What it means is from early next year any car 40 years old will be MoT exempt. Now I know we already have pre 1960 cars that don't require a test but those cars only ever fall into the cherished category. There are still folks around that will buy an R reg car or older and see it as cheap transport, freeing them of the requirement to get it tested will see a few barn finds back on the road without being checked for safety!
Rolling too so every year things will take up the slack, eventually my 145 won't need an MoT!
Wonder if I'll get my '89 integrale done before it doesn't require one?
Right, off to fetch that '75 Sud that's almost falling in half and use it as my daily driver, smashing
Definitely bonkers. I was going to rebuild all the brake callipers on my 1976 Ti to get it on the road, but from next March I won't need too even though it has almost no brakes ! It will still be illegal to drive a vehicle which is not roadworthy but who will know until you have an accident. However your insurance states that the vehicle must be roadworthy. It is only a matter of time before there is a serious accident caused by an unroadworthy classic and then the government will have a reason to justify restricting the use of classic cars. It has been proposed before that older vehicles be banned from motorways. Or perhaps a blanket speed limit for older cars as they must all be unsafe.
Totally agree with crank . Then what your have to do to prove your car is safe to drive at speed. is an MOT
There will definitely be a catch in all of this . But definitely crazy .
Powered by the dark side
Gt jtdm blackline
S2 33 cl veloce 16v sleeping
Freestyle superjet jetski
Any responsible road user would want a certified 2nd opinion concerning the safety of their vehicle. Many owners of exempt vehicles still MOT their cars - surely any car with a test certificate will be worth when it comes time to sell. As has been intimated I can see a long-term government strategy here.
Yep, agree it has all the hallmarks of the government just waiting for an excuse to limit or worse, ban classics from the road once an accident has been caused by a classic that hasn't had an MoT.
Why there couldn't be a 2nd tier of test for older classics I just can't see?
Once a car gets to 40 then just test the basic safety stuff like do the brakes work, is a ball joint about to fall out, is the car ready to fall in half!
Imagine how the loony left will react if a classic runs into a pedestrian due to a bottom joint falling out, we'd be banned from the road in no time!
My van is as good as banned from inside the m25 and Heathrow
In February I went to excel centre and two months later got a thousand pound fine for not paying low emission zone charge but right at the bottom of the letter they had let me off
But last weekend took my daughter to Roehampton uni in the van and just after chesington world of adventure low emission zone starts didn’t even think about it before I left so had to pay £100 next day should have gone in jcb it’s free road tax and free to enter emission zone
I agree this is not a good idea. As Kev says there is a lot of difference between a cherished classic and the classic "old banger" that we all learned to drive in (mine was an Austin Maxi with worn out piston rings and terminal rust). Fortunately I don't have to worry, as any form of radically altered car, including kit cars and kit conversions are explicitly excluded from this proposed legislation. After all, a kit car can't be a classic, can it???
