MoTs scrapped for pre-1960 cars

[Ben]

http://www.topgear.com/uk/car-news/mot- ... o.facebook

did they make 40 series's before 1960?

no road TAX, no MOT, and classic insurance. could make for cheap motoring!

 

[Gav Peter]

I thought we'd gone past April 1st!!!

 

[Ben]

its really happening!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18146326

 

[Jimbo4x4]

Initially I thought "WTF? Who's hair-brained idea was this?". But I can see the sense in it. It might be worth having a 5yr MOT or 5k miles, whichever comes first, but then many of the cars in question don't even have odometers...

 

[chadr]

"Owners of classic cars and motorbikes tend to be enthusiasts who maintain their vehicles well - they don't need to be told to look after them, they're out there in all weathers checking the condition of the engine, tyres and bodywork," he said

I broadly agree with the above - yes, most people that bother to keep a "classic" car on the road, usually will make the effort to keep it roadworthy.

"Owners of classic vehicles will still be legally required to ensure that they are safe and in a proper condition to be on the road but scrapping the MoT test for these vehicles will save motorists money."

How? What measures are in place to ensure this happens (other than the MoT test)? I personally don't see the logic in this at all. How can a 3 year old "normal" car be deemed to require an MoT but a 45 year "classic" doesn't?

IMO a better solution (read: compromise) would have been to have "cut-down" MoT for Classics that only checked items such as brakes, steering etc. and was say 1/2 price of the normal.

 

[J66P]

personally I think its absolutely bonkers, I used to be an MOT tester and i have to say the bulk of people that have old cars dont have a clue, they polish them to death but thats it after the initail restoration project

 

[Jon Wildsmith]

does seem a bit bonkers to me. MOT's are not very expensive really are they, once a year, unless stuff needs fixing!

 

[Chas]

The MOT can be a nuisance sometimes but it's a good thing to have a regular check on your vehicle. There can often be problems that slowly arise that you're not aware of.
Many years ago, pre MOT, I used to buy old cars and run them until I couldn't repair them anymore but when I think of some of the wrecks I used to drive around it's frightening so I don't think this move is wise.

 

[Crispin]

Could we start a campaign for Land Cruisers (Pre 150 series of course)

Does seem a bit daft that once you get to a certain age, you don't need to check it for safety.

 

[wobbly]

The cars still have to be legal in so far as the driver can be dealt with by the Police for construction and use type offences.

Thats no different to any other vehicle.

Doubt this will make the roads any more dangerous than they already are.

Pete

 

[frank rabbets]

Total nuts!! A 50 year old car needs no checks but a 3 year old car needs scrutiny even after all the developments in anti corrosion etc etc.

Frank