Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • 50Twuncle
    • By 50Twuncle 30th Sep 17, 4:50 PM
    • 7,800Posts
    • 1,798Thanks
    50Twuncle
    MOT exempt
    • #1
    • 30th Sep 17, 4:50 PM
    MOT exempt 30th Sep 17 at 4:50 PM
    Why on earth has the government decided to exempt all 40+ year old cars, from MOT tests
    Surely - it is these old bangers that are likely to have dodgy brakes and are going to cause accidents
    And what about pollution ?
    These old carburettored cars - are going to emit heaps of CO and other nasties (particularly pre 78 diesels) - we have all seen old ex-taxi mercs emitting smoke
    What a stupid idea
Page 2
    • AdrianC
    • By AdrianC 1st Oct 17, 12:50 PM
    • 15,255 Posts
    • 13,592 Thanks
    AdrianC
    Sorry - but the present government is going down the completely wrong track with car tax - why should an old banger that puts out unlimited amounts of CO and pollutants, get a waiver from tax - whereas a new (virtually non polluting (105g/km) - suddenly go from £20 to £140 ?
    Originally posted by 50Twuncle
    You may have missed the subtle detail that the average new car now is in the £30 VED band. What do you think that's done to total government receipts from VED?
    • 50Twuncle
    • By 50Twuncle 1st Oct 17, 1:32 PM
    • 7,800 Posts
    • 1,798 Thanks
    50Twuncle
    You may have missed the subtle detail that the average new car now is in the £30 VED band. What do you think that's done to total government receipts from VED?
    Originally posted by AdrianC
    No it's not - it is £140
    • AdrianC
    • By AdrianC 1st Oct 17, 1:35 PM
    • 15,255 Posts
    • 13,592 Thanks
    AdrianC
    OK, yes - since this April it is. My apologies for not being clearer. I should have said "before this change".

    Thank you for so eloquently demonstrating my point, however.
    • Richard53
    • By Richard53 1st Oct 17, 8:41 PM
    • 2,533 Posts
    • 2,159 Thanks
    Richard53
    What Joe says.


    Also, if you're worried about emissions: older vehicles tend to be used for small mileages at weekends. It's the newer ones that are being thrashed endlessly up the motorway doing 40-50k miles a year. Which group do you think creates the most emissions overall?


    I'd like all vehicles to be non-polluting if possible, but in the real world it is sensible to concentrate on where the problem is most acute.
    An hour alone spells freedom to the slave.
    • droopsnoot
    • By droopsnoot 2nd Oct 17, 12:51 PM
    • 1,072 Posts
    • 675 Thanks
    droopsnoot
    Why on earth has the government decided to exempt all 40+ year old cars, from MOT tests
    Originally posted by 50Twuncle

    Because there's an EU-wide directive that says they must do so, as I understand it.


    Surely - it is these old bangers that are likely to have dodgy brakes and are going to cause accidents
    Originally posted by 50Twuncle

    I don't think the statistics back you up on that.


    As I said in another thread on this subject, there's probably more chance of being hit by an uninsured, unroadworthy modern car driven by someone without a license than someone driving a car from the affected years.


    Even as the cut-off year moves forward and brings in more powerful cars, and cars that might be reasonable to drive as daily drivers, there still isn't vast numbers of them sitting around waiting to come back to life. And fewer still when you take into account that the majority of owners will still be responsible people who will look after their cars.
    • Strider590
    • By Strider590 2nd Oct 17, 1:10 PM
    • 11,609 Posts
    • 6,508 Thanks
    Strider590
    You know what it is, and I experience it when I drive my kitcar, people think you're cheating, driving an older car when other people feel they have to pay large sums of money for their new ones, they think your not paying your dues, tax, insurance, MOT, garage repair bills, all the things they have to pay and they assume you don't.
    Ultimately you're seen as unwilling to conform and nothing angers the sheep more than someone who doesn't conform.
    “I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an a** of yourself.”

    <><><><><><><><><<><><><><><><><><><><><><> Don't forget to like and subscribe \/ \/ \/
    • AdrianC
    • By AdrianC 2nd Oct 17, 1:34 PM
    • 15,255 Posts
    • 13,592 Thanks
    AdrianC
    Because there's an EU-wide directive that says they must do so, as I understand it.
    Originally posted by droopsnoot
    Kinda, but not quite.

    There's a 2014 EU directive, which must be implemented by mid-May next year, that says that the bare minimum any country can have a historic vehicle exemption from roadworthiness testing is 30yrs, and any exemption must only apply to vehicles that are broadly to original spec. Anything above and beyond that is down to the countries. There doesn't have to be an exemption at all.

    The UK's 1960 exemption fits the "minimum 30yo". It doesn't fit the originality test, because it applies to everything pre 1960.

    So the UK had a choice to fit with the directive - introduce an originality test, or bin the pre-60 exemption completely. Bringing it forward to 40yo is ENTIRELY the UK's choice...
    • almillar
    • By almillar 2nd Oct 17, 1:56 PM
    • 7,062 Posts
    • 2,820 Thanks
    almillar
    why should an old banger
    An old banger?! A 10-20 year old car is an old banger. A 30+year old car is a classic, and there should be certain privileges associated with that. Motoring heritage and all that. There's certainly no-one profiting from running these oldies.
    Imagine in 50 years if all the petrol cars were scrapped, letting some kid hear what a V8 engine sounded like?!

    that puts out unlimited amounts of CO and pollutants
    Very limited actually - they'll mostly be on limited annual mileage insurance, unless you're seeing people commuting in these cars daily.

    The government claims that it is trying to reduce CO emissions - but by doing this - they prove otherwise !
    They have openly STOPPED taxing cars based on their CO2 emissions from April this year. If you still want to be taxed on this basis, feel free to buy one of the thousands of cars registered from 2001-2017 which are taxed on CO2 emissions.
    They have completely removed the incentive for people to go green.....
    No, they have redefined 'green'. Only electric cars (and hydrogen) are green, and pay £0 tax. There's your incentive.
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 2nd Oct 17, 2:52 PM
    • 2,286 Posts
    • 1,470 Thanks
    Car 54
    Because there's an EU-wide directive that says they must do so, as I understand it.
    Originally posted by droopsnoot
    The EU directive allows them to do it, it doesn't force them. In fact it allows them to set the limit at 30 years.


    http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20141203191730/http://www.dft.gov.uk/classic-mot/background/
    • bigadaj
    • By bigadaj 2nd Oct 17, 5:07 PM
    • 10,300 Posts
    • 6,605 Thanks
    bigadaj
    You know what it is, and I experience it when I drive my kitcar, people think you're cheating, driving an older car when other people feel they have to pay large sums of money for their new ones, they think your not paying your dues, tax, insurance, MOT, garage repair bills, all the things they have to pay and they assume you don't.
    Ultimately you're seen as unwilling to conform and nothing angers the sheep more than someone who doesn't conform.
    Originally posted by Strider590
    You are Tommy saxendale and I claim my £5.
    • Shoshannah
    • By Shoshannah 8th Oct 17, 10:36 AM
    • 632 Posts
    • 623 Thanks
    Shoshannah
    Do you have any idea how much work can go into maintaining a car of that age?! Trust me - no (running) car of over forty years old will be a 'banger'.

    As for the pollution aspect, I don't really care. My car is twenty-five years old so not exempt of tax or MOT in any case, but it's better looked after than some of the younger cars on the road today - and I will continue to drive it and maintain it as long as I see fit.

    I'm far more worried about the 2-year-old cars with bald tyres because they're MOT exempt and their owners don't know or care to check them before the first MOT is due.
    • ilikewatch
    • By ilikewatch 8th Oct 17, 10:47 AM
    • 1,042 Posts
    • 1,235 Thanks
    ilikewatch
    Do you have any idea how much work can go into maintaining a car of that age?! Trust me - no (running) car of over forty years old will be a 'banger'.
    Originally posted by Shoshannah
    Most won't, but I can personally think of 3 mid-seventies vehicles (Capri, Cortina, VW camper) which have been parked up for years since failing their tests due to corrosion. All of them start and drive and I would be amazed if all 3 weren't back on the road as soon as they are MOT exempt with nothing more than a fresh tank of petrol, a wash and a jump start to "recommission them".
    • Shoshannah
    • By Shoshannah 8th Oct 17, 2:37 PM
    • 632 Posts
    • 623 Thanks
    Shoshannah
    The fact that two are Fords speaks volumes.

    When this is implemented, I wonder how it will happen. Presumably all vehicles over the certain age will suddenly become MOT exempt in the way you describe.

