Should We Get Rid of the Required Yearly MOT Test?

anotheruser

Playing a little devils advocate here but I see many suggesting we should up the speed limit because "cars are safer these days". My argument against is that cars may be safer, but people are more stupid.

But it begs the question, should the requirement of a MOT test be dropped?

Perhaps a discount could be offered for those with a valid test certificate? I understand many people will leave their test and not bother, but surely it works like this in other countries?

Interested to hear peoples views.

System

anotheruser wrote: »

Playing a little devils advocate here but I see many suggesting we should up the speed limit because "cars are safer these days". My argument against is that cars may be safer, but people are more stupid.

HGV speed limits were increased last April by 25% on single carriageways from 40 to 50MPH and by 20% on dual carriageways from 50 to 60MPH. No increase in accidents.

But it begs the question, should the requirement of a MOT test be dropped?
.

You can have a new car, do 50,000 miles a year and by the time it gets its first MOT it will have 150,000 miles on it. You can have a car, hit something and the MOT is still valid. You can have a car pass an MOT and have something testable fail less than a week later, hell my wifes car one year passed the brake visual inspection part of the test and one of the brake hoses which had just passed visual inspection blew out on the brake effort test.

Far better would be a system which made servicing to the manufacturers schedule mandatory. It would mean cars had to be serviced as the manufacturer intended and couldn't do starship mileage between inspections.

Car_54

anotheruser wrote: »

Perhaps a discount could be offered for those with a valid test certificate? I understand many people will leave their test and not bother, but surely it works like this in other countries?

A discount off what?

And which other countries?

pappa_golf

a lot of classic car and bike owners whos vehicles do not require an mot are finding insurance hard to get without one

motorguy

anotheruser wrote: »

Playing a little devils advocate here but I see many suggesting we should up the speed limit because "cars are safer these days". My argument against is that cars may be safer, but people are more stupid.

Speed limits on motorways were set back in the days of mk1 Ford Escorts with drum brakes, no ABS, no servos and narrow little tyres. You would have had a heart like a lion to drive one at 70MPH.

Presently you can pretty much drive at 80MPH and the police wont bother with you. Also, what percentage of accidents are caused purely by excess speed, rather than excess speed for the prevalent conditions?

anotheruser wrote: »

But it begs the question, should the requirement of a MOT test be dropped?

Does it really??

I dont think so. Completely unrelated as far as i'm concerned.

anotheruser wrote: »

Perhaps a discount could be offered for those with a valid test certificate? I understand many people will leave their test and not bother, but surely it works like this in other countries?

Interested to hear peoples views.

A discount off what? Surely having a check on the braking ability, suspension wear and general roadworthiness of a car once a year is the absolute minimum that should be done?

Joe_Horner

motorguy wrote: »

Speed limits on motorways were set back in the days of mk1 Ford Escorts with drum brakes, no ABS, no servos and narrow little tyres. You would have had a heart like a lion to drive one at 70MPH.

Until we took it off road I was often to be seen doing 70 in our Daf with (single circuit) drums all round, no servo, no power steering and 135/13 tyres. Oh, and no wing mirrors.

Your's roaringly,

Leo.


:beer:

PasturesNew

I bought my 2006 car 2nd hand in 2010, it came with an MoT.

To date it's passed without issue 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016.

Although they did let me know a tyre was a bit low and the brakes would need doing soon....

But maybe it should be after: 3 years, 3 years, then 2 yearly until a car's about 15/16 and then annually.

BeenThroughItAll

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Until we took it off road I was often to be seen doing 70 in our Daf with (single circuit) drums all round, no servo, no power steering and 135/13 tyres. Oh, and no wing mirrors.

Your's roaringly,

Leo.


:beer:

Indeed. I was happily doing 70 in my near-30yo Triumph Herald in 1995. On a private road it'd do more than 90mph, and it stopped. Didn't kill me.

ETA: to answer the OP, if it were up to me cars would be checked every six months, and it would be punishable by flogging for a car to fail a test on a duff bulb, tyre, or wiper.

motorguy

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Until we took it off road I was often to be seen doing 70 in our Daf with (single circuit) drums all round, no servo, no power steering and 135/13 tyres. Oh, and no wing mirrors.

Your's roaringly,

Leo.


:beer:

You have my eternal respect!

boliston

Surely an mot of 54.85 is not much more than many people pay for one tank of fuel and is a small price to ensure cars are not unsafe. It can even enhance the value of an older car that needs to be sold as less risk to the buyer of an imminent mot failure.

motorguy

BeenThroughItAll wrote: »

Indeed. I was happily doing 70 in my near-30yo Triumph Herald in 1995. On a private road it'd do more than 90mph, and it stopped. Didn't kill me.

In fairness my first car was an old modded mini on drum brakes, no PAS, ABS etc and likewise it didnt kill me.

Not sure i'd want to be out in one in modern motorway traffic though...