Roadworthiness testing for vehicles of historic interest

[Red Kite]

I think this is a new consultation ?

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultat ... c-interest

[christopher storey]

Indeed it is, and I intend to reply to it , although the questionnaire is in my view unnecessarily complicated !Essentially, it is the question of whether vehicles over 40 years old should be tested or not , but there is a heffalump trap in it concerning the question of whether any significant modification should be permitted - which of course raises the question of what is "significant"

[chrisfell]

How about a quick poll? The preferred proposal is to remove MOT requirements for all vehicles over 40 years old, in line with the vehicle exise duty exemption. Anyone think this is a good idea?

[mark10337]

Nope. Every 2 years might be acceptable. Otherwise we could have even more shoddy restorations on the road. Let's keep safety standards up! I would prefer to know that other people are driving around on the same roads with the same minimum safety levels applied to their vehicles as mine.

[MarekH]

Of course one should allow modifications, significant or not. Why would you want to box yourself into a corner on that one?

kind regards
Marek

[Nickleback]

Nope I dont agree, keep the MOT yearly.
I want to keep my car in great condition, know that it is relatively safe and reliable and am happy to keep getting it checked by a yearly MOT.
Mine even got an MOT advisory this week for a slight play on an OS wheel bearing which has just been replaced, so that will be sorted ASAP

[cactusman]

Keep the MOT. They do define (vaguely) what they see as original in their eight point check but at least biennial checks by an independent expert should remain. MG had an advisory front n/s wheel bearing. Did both sides. £16 for two bearing sets and a shim set. Sorted.

[abowie]

In South Australia we have no requirement for regular roadworthy inspections. Personally I'd be happier if we did.
I've rebuilt all 3 of my cars myself. While I think they are safe a regular inspection would make me more confident in them.
WRT modification, we have a category of concessional registration for older vehicles called Historic. You get 3 years registration for less than the price of one and can drive the car 90 days per year. To qualify the car must be inspected by a club approved expert. Minor modification only may be allowed at the discretion of the inspector.

[malcolm]

I'd say yes to M.O.Ts, providing the testers have a mind as to the age of the cars. For example, I'm sure they could fail; on "wipers not clearing adequately"; but they never did. Indeed, many things on our cats aren't as good as their modern counterparts.

[mark10337]

Agree Malcolm.

Here in Switzerland, they are very strict. Even oil leaks, scratches on the windscreen from the wipers, rust on brake discs have been known to cause a failure. There are also vibration tests. However aspects of the test are against the regulations from the time when the car was first put on the road, e.g. for emissions / seat belts / daytime running lights and the like. Legally, I don't need to have seat belts in my car as it wasn't law in 1969. Some of the other areas though would be tested according to modern specifications.

However, our tests are every 2 years. There is also a very demanding test for "Veteran" status. Everything needs to be "original" and in extremely good working order. This test allows for 6 years until the next test but limited to (I think) 3000km per year.

[cactusman]

My MOT man has old cars. He is sympathetic. I rather doubt he bothers with the wipers much but works the brakes, steering, suspension and lights through thoroughly. We need a periodic check done by people who know old cars, their capabilities and their shortcomings and who can distinguish between an issue that is "how the car is" from a genuine safety issue that must be fixed.

[JagWaugh]

Agree Malcolm.

Here in Switzerland, they are very strict. Even oil leaks, scratches on the windscreen from the wipers, rust on brake discs have been known to cause a failure. There are also vibration tests. However aspects of the test are against the regulations from the time when the car was first put on the road, e.g. for emissions / seat belts / daytime running lights and the like. Legally, I don't need to have seat belts in my car as it wasn't law in 1969. Some of the other areas though would be tested according to modern specifications.

However, our tests are every 2 years. There is also a very demanding test for "Veteran" status. Everything needs to be "original" and in extremely good working order. This test allows for 6 years until the next test but limited to (I think) 3000km per year.

I like the Swiss system for classics. MOT every 5 years, full test of safety systems, emissions are fine as long as they don't exceed the values back in the day by all that much. Mods which mean the car can keep up with modern traffic (headlamps, electric cooling fans, electronic ignition) are fine, but no non period mods like EFI in an XK. Brake upgrades and such are sometimes tolerated, but the point of the veteran status is that it preserves a piece of automotive heritage, so you can't change everything and make a low rider with modern engine and air suspension and get the extended test interval. The km limit is a bit low if you rally the car, or use it all summer and go on a trip, but on the whole, there are very few claptraps here, and nobody sneaks by with an old beater. Sometimes you get an inspector who is difficult (I've had cars rejected for oldtimer status for really minor originality things, but pass the regular inspection.)

To my mind mich better than just dropping all inspection requirements.

[Jasper013]

Personally, Option 3 (the governments preferred option) seems perfectly reasonable.
I would be happy with that. Gets my vote.