    Ideally, it would apply only to vehicles whose last recorded MOT test resulted in a pass, not a fail. Far from foolproof in preventing unroadworthy old vehicles hitting the road, but it's a start.

    I also think that a vehicle that has been off road (SORNd) for more than a certain period of time (three years?) should have to pass an MOT before being used again, regardless of age.

    Probably won't happen that way, though.
    • jack_pott
    • By jack_pott 8th Oct 17, 3:01 PM
    • 4,181 Posts
    • 5,309 Thanks
    jack_pott
    The amount of pollution and road wear caused by cyclists must be huge.
    I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you.
    Friedrich Nietzsche
    • 50Twuncle
    • By 50Twuncle 8th Oct 17, 4:17 PM
    • 7,800 Posts
    • 1,798 Thanks
    50Twuncle
    The amount of pollution and road wear caused by cyclists must be huge.
    Originally posted by jack_pott
    All of the CO2 breathed out by unhealthy cyclists and as for the rubber that must be laid down from all of the hard acceleration and wheel spinning - you mean ?
    • Joe Horner
    • By Joe Horner 8th Oct 17, 5:26 PM
    • 4,123 Posts
    • 3,612 Thanks
    Joe Horner
    The amount of pollution and road wear caused by cyclists must be huge.
    Originally posted by jack_pott
    Funny thing, that, back-of-an-envelope figures suggest that the pressure on the road surface from a typical bike tyre is actually a little higher than the pressure from a typical car tyre.

    Say 90kg bike + rider, equally split between two tyres with a contact area of 28 square cm each gives 1.6kg per sq cm.

    1500kg car + driver split between 4 tyres with a contact area of 310 sq cm each gives 1.2 kg per sq cm.

    So, yes, per contact area, the bike will be producing higher wear
    • 50Twuncle
    • By 50Twuncle 8th Oct 17, 6:10 PM
    • 7,800 Posts
    • 1,798 Thanks
    50Twuncle
    Funny thing, that, back-of-an-envelope figures suggest that the pressure on the road surface from a typical bike tyre is actually a little higher than the pressure from a typical car tyre.

    Say 90kg bike + rider, equally split between two tyres with a contact area of 28 square cm each gives 1.6kg per sq cm.

    1500kg car + driver split between 4 tyres with a contact area of 310 sq cm each gives 1.2 kg per sq cm.

    So, yes, per contact area, the bike will be producing higher wear . it
    Originally posted by Joe Horner
    Good point !!
    • shaun from Africa
    • By shaun from Africa 8th Oct 17, 6:53 PM
    • 9,495 Posts
    • 10,665 Thanks
    shaun from Africa
    The amount of pollution and road wear caused by cyclists must be huge.
    Originally posted by jack_pott
    Not to mention the tons of damaged and used Lycra that probably ends up in landfill.
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 8th Oct 17, 7:09 PM
    • 2,286 Posts
    • 1,470 Thanks
    Car 54
    Funny thing, that, back-of-an-envelope figures suggest that the pressure on the road surface from a typical bike tyre is actually a little higher than the pressure from a typical car tyre.

    Say 90kg bike + rider, equally split between two tyres with a contact area of 28 square cm each gives 1.6kg per sq cm.

    1500kg car + driver split between 4 tyres with a contact area of 310 sq cm each gives 1.2 kg per sq cm.

    So, yes, per contact area, the bike will be producing higher wear
    Originally posted by Joe Horner
    That is a very dodgy argument, as I'm sure you know
    • Joe Horner
    • By Joe Horner 8th Oct 17, 7:16 PM
    • 4,123 Posts
    • 3,612 Thanks
    Joe Horner
    That is a very dodgy argument, as I'm sure you know
    Originally posted by Car 54
    I'm sure I don't know what you mean!

    If a car and a cyclist sat side by side at the lights then the figures clearly say the cyclist will sink into the tarmac before the car does!
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

86Posts Today

2,054Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @furyboy86: @MartinSLewis I read your email, and decided to check my account interest rates. My main account = 0.0%(!) and my cash ISA =?

  • Yes. Theyre being paid. They're responsible. Especially for a scam that's been reported over 20 times andseen vulne? https://t.co/Q0pHZ7iH3W

  • Quite right.Broken system as the six week delay forces the most vulnerable into debt at a crisis moment https://t.co/951fogq5ej

  • Follow Martin