PistonHeads.com: Row erupts over new MoT test plan

James

Chairman
Can the government EVER get cars right?! Now they're doing it the wrong way for another reason! I am very against 2 year tests, you see how bad a car can get after a year of no repairing, it would fail an MOT quite easily - changing it to every 2 years is just crazy imo!
 

Arnold

www.alanarnold.co.uk
Moderator
Site Supporter
Absolultly rediculous, i mean they introduce billions of cameras to keep speed down, but want to keep dangerous cars on the roads for longer!!

First pay as you go driving, now this.. whoever's thinking these stupid ideas up needs sacking and fast.
 
the only way a 2 yearly test would work is if it is far tougher and/or cars older than 10 years old were banned from the road.
 

Pete

Site Supporter
It 'could' work if they introduced 2 year tests for cars under 6yrs old then annual for cars over that... BUT that would put people off of older cars and they SHOULD be encouraging people to retain their cars as it reduces wastage and carbon usage n production and shipping of new models (yes even though older cars are less environmentally friendly).
 

Arnold

www.alanarnold.co.uk
Moderator
Site Supporter
cars older than 10 years old were banned from the road.

Why? My car is 15 years old and flew through its last 3 MOT's without any advisories at all! You get cars that are 4-6 years old which fail for crap tyres & brakes. Just because it's old, doesnt mean it's a dangerous rust bucket.
 

lewic

Ex. Club Member
Sounds like a last-ditch attempt by the government to win over motorists votes, so they can sneak in other laws like road pricing, which involve spying on people or fleecing them.

2 yearly MOTs are an insane idea, however I wouldnt be surprised if the government bring in random 'roadworthiness' checks and extortionate on the spot fines.
 
Why? My car is 15 years old and flew through its last 3 MOT's without any advisories at all! You get cars that are 4-6 years old which fail for crap tyres & brakes. Just because it's old, doesnt mean it's a dangerous rust bucket.

Dont get your panties twisted :p mines 14 this year, what I meant was unserviced cars that aren't looked after, what would the average 10 year old car be like if it wasn't looked after for 2 years and only looked at when it broke.
 

gam1984

Professional lurker.....
Sounds like a last-ditch attempt by the government to win over motorists votes, so they can sneak in other laws like road pricing, which involve spying on people or fleecing them.

2 yearly MOTs are an insane idea, however I wouldnt be surprised if the government bring in random 'roadworthiness' checks and extortionate on the spot fines.

I totally agree with that. It seems very suspicious that this has suddenly come out so recently after the massive objections from motorists about road charging.

I do detect some government spin here. I think that current government policy on cars has very little to do with road safety or the environment, just money.

Motorist organisations are getting much more willing to speak out about this.

So if you want to keep making money from things like speed cameras, toll roads, petrol and the congestion charge, etc then you have to offer a few incentives to try and keep people quiet, such as the proposed 80mph motorway speed limit, or the 2 yearly MOT.

Neither of these are even close to becoming law at the moment and may never be, but information is released about them in such a way and at such a time that it has the effect of making us think they will at some point.

It's like that with any unpopular government policy, whether it's transport, the state of the health service, wars, etc. You pacify the objecting public just enough so that you can still push your policies through.
 

Arnold

www.alanarnold.co.uk
Moderator
Site Supporter
Dont get your panties twisted :p mines 14 this year, what I meant was unserviced cars that aren't looked after, what would the average 10 year old car be like if it wasn't looked after for 2 years and only looked at when it broke.

I think that's the attitude of alot of car owners, fix it when its broken instead of taking preventative measures. Servicing isnt directly related to the safety of the vehicle though, i mean no servicing you do will change the way the car rusts away etc. I agree, tyres & brake pads are important, but the MOT picks up on this anyway. Not changing the oil or spark plugs shouldnt really effect anyone other than the driver of the car - when it breaks down.

I think advisories on MOT's should be looked at though, for example, getting one because your tyres are just about legal. Surely it should fail for that? because during the next 12 months at some point, they're going to be illegal. Parts should be forced to be changed, because at some point, they're going to fail / be illegal and cause major safety problems for the driver & other road users
 

Pete

Site Supporter
Of course there is such a thing as on the spot VOSA testing and we do quite regularly target vehicles.

Primarily commercial vehicles but VOSA have the authority to inspect and impound cars as well as goods vehicles. They EVEN have the authority to stop vehicles to carry out such checks, but they dont at the moment.
 

Fordy

Ex. Club Member
ive seen new cars that are 1 or 2 years old that are dangerous to be on the road and they dont need a mot untill on the 3rd year

but why change something thats been working for ages
 

Demarest

Ex. Club Member
Why? My car is 15 years old and flew through its last 3 MOT's without any advisories at all! You get cars that are 4-6 years old which fail for crap tyres & brakes. Just because it's old, doesnt mean it's a dangerous rust bucket.

True, my dad gets brand new citrion vans from the work every 4-5 years, and although a van obviously gets more abuse than a car, they fail every single M.O.T. that they have been put though on major items such as suspension and brakes.

Having M.O.T.s every 2 years is a dumb idea, alot happens to a car in a year. never mind 2.

Has anyone signed the petition
 

Ed

Fusion Motorsport
MSC Founder
Official MSC Trader
Cars these days have better corrosion resistance than ones of years ago. I see no problem with the 2 year mot other than the fact that the people who fail to regulary have their car serviced (i.e most here i bet) will less likely to have the faults pointed out to them at mot time. So I can see more things such as issues with brakes etc.

There are fery few valid arguments in this thread. You cannot just slate something without some kind of sensible reason.
 
Top