MOT exempt and insurance

[mab01uk]

Even though your classic car may be exempt from MOT, on a low annual mileage classic it is always worth checking the date code on the tyres, there may be plenty of tread left but the structure of the tyre may have significantly degraded along with the level of grip!

[hanlminiman]

Even though your classic car may be exempt from MOT, on a low annual mileage classic it is always worth checking the date code on the tyres, there may be plenty of tread left but the structure of the tyre may have significantly degraded along with the level of grip!

Totally agree re MOT exempt but also consider the time spent parked up on the tyres.
I have just replaced my 2019 road car tyres which had about 3- 4 mm tread all round but had been stood during the Covid lockdown period and were also showing signs of pothole damage. Also I walk locally rather than use a car. No problem with MOT but dealer recommended replacement at last service and must admit it was already on my to do list this Autumn.

[Catmint]

We go to our local MOT man and ask for a safety check, ie an MOT without the ticket, and get a reciept to prove it has been done

[Exminiman]

I would think, its OK as long as you dont have an accident.....

Just my thoughts.......

If you drove a car that had failed its MOT (regardless of whether it has to have one or not) and had an accident, especially an accident attributable to the MOT failure, I cant see the plea "It doesn't need an MOT legally, so it doesn't count" holding any water.....

I think an MOT is a sensible thing to do, in the ned its a cheap way to get your car inspected for faults. If it fails, I would always fix the issues and get a pass certificate, to record the fact that the faults are fixed....

[mk1]

As has already been said, all that ANY MOT says is that a car was capable of passing an MOT test the actual second it was tested, no more no less.

If you were driving an MOT exempt car & you had a wheel fall off on the way back from a voluntary MOT, after it had failed the test because of loose wheel nuts. Then the lack of an MOT Is totally irrelevant, the offence would be "driving a vehicle that is unfit for the road". This applies regardless of whether a car did or did not pass an MOT.

It is ALWAYS The driver's responsibility to ensure that ANY vehicle he takes on the road is fit for purpose. This is why van drivers can't blame their bosses for making them drive a clapped out death trap.

Also, an insurance company will never not pay out because an MOT exempt vehicle does not have an MOT test.

There is a hell of a lot of overthinking going on in this thread!

[IslandBlue]

Just wondering if an exempt car fails an actual MOT test is it then illegal to drive it knowing that it has failed for whatever reason?
For instance the current emissions test is pretty strict.
T

From what I can recall there used to be a section on the MOT form to state the reasons if in the tester's opinion the vehicle was dangerous or unsafe to drive (e.g faulty brakes). Other than that I have always assumed it was permissible to drive a failure directly home (assuming you'd not travelled halfway across the country to reach the MOT station of your choice!) On the other hand if it's failed it's presumably unroadworthy by definition, although equally it may not actually be unsafe if driven with care and regard to the fault. Perhaps I'm overthinking it though

Personally I like to have mine tested for peace of mind and because ultimately I'm not a qualified mechanic and the tester gets a far better view of the underneath etc. than I can. Passed last week as it happens although I discovered I'd missed the recent tax (free) renewal when I received a red reminder at the weekend!

It was so easy when they gave you a tax disc to stick in your window as a visible reminder. I definitely didn't receive the usual first request, I wonder how may people get fined because of an honest mistake?

[mab01uk]

Personally I like to have mine tested for peace of mind and because ultimately I'm not a qualified mechanic and the tester gets a far better view of the underneath etc. than I can. Passed last week as it happens although I discovered I'd missed the recent tax (free) renewal when I received a red reminder at the weekend!

It was so easy when they gave you a tax disc to stick in your window as a visible reminder. I definitely didn't receive the usual first request, I wonder how may people get fined because of an honest mistake?

Apparently car tax evasion rates have more than tripled since the visible paper tax disc was abolished by the government in 2014, Department for Transport figures show. When the paper disc was ended in October 2014 the Government said it would save the DVLA around £7million annually. The move has had the opposite effect with up to £119million in lost revenue from unpaid vehicle tax each year and the higher levels of evasion comes despite widespread use of ANPR cameras.....

[Andrew1967]

Passed last week as it happens although I discovered I'd missed the recent tax (free) renewal when I received a red reminder at the weekend!

It was so easy when they gave you a tax disc to stick in your window as a visible reminder. I definitely didn't receive the usual first request, I wonder how may people get fined because of an honest mistake?

Oddly enough, I got a red reminder for the tax on my everyday car at the weekend and again I definitely didn't receive the first request.

[Herbert]

I always get my S MOT'ed. It makes sense as I will know the car is roadworthy but to cap it all its cheaper to pay the MOT fee than it is to have the garage spend an hour which at my garage (with REAL mechanics) that would cost me £80.

[goff]

One thing to watch is if you are going to europe with your classic !!! , i went to classic Le-Man last year and looked at RAC European cover , it states if the car is not taxed or MOT'd they will not recover your vehicle , so i got mine tested just in case , GREY AREA !!!! , did not want to be arguing with RAC if i needed them .

[GraemeC]

Passed last week as it happens although I discovered I'd missed the recent tax (free) renewal when I received a red reminder at the weekend!

It was so easy when they gave you a tax disc to stick in your window as a visible reminder. I definitely didn't receive the usual first request, I wonder how may people get fined because of an honest mistake?

Oddly enough, I got a red reminder for the tax on my everyday car at the weekend and again I definitely didn't receive the first request.

I’ve had similar but no reminders and then a fine.
When ‘discussing’ it with DVLA they were very clear that it is the owner’s responsibility to remember and that they have no duty to send reminders. Even when argued that they have set the precedent by doing so in 99% of cases they stood their ground.

As for MOTs - my fairly elderly parents over-turned their car on a main road and it wasn’t until the insurance company were settling the total loss claim that it came to light the car was out of MOT (yes the police hadn’t picked up on it!).
After a few moments of dread on my part that we’d be a world of pain and loss of lots of money, the insurance assessor said “it’s OK, we just deduct 25% from the payout”

[trevorhp]

I believe that if you voluntarily MOT an MOT exempt vehicle and it fails, it goes on the record and you cannot tax even a tax exempt vehicle until it passes a further MOT test, just like a non exempt vehicle.
Could prove problematic if you were in a hurry.

[BAD942B]

I believe that if you voluntarily MOT an MOT exempt vehicle and it fails, it goes on the record and you cannot tax even a tax exempt vehicle until it passes a further MOT test, just like a non exempt vehicle.
Could prove problematic if you were in a hurry.

I think that is correct, same as if a vehicle was found in a dangerous condition on a roadside check, if its very dangerous it must be either repaired there & then or lifted to a repair facility but not driven on the road

[Peter Laidler]

Not sure about that.......... VERY basically, if you have a defect at a police roadside check in your PLG car, you'll be issued with a vehicle defect notice. If you drive off, usually with a vehicle defect notice ordering you to repair it (bit more to it than that.....) you can drive home even though the examiner will be hopping up and down like a frog on fire. He can't do anything because it is simply what is termed a continuing offence.

An article in the Daily Mail today tells you about the MoT test

[IslandBlue]

I’ve had similar but no reminders and then a fine.
When ‘discussing’ it with DVLA they were very clear that it is the owner’s responsibility to remember and that they have no duty to send reminders. Even when argued that they have set the precedent by doing so in 99% of cases they stood their ground.

This begins to look like entrapment!

I accept that ultimately it's the owner's responsibility to ensure their vehicle is taxed, BUT - if they can send you an email and/or a text message to confirm you've renewed your tax then it cannot be beyond the wit of man to send a reminder via the same means when it expires. They could even give you the option not to receive a paper reminder which surely would save them some money?!

[hanlminiman]

I have always been wary of small brown envelopes arriving through my letter box. If the brown envelope is too big for the letter box I might have struck lucky but have a problem putting the contents into a bank.
Seriously, I have 2 DVLA envelopes arrive this month for 31 August renewal with one another requiring payment. To be honest I do put a note in my diary as I once forgot many years ago but luckily did not have a problem.

[111Robin]

You can select to receive an MOT reminder from DVLA on the MOT check website.

[monkeyjim]

I am not going to say whether you should or should not have your classic Mot’d but as a MOT tester it is interesting reading this thread.
You do all know the mot manual hand guide is available on-line on .gov webpages?
Testing guide : Not really any concern to the car owner , it is for testers, site managers and garage owners.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/mot-testing-guide

Mot manual. This is of use as it is what the testers go by but don’t get too carried away , read carefully as there are many dates for items and as such not applicable in some circumstances.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/mot-inspect ... l-vehicles

Emissions for those who may be interested is under section 8 Nuisance .
You only need to test vehicles registered from 1/8/1975 so that is P reg onwards.
There was a comment the emissions test has got stricter. Emissions test limits are carried out in categories depending on the vehicle year so there is no concern that a 1990 Mini is expected to pass a emissions test to the same limits as a 3 year old Golf.
There are flow charts in section 8 that help to identify what emissions test to carry out.

In all honesty if your competent enough to rebuild your car there is no reason why you and a helper could not do the basic safety check that is the Mot . I realise you may want to get a professional look at it for piece of mind. If it were mot’d it is only really valid to be fault free at time of test . You could drive into a pot hole pulling onto the main road when leaving the test station resulting in a bulge on a tyres inner sidewall (mot failure) but it still has 12 months MOT .
Get helper to wiggle steering , put foot on the brake , operate handbrake , wiggle the wheels checking for play whilst you are there with a light checking what is happening as the helper does there stuff.
Check all lights work properly and there is no interaction with other lamps ….sure some of you remember the mk3 escorts that turned the rear lamps into a flashing disco light because of earthing and corrosion issues. , horn and wipers must work. Check there is no excessive play or corrosion in steering , suspension or brake components , make sure there is no excessive corrosion within 12 inches of seatbelt , suspension , steering or brakes mounts including subframe mounts in our case. No twisted chaffed or split brake hoses or excessively corroded hose ferrules or brake pipes. Brake disc back plates are not a mot item unless they are going to adversely affect steering suspension or brake components. I put that in as the disc back plates on my wife’s 1996 Spi have corroded at there mounts and had broken away . She thought they were needed for MOT , they aren’t but she wanted them replaced . Check Tyres and the rest etc etc as per the manual.

Incidentally unlike some vehicle test categories that have a 10 year age limit on tyres the class 4 (car ) mot does not have a date limit.

I am sure you guys and gals on here if you find something is loose broken or in need of adjustment you will rectify it. What the barn find brigade on eBay do with classics could be entirely different .
Incidentally since when is a old concrete lock up garage a barn?
How do the ads go…..Barn find , mk1 , Cooper S , works , GT , nos, retro , deco , mid century….lol .
I have a house in central France . They have proper barns and barn finds over there.

Hope that helps.
D

[111Robin]

100% monkeyjim, the vast majority of folk on here should feel confident enough in performing MOT level safety checks on their cars, it's not rocket science and I for one know my cars better than any random garage MOT tester. I sold a Mini I had owned for thirty years a while back, never had any issues with it, always maintained as it should be. I checked recently to see if the new owner had MOT'd it and there was a list as long as your arm in the advisories section. It failed for emissions (1989 car) but I told the new owner to turn the jets up a couple of flats before the test and it would pass no bother, but he didn't. Some of the advisories were laughable like "grease visible on ball joint boots". Anyone with any Mini knowledge knows this means it has actually been maintained, it's not a fault.
Each to their own obviously but I for one won't take my classics for an MOT unless the rules are changed and I certainly don't feel less safe in doing so.

[DougR]

This is a fascinating discussion. Over here in Ireland we have a thing called the National Car Test (NCT) and it's operated by APPLUS which is a huge Spanish conglomerate. The whole testing thing is computerised so when you are getting your car tested they type in the reg number and the computer then knows all the parameters for that car and it is tested against those. If you rock up with your 1965 Cooper S 1275 the response is going to be 'Computer says no'. So they will have no parameters to test against. One could suggest that they check that the brakes work and the brake pipes are ok and they could put it onto the suspension rocking thing to check the ball joints for play and all that good stuff. But they're never going to pass it and issue a certificate because the computer can't cope with it. That's why all pre-1980 cars are exempt. They used to regularly fail my 1993 Saab 900 Turbo because they couldn't find the second VIN number. It is stamped into the tailgate locking panel and no matter how many times I showed them they never updated the computer because they couldn't. So, what is my point? If you have MOT testers who can test classic cars and be flexible, then I think it is a good idea to get it done for your own peace of mind. If you have a test regime that is inflexible and can never issue a certificate due to the incapability of the system, then there is no point in trying and the insurance companies will be aware of this. So in many respects we over here are in a better position from a legal point of view. I personally would love to have my cars inspected by an independent legally bound operator but it seems that that is not available unless I employ a registered motor engineer at huge cost. That's my tuppence worth. Cheers, Doug.