Vitesse said:

I have just looked at the MoT history of one of my moderns. It has down 2742 miles since August 2011. Can I claim an MoT every 10 years?

Click to expand...

Yes you can; I suppose that's what comes of having a private jet, as you do.....and Murf should have one every six months!

thepuddlejumper said:

People do drive their vehicles without insurance and MOT's

Ralph

Click to expand...

There is a wide range of vehicles which don't need an MOT...most of those great clunking farm vehicles for instance. There are several Scottish Islands where no MOT is required for HGVs registered there and they are still allowed to drive on the mainland to collect and return goods.

When I bought my van, (which you may know is now in a million bits being welded up), it had been taken for a pre-MOT, which had produced a very long list of problems but just three areas of corrosion that mattered. In fact it was actually in a very dangerous condition. Somehow it had achieved an MOT for several years when I can't believe it reall deserved one.
Once the condition of a car has slipped that much, if you have the cheek to submit it for examination then you will ususally get a limited and achievable set of repairs needed to be done, which will let you pass it on to someone else or cobble along until the next year.
I'm sure minds immeasurably superior to my own are chewing over these conundrums as we speak and and from historical experience I do think they will introduce the exemption.

Well for one find MOTs tedious for a classic that I insure for 3000 miles and because of other commitments drive for 250...
but I do agree that there needs to be some test, annually is not really the best idea, perhaps every 3-5 years a compulsory test, I thought of millage.... but if say it was every 5000 miles and you have your car for 10 years but some years don't drive it, that test would be once every 10 years... Cover is no difference in price to off road cover.. so insured...
the fixed every July 25th for me is just too rigid....
What about some flexible scheme.. all info is now centrally located, they can tell if it is Sorn, Insured or even say tested... a program could work all this out...
So a system that says you car must be compulsory tested every 3-5 years or based on mileage.... Changing owners should not matter it is the car...
So if you drive 1000 mile a year it is tested every 3-5 years
if you drive 5000 miles it need to be tested if that is 1 year or 3 years...
As mileage is recorded at test stations...
But with a bit of leeway on the numbers for instance if you are at 4,800 miles and drive a long distance then you should have it tested before 5,500
and if your 5 years are up.. you have a 3 month grace period.

Sounds complex but perhaps an owner could opt for one scheme or the other, it isn't that complex similar exists for VAT.

I agree it would be nice if you did less that a thousand miles a year and only MoT'd every 3-5 years but I don't think it would work unfortunately.

I remember years ago my speedo cable broke on my 500 and I didn't replace it for months but still drove. That's in the days when it was my daily drive. It's not like you really need a speedo in a 500, it's a bit of a luxury.

It takes a minute to disconnect the speedo, so if you were getting a bit too close to 1000 miles in a year, you maybe be tempted to disconnect your speedo to save the £50 a year or whatever it is? For an MoT.

I can't see them changing anything, it's just going to be too complicated to administer.

Tony

Vitesse said:

I can't see them changing anything, it's just going to be too complicated to administer.
Tony

Click to expand...

Probably correct, and I still get my Pre 60 cars checked... every now and then...
Tiz nice though for the common man to ponder what it would be like if people who things actually affected was allowed a real input into the laws and systems...
Ahh yes that's what we elect..... "Civil Servants for ".. errr I have I missed something there...

Bigvtwin996 said:

Probably correct, and I still get my Pre 60 cars checked... every now and then...
Tiz nice though for the common man to ponder what it would be like if people who things actually affected was allowed a real input into the laws and systems...
Ahh yes that's what we elect..... "Civil Servants for ".. errr I have I missed something there...

Click to expand...

No they will come out with the most outlandish and difficult system to administer, so that they can justify employing an extra 1000 civil servants to look after it. And at the same time totally confuse us all!!

I hope there aren't any civil servants on here.

ohhh and it would take years to implement..

they would need a
Think tank for the ideas...
Working Party to decide how it would be set up...
then a Steering Group to decide who would manage it
Then a feasibility study.. to see if it would work
the a Pilot proposal to see if they could guess the results before they started..
Then it would all be put on hold for a while because of the lack of funding..

and not restarted till a Prius was a Classic and you have to pay £5 per mile on the pay per drive scheme introduced to combat congestion...

So lets can it and carry on as we are...

Bigvtwin996 said:

Tiz nice though for the common man to ponder what it would be like if people who things actually affected was allowed a real input into the laws and systems...

Click to expand...

They did allow us mortals a five week window in which to make our views known...I don't think they wanted too many of them.

In the documents it states that 7% of MOT exempt vehicles were submitted for a voluntary MOT in 2014-2015; this is a much lower number than the internet twitter before the start of exemption would have made me expect.

It also sadly shows that out of a total number 1775 deaths relating to vehicle use on the roads in 2014, three of those involved cars from the era of the manufacture of the 500.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/roadworthiness-testing-for-vehicles-of-historic-interest

fiat500 said:

It also sadly shows that out of a total number 1775 deaths relating to vehicle use on the roads in 2014, three of those involved cars from the era of the manufacture of the 500.

Click to expand...

that will be you boys with these modern 500s than can travel in excess of 50mph..
So Ban anything Post 1960 and we'll be much safer... that's the "Final Solution"
Now that's got a familiar ring to it......
where have I heard that before................

(ohh and they never wrote to me asking my opinion!!!)

Only cars with an engine size of 499cc or 17bhp should be exempt! Anything bigger should be subject to a car scrappage scheme. There! I think we have sorted it!

Peter what are you going to get in exchange?

Vitesse said:

Only cars with an engine size of 499cc or 17bhp should be exempt! Anything bigger should be subject to a car scrappage scheme. There! I think we have sorted it!

Peter what are you going to get in exchange?

Click to expand...

sorry too big.. bring it down to 479cc...

ohhhh the increase in value would be amazing.....
(we have just 225 N's recorded worldwide... ohhhhh yesssss)
What's the opening bid?
Even RHD!!!!

fiat500 said:

<SNIP>

It also sadly shows that out of a total number 1775 deaths relating to vehicle use on the roads in 2014, three of those involved cars from the era of the manufacture of the 500.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/roadworthiness-testing-for-vehicles-of-historic-interest

Click to expand...

That is only one year and does not indicate if the roadworthiness of the vehicle, never mind just things tested by the MOT, was a factor. It's more likely that the deaths were influenced to the lack of occupant protection in the original design of the vehicle.


Robert G8RPI.

g8rpi said:

It's more likely that the deaths were influenced to the lack of occupant protection in the original design of the vehicle.


Robert G8RPI.

Click to expand...

It's just a statistic after all Robert, and the low occurrence of death is probably more a reflection of the relatively low total mileage of this group of vehicles But I pointed it out because it has relevance to the eventual decision made.

The part that the original design plays in the inherent safety of older vehicles is obviously something that no MOT can ever change. My worst nightmares in the Fiat are being hit by another car from the front, side or rear!!! (all my hard work and my mother's undone) If that is the major reason for deaths and injuries in older vehicles perhaps it supports an argument for the lack of need for an MOT?

Vitesse said:

Only cars with an engine size of 499cc or 17bhp should be exempt!

Click to expand...

I'll just let DVLA know that the engine size has changed back to 499cc (or maybe 479cc, BigV). I wonder if they ever check that. Even at the MOT I think it's just the chassis number they are interested in.

I wonder how many owners actually have the registration document updated with a new engine number and size? I did it straight away because I'm perfect!

Bigvtwin996 said:

sorry too big.. bring it down to 479cc...

ohhhh the increase in value would be amazing.....

Click to expand...

There you go, you rich folk pricing us Muggles out of the market. I wouldn't have an "N" if you paid me......they don't even seem to have a proper roof and have only got half a fuel-tank.

fiat500 said:

It's just a statistic after all Robert, and the low occurrence of death is probably more a reflection of the relatively low total mileage of this group of vehicles But I pointed it out because it has relevance to the eventual decision made.

The part that the original design plays in the inherent safety of older vehicles is obviously something that no MOT can ever change. My worst nightmares in the Fiat are being hit by another car from the front, side or rear!!! (all my hard work and my mother's undone) If that is the major reason for deaths and injuries in older vehicles perhaps it supports an argument for the lack of need for an MOT?

Click to expand...

Yeah there are not many cars that afford you the luxury of effectively driving around with a fuel tank on your lap!

Vitesse said:

Yeah there are not many cars that afford you the luxury of effectively driving around with a fuel tank on your lap!

Click to expand...

I call it my airbag. It's the best safety feature on the car because it promotes caution when I'm caught in busy traffic....admittedly not that often up here in Scotland.