MOT exempt and insurance

[Robbie224]

Hello. Probably like many owner here I have a 71 historic mini registered for tax and mot exempt.
Is it worth sometimes putting vehicle through a voluntary MOT so if the worst ever happened would have some proof vehicle was in good working safely condition.
Would insurance companies be funny try getting out of any clam as no proof it's been MOT by a registered MOT person who can issue certificate etc?
Just a thought might of been covered here b4.

[mk1]

I do occasionally put my cars through MOT's just to have another set of eyes look at them. This has never caused a problem with the insurance.

Even if a car doesn't have to have an MOT it still needs to be roadworthy, this has not changed.

M

[Robbie224]

Makes sense to then. Mini probably in better condition now than it was leaving factory .
Thanks M

[Polarsilver]

My view this is all about the "Competence" of the Historic Vehicle Owner.. do "We".. have the knowledge,ability also equipment & the facility to carry out correct & proper maintenance of our Historic Vehicle ..or do "We" use / maybe pay another person that is competent is such matters?..i will say "if" there is any doubt about such competence.. go get an MOT Pass which to be fair will not maintain your car to a safe standard throughout that Insurance year.
More important to me the question about the MOT "Emissions Test" on any Historic Vehicle .. what is the current thinking on A Series MOT Emissions ?

[Peter Laidler]

The MoT test has absolutely no standing in law - except that you must have one - unless the car is exempt of course. It confirms that one day in the year, it complied with the necessary safety and environmental legislation. And even then, the updates and changes aren't retrospective!

You cannot enforce something that it not enforceable. If it doesn't need an MoT, then the insurance industry can't imply that it does - or should have.

The no MoT relaxation was as a result of some long standing research that confirmed that older car accidents, caused by MoT or mechanical failures were so rare that they did not even feature in statistics

I think we've been down this route before, so I've got my steel helmet on awaiting the incoming flak

[johnv]

I get my cars MOT'd every year. I know it shouldn't, but I just get the feeling that a complete MOT history would help if something untoward happened. It doesn't do the ease of resale any harm either.

[mk1]

Not all classic car owners look on the MOT excemption as a duty of responsibility on themselves. I have come across a few occasions when this has been looked on as a green light for the shoddiest cover up jobs that you can imagine. When this is queried, the answer is "No problem, it doesn't need an MOT".

Persoanlly, I still think it is a daft idea having any MOT excemption at all, I'd far rather the playing field was level for all cars. Unfortunately it is too difficult to shoe horn old cars into the one size fits all computerised MOT we have today.

[trevorhp]

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

[mk1]

Emission test results don't apply to old cars. It is just the old visible exhaust test. If it's smoking like it's a member of the red arrows, it can be failed.

With much of the test, cars are only tested to the level that was required when they were current models, no or very few MOT requirements are applied retrospectively.

An MOT tester could give chapter & verse on this, but this is exactly why old cars are exempt. It's just too complicated navigating through what does or does not apply.

Good question about a fail though. . . . . . I don't know the answer.

[Peter Laidler]

If your MoT exempt car failed a non statutory MoT test, then in law, that's the end of the matter. But the tester did tell you something important that needs fixing PDQ I'd say.

That said, most of the forumers here seem to be pretty-well versed with the mechanicals and mechanical requirements of their cars. I say SEEM to be well versed.........

[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 .