New MOT exemption

[LobbyLudd]

Shouldn't ANY responsible classic car club strongly recommend and also even lobby for any classic car excempt from an MOT 'at least' that each time in future before it is put up sale to have an MOT (or a future equivalent classic industry agreed safety check more specifically suited to a classic car) ?

(Each time it is put up for sale in future)

[les]

Well any future buyer of such a car, would be at liberty to ask the seller to mot it.

[palacebear]

There were, some while ago, mutterings from classic car insurance providers hinting that they may refuse to cover classics which don't have a current MOT, or a more costly recent professional engineers report, irrespective of exemption status. Perhaps this will move a step closer to reality next year...?

[les]

If that really is being considered, one wonders why they haven't done that already with pre 60s

[SteveClem]

While I'm driving mine, I'll get them mot'd,regardless of the rules. I can't check them as well as I used to and trust our local classic friendly garage. Money well spent, I reckon...and peace of mind.

[palacebear]

Agreed. I'll keep mine tested. My local garage is reasonably classic-friendly, if slightly clueless (where's the starter switch? where's the indicator switch?). Only £30 for an MOT test as well. Money well spent as far as I'm concerned too.

[firedrake1942]

Ditto

[Budgie]

There is a Triumph Stag for sale on carandclassic site tonight and the seller states that even though it is a 1976 model "it is now MOT exempt as per the new ministry of transport legislation as this applies to any car that is over 40 years old ", Anyone gonna tell him ?

[Trickydicky]

I too will keep mine tested each year regardless of status. I would hate to think I have caused an accident or injured an innocent party to save a few pounds. The garage that tests my car is sensible enough to know that it's an old car and takes this into consideration but advises me when any issues arise.
For example on my last mot in March he noted there was a slight imbalance of the front brakes on the drivers side, not enough to fail but he told me when I collected the car. I could feel a slight pull when applying the brakes, after inspection I found the brake cylinders were sticking so I replaced them. I took this as an opportunity to replace the brake fluid and after replacing it I found a sticking rear cylinder so replaced that too.
It's times like this I need my garage to warn me of potential problems, be it mechanical or structural.

[les]

He may be right, if it has had a recent mot, it may well not need anymore.

[jollysmart]

Further information lifted from another car site:-

BIG update to the draft "originality" test for the 40yr MOT exemption.

* Chassis/bodyshell changes with "original pattern" are OK.
* Steering/suspension changes to "type and/or method" are not OK.
* Engine changes within original choices, and different capacity of same "basic engine" are OK.
* Period (production/within 10yrs)-style changes are OK.
* Preservation changes (original parts no longer available) are OK.
* "Safety/efficiency/environmental performance" changes of axles/running gear are OK.
* Mods are now OK so long as at least 30yo, rolling date, not fixed 1988.

Onus is on the keeper to prove it HASN'T been changed - and if they can't, they should MOT.

FYI

[firedrake1942]

Thanks for the update. It raises more questions than answers really. Th first is why this had to be lifted from another site ????

Next comes


* Chassis/bodyshell changes with "original pattern" are OK. Understandable but Traveller to Pick-up ? 2 Door saloon to Convertible ?
* Steering/suspension changes to "type and/or method" are not OK. Does this include telescopic shocks instead of lever arm ? Different ie Marina torsion bar ??

* Engine changes within original choices, and different capacity of same "basic engine" are OK. So A series to take you to 1500 CC (Riley pathfinder) but not B series? Obviously Fiat engines etc would be caught here.

* Period (production/within 10yrs)-style changes are OK. Not sure what this means . Perhaps door mirrors within 10 years of production ???

* Preservation changes (original parts no longer available) are OK. Most Minor parts are still quite widely available.

* "Safety/efficiency/environmental performance" changes of axles/running gear are OK. Would this not mean that telescopic shocks would be ok? Would probably include brake upgrades servo etc.

Self declaration and insurance implications are a potential minefield.

Any other thoughts from anyone ?

[philthehill]

Get the car MOT'd and have done with it.

[firedrake1942]

Well said Phil, but there will always be those who seek to save a few quid as a short term measure. We have become used to seeing 'MOT Exempt' as some sort of selling point on Minor Adverts.

[jollysmart]

Well said Phil, but there will always be those who seek to save a few quid as a short term measure. We have become used to seeing 'MOT Exempt' as some sort of selling point on Minor Adverts.

Already happening, describing a Minor as being MOT exempt from may next year, more than one doing that on Ebay.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... idance.pdf

Link to Government guidance.

[philthehill]

If and when the above regulations come into play and the vehicle for sale is required to comply with these new MOT requirements then the term 'MOT Exempt' will not be able to be applied to the sale details.

[Sleeper]

The latest..

https://www.autoclassics.com/posts/news ... ood-news-1

John

Edit

Could be a duplicate of earlier post...sorry...

[Blaketon]

I took part in the consultation over this (But I think exemption was always the plan) and expressed the opinion that testing may well need to be put in the hands of specialists and that it should be done on the basis of use, rather than by the calender. As it stands, I will get mine done every 1000 miles (Which is when I grease the suspension and change the oil....though I had been doing it at MOT time of late), just to make sure the brakes are all pulling as they should and to let a second pair of eyes look at it. I am lucky that the local garage understand older cars, having got a Frogeye, Healey 100/6, Jensen Intercepter and an MGA Mk2. If they ever quit......... :?:

My father well remembers what it was like before there were MOTs. I think most classic owners are more aware of what goes on, than are what I refer to as the "Coal in the bath" motorists and that few will see MOT exemption as a carte blanche to get away with murder. However I know that some will take chances and any resultant accidents will have a disproportionate effect on the opinions of the ill informed. People have a tendency to judge things by their own standards and experience so since most people only have experience of old cars, as old bangers (The cars, not the owners), anything older than their heap was must be proportionately more clapped out. If one unroadworthy old car causes and accident, this would only reinforce the unfounded assumptions of such people.

I've seen two things regarding modified cars. I had a letter from the Department of Transport, which mentioned that a 15% power to weight ratio increase would mean a vehicle was subject to an MOT, unless the modifications were done before 1988. The latest attached FBHVC newsletter didn't mention power to weight ratio but suggested the date was rolling. I had raised the issue of proof (I have invoices for when my cars were altered) and it seems there are no plans to insist on proof (How can anyone really check up?). It was for this reason that I originally suggested that permitted modifications should be period mods, no matter when carried out, so a 1275 A Series in a Morris Minor would be OK but not a Ford Zetec. As an example, there was an Atlantis conversion available for MG Midgets, where a Ford 1600 Crossflow was fitted. This conversion was carried out when the cars were in production (The only ones I ever saw were on Arkley cars).

I've asked my insurers how they view MOT exemption and they said if that's the law, that's it. The added however that if a car had been checked or given an MOT, it could help the owner if there was an accident.

To sum up I think how it pans out is up to all of us. We've been shown some trust; let's not abuse it. I don't want to get into politics but if ever Labour get in again (I think it's more a case of when), we can expect another Brownline, that will freeze road tax exemptions and presumably MOT exemptions for the duration. That shouldn't make any difference to Minor owners but I'd say that if all Abingdon MGs and RWD Ford Escorts come in from the cold, we'll be very lucky. How do I know this :?: Labour refuse to answer my questions, whether directed via my local MP or via party HQ. I think they assume all classic car owners are filthy rich and I also think they feel they can be seen to be tough on the environment by using classic drivers as scapegoats. Let's face it, there aren't enough of us to swing an election.

[Mark Wilson]

I don't want to get into politics

Please don't then.

[firedrake1942]

Why not? it is only by fighting the indefensible, the privileged and vested interests that rights are created, the vulnerable protected and society makes progress!