MOT Expiry

Mart34

Hi guys
My MOT is due on my vehicle on the 5th December, but hoping to get it in slightly early, howver if the car fails it's MOT does it then void the original MOT certificate that's valid until 5th December

Master_Blaster

No, it does not. However the defect that caused it to fail must be rectified to make the car road legal.

BeenThroughItAll

Master_Blaster wrote: »

No, it does not. However the defect that caused it to fail must be rectified to make the car road legal.

Not at all, a car can fail its MOT on all kinds of things that don't make it illegal to use on the road - if it already has a valid MOT, and fails an early one, the existing MOT remains valid and the car remains road legal right up until the expiry of the original if the fault itself doesn't contravene road traffic laws; and after the original expires it only becomes non-road-legal as a result of not having a current MOT - not necessarily because of what it failed the MOT on.

Examples include emissions failures, airbag failures, abs failures, seatbelts being worn, etc.

Any one of those could fail an MOT, but the police can't prosecute you for having a duff lambda sensor or an airbag that doesn't work, or for having seatbelts which are cut in half unless there's someone sat in the seat they're for.

Master_Blaster

Regulation 48 of Construction and Use covers the seat belt. VOSA may have you on the emissions but I'll give you the airbag light.

BeenThroughItAll

Master_Blaster wrote: »

Regulation 48 of Construction and Use covers the seat belt. VOSA may have you on the emissions but I'll give you the airbag light.

Not meeting C&U regulations does not necessarily equal an offence. A policeman will not prosecute you for having a cut seatbelt unless someone was sat in the seat not using it - irrespective of what RTA 41/42 might allow.


Also, VOSA taking action doesn't necessarily = an offence being committed.


Thanks for your generosity regarding the airbag light. How about middle brake lights, wiper blades, broken speedometer? There's plenty more examples of MOT fails which don't make the vehicle illegal to use on the road.

Master_Blaster

I think you need to look a construction and use regulations as police do prosecute for them.

JustinR1979

Master_Blaster wrote: »

I think you need to look a construction and use regulations as police do prosecute for them.

There are always grey areas with mot's.
Where mot's are compared to construction and use it's a dark matter.

Tilt

The original MOT remains valid up until it's expiry date even if a newer MOT test produces a fail. However if the reason for the fail is due to the car being in an un-roadworthy condition (defective brakes, steering, tyres etc) then you would be committing an offence driving it anyway thus you would need to get the fault(s) rectified immediately.

Joe_Horner

Technically anything that fails an MOT will also contravene C&U or other regulations, make it unroadworthy in the strict sense, and driving it will constitute an offence.

But in practice the chances of you being stopped and prosecuted for (say) a seatbelt failing to fully retract when fastened across an empty seat is nil. Unless you really upset someone roadside checks aren't going to go much past lights, tyres, brakes, steering and obvious hole / bits falling off.

Besides, the simple situation is that, if it fails, you're not driving any more illegally than you were the day before because, as far as the law's concerned it's your responsibility to ensure it meets the minimum standard of the MOT at all times - "I didn't know about it" isn't a defence.

Before the tester tells you about something you might be able to mitigate sentence with "I didn't know that was wrong" but you won't be found not guilty because of it

BeenThroughItAll

Master_Blaster wrote: »

I think you need to look a construction and use regulations as police do prosecute for them.

I'm aware of the C&U regs, thanks. And I'm aware the police can and do prosecute for them, but your statement in answer to the OP's question that "the defect that caused it to fail must be rectified to make the car road legal" was, and still is, incorrect and that is what I set out to demonstrate using realistic examples.


I am VERY happy for you to point me to any case you can find where someone has, to continue the original example, been prosecuted for having a car with a cut or otherwise inoperable seatbelt on an unoccupied seat.


Yes, police will prosecute for an overweight vehicle, or for severe or safety-critical defects, or even for the results of a non-safety critical defect (for example, where the wiper blades I mentioned earlier as not making the car illegal to use in their own right cause the driver to be unable to see through the screen, in which case he could be prosecuted as a result of the wipers not being good enough to pass the MOT); but your implication that a contravention of C&U regulations = a definite prosecution is false.

BeenThroughItAll

Joe_Horner wrote: »

But in practice the chances of you being stopped and prosecuted for (say) a seatbelt failing to fully retract when fastened across an empty seat is nil. Unless you really upset someone roadside checks aren't going to go much past lights, tyres, brakes, steering and obvious hole / bits falling off.

Yep, that's exactly what I said, and yet Mr Blaster doesn't seem to agree with my post.