Lancer Register Forum banner

No more yearly MOT

1K views 13 replies 12 participants last post by  stewie 
#1 ·
In todays paper
END OF THE M.O.T. TEST EVERY YEAR
Motorists save as it moves to 2yrs
By Rosa Prince Political Correspondent
CARS will only be tested for for roadworthiness every two years - saving motorists almost half a billion pounds annually.

The £50.35 MOT test on vehicles three or more years old will no longer be done every year to bring it in line with the rest of Europe.

The move, announced yesterday by Chancellor Gordon Brown, follows a review by the Treasury to cut red tape.


Headed by Lord Davidson, it discovered most of the EU only requires cars to be tested biennially and only after their fourth birthday.


He told the CBI conference in London: "Moving to the EU minimum would mean cost savings in terms of inconvenience, time and paperwork.


"It would also save motorists £465million a year in test fees."But motoring organisations said they were worried about safety.


The AA's Ruth Bridger said: "Saving money is good for the motorist but not at the expense of safety or the environment in terms of emission levels.


"We'd like to determine how many cars usually fail the MOT at four to six years old to see how many cars would fall through the net."


RAC spokesman Adam Cracknell added: "The changes could see a number of unroadworthy cars on the road which would have failed an MoT test during the extended period."


Lord Davidson's review found at least 10 other areas where British laws were stricter than those in the European Union. Adopting EU regulations would save up to £670million, he said.


These include councils not forcing all food workers to go on hygiene courses and the easing of animal testing regulations.
 
See less See more
#4 ·
:eek: OMG - Government in "doing something sensible" shock!

Cars these days age better - they're better built, don't rust, their electrics are better etc. A ten year old car now will usually be in pretty good condition, 20 years ago a 10 year old car was a shed. Makes sense to test after 4 years rather than 3 and keep the checks biennial, perhaps until the car is 10 years old, then do it every year. And make the fines for having bald tyres, knackered brakes etc. which make the car dangerous much higher to encourage people to keep their cars in good nick.
 
#6 ·
Bringing this law in would be crazy. I'm an MOT tester and if you saw some of the heaps of **** i test you would agree. And to say cars are made better now is rubbish. Only the other day i carried a first test on a 53 reg vehicle and found the brake pipes to be very badly corroded. I wouldnt like to think I'd be carrying my kids round in a vehicle that had not been checked over for two years. There are a hell of a lot of cars driving on the roads that never see a garage in between MOT's. Yes your Evos are all looked after well but not all the other cars coming towards you are. For the sake of £50 i think its a stupid idea. Anyway cant see this law been passed myself.

Stewie
 
#7 ·
stewie said:
Bringing this law in would be crazy. I'm an MOT tester and if you saw some of the heaps of **** i test you would agree. And to say cars are made better now is rubbish. Only the other day i carried a first test on a 53 reg vehicle and found the brake pipes to be very badly corroded. I wouldnt like to think I'd be carrying my kids round in a vehicle that had not been checked over for two years. There are a hell of a lot of cars driving on the roads that never see a garage in between MOT's. Yes your Evos are all looked after well but not all the other cars coming towards you are. For the sake of £50 i think its a stupid idea. Anyway cant see this law been passed myself.

Stewie
Too right its a ****ing stupid idea imo - very dangerous.
**** Europe there is a reason why we have the safest roads, yearly MOTs being one of them.
 
#11 ·
While one part of me says "woohoo, no more (or less) MOT's" I'm also fully aware that some cars would be an absolute hazard if our current MOT laws did not exist. To be honest its an absolute silly idea though may be if they did it in a different way it might be not so bad eg if a car barely scraped a MOT it would be given a 6 months recheck MOT but if a car was in excellent condition then it would be give a 2-3 year bill of health. Maybe some form of points system to determine the car's suitability - of course this solution would only work if MOT stations were being honest as its their business that seeks to gain/lose from this.

Not sure about the tyres part though - i wouldn't be surprised if the government brought in a new test for tyres alone.

Mark
 
#12 ·
good for most of us that look after are cars but there is alot of people who dont take an interest and it will be one of them that will wright off are cars because they didnt change there tyres in two years or change there brake pads.as much as i dont like paying its still nice to know that when you do have an mot done that your cars up to scratch.i had the mot done on mine only last week and me and a greese monkey mate had spent weeks changing all ssorts of things like uprated bushes track rod ends and such like,not that they would fail an mot but just to make the car fresh again and we still failed to notice that the steering rack gatters had split so failed the mot for it,so the average person who doesnt even know where to fill up with oil isnt going to know when there could be problems on the way.
 
#13 ·
when will this come into force

what i have found is mots are not worth the paper they are on as my car its mot and on the way home i was stopped for a routine check and there was vosa there checking desil etc and my car failed thier test on emmistions i showed them the mot and they even said that was then this is now and made me get it re checked
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top