I was loading it onto a trailer. Fortunately, the handbrake stopped the car just in time. The seller had packed the wheel cylinders with grease - presumably in an attempt to stem brake fluid from leaking out.

In my opinion, the car would not have passed the MO.T. but there was nothing to stop the seller from letting me take it on the road should I have so chosen.

.

[alastairq]

[Ray White]

MY recent experience is that some of these M.O.T. garages simply use their test facilities as a means of generating extra work when they have a quiet spell.

Skullduggery?