Only 6 days left to have your vote on the MOT

[Les burrows]

In my opinion yet another stupid idea by the Uk government
Les

 

[JimD]

Not sure how to react to this as I've always thought of MOTs as an utter PITA (and possibly an excuse for unscrupulous garages to charge for unnecessary work).

On the other hand there are undoubtedly people out there who would take advantage of looser controls to run cars that might be unsafe.

Surely if you get your car serviced annually, any serious defects should be identified then provided it's done properly and isn't just a rubber stamp exercise.

 

[DBedford]

Why is there an issue in the first MOT being 4 not 3 years? Car design and manufacturing has improved beyond compare over the last 30 years.

As for servicing detecting faults, the word is ‘if’ you get your car serviced. New cars tend to be serviced, either by the private owner or the leasing company (business users). I think the issue lies with older privately owned cars, which on the whole may not be serviced.

My concern is that opening up the first MOT to 4 years, then what next, the annual MOT opening up to 18 months or 2 years? Then there will be issues!!!

 

[Les burrows]

H Jim I can see your point but I when I need an MOT or any off our cars have needed one I have always gone to an MOT station that only do MOT testing and not repairs, which rules out the unscrupulousness of garages which I agree are around always have been, you see Jim I once work at an MOT testing station collecting and delivering vehicles and assisting the testers in doing the testing so I have seen some of the things that go on.

Has the guy in the video rightly points out when money gets tight one of the last things the last people like doing is spending money on servicing and repairs as you say if they can avoid it often saying it’s running fine so it well be ok until it I can afford to get it repaired and the continue to drive it, as for servicing that to can be good and bad as well as we all know that’s where the rubber stamp can be found in the service book for things that have not been done are checked.

And DBeford what you have written, that is exactly what is said in the video,
in my opinion the MOT is not fit for purpose and never has been, in the first 3 years a car can do many many miles or next to nothing without being serviced or even having any safety checks, so it’s servicing to set ridged standards that should be compulsory to do these checks.
Yes vehicles are on the whole much safer now than they where years ago ( then I think about LKA and MG pilot issue that have shown up in this forum ) but brakes tyres steering and suspension parts can wear out and sometimes in far less than 3/4 years.
Les

 

[tsedge]

This change will most likely go hand in hand with a dramatic increase in the price of MOTs, to offset the fact that they are done less often.

 

[DBedford]

And DBedford what you have written, that is exactly what is said in the video,

I don’t watch the video Les.

in my opinion the MOT is not fit for purpose and never has been, but brakes tyres steering and suspension parts can wear out and sometimes in far less than 3/4 years.
Les

What would your suggestion for an MOT replacement be Les?

 

[Lguk]

For a period of time there was a very high % of French vehicles failing their first mots for mechanical items. So I get the reluctance on the 4 years change.

You only have to look at America to see the shonky kinda lethal crap we could end up with driving around if there wasn't an MOT at all.

Currently there's a lot of EVs failing first mots for tyres, as I assume people are fitting lower weight rated tyres when the factory fit ones run out as they're cheaper (never personally understood scrimping on the one part of the car that touches the road)

 

[Les burrows]

I don’t watch the video Les.

What would your suggestion for an MOT replacement be Les?

Hi DBedford,
That’s a good question and I don’t really have an answer for you, but I certainly dont agree with it going to longer than 3 years and then every other year, maybe a mileage system might be better what I mean is for example let’s say every 12000 miles or a maximum of 3 years for the first safety check or MOT call it what you will I don’t know.
As I said earlier in #4 maybe servicing should be compulsory and I’m not just taking EVs here all vehicles would need to be done and recorded as being done how many times have you been behind a diesel chucking out thick black soot while accelerating a lot of the time that can be down to dirty filters which have not been changed when they should have been, other vehicles of all fuels with choked air filters which are then burning much more fuel than they should be and pumping out more emissions than they should the list go on.

Full BEVs should be cheaper to have MOTed but I bet they or not, why some might ask should they be cheaper well a smoke test or emissions check can take up 15-20 of the tester time if done properly none of that on a BEV.

Many have purchased a vehicle with the idea if it’s got a full years MOT then that’s a good sign its a good vehicle, I believe a full service history is a far better assurance of a vehicles condition, last year we got my wife an MG4 her old car a Vauxhall Corsa 16 years old was sold with a full service history and a fully stamped service book the first four stamps from a main dealer and 12 others from a reputable garage near by along with 13 mots to verify mileage and every receipt for every part that was ever fitted to the car and there wasn’t many of them because not much went wrong with it because it was properly serviced each year.
Les
P.S. maybe you should watch the video and cast your vote.

 

[Les burrows]

This has popped up today on Auto Express
Les

NEWS

• Home
• News

Plans for cars to have first MoT after four years branded "dangerous"​

Government plans for new cars to require their first MoT after four or five years instead of three have been met with criticism​

by: Tristan Shale-Hester
22 Mar 2023
17

The automotive industry has spoken out against Government proposals to change the MoT system, branding the idea “dangerous”.
A Department for Transport (DfT) consultation has asked whether a ‘4-1-1’ MoT system should be adopted. This would see new cars requiring their first MoT after four – or even five – years instead of three, with tests then continuing on an annual basis after that.

• 
  
  MoT test checklist: top tips to help your car pass first time

The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) commissioned a survey of 1,784 drivers, asking for their thoughts on the proposals. Some 67 per cent said they were concerned that extending the period after which the first MoT is required would put lives in danger, while 74 per cent said the typical MoT cost of between £35 and £45 is a price worth paying to ensure their car is roadworthy.
The DfT has estimated that the 4-1-1 MoT system would save drivers £91million and £117million per year, but 87 per cent of respondents said they would prefer an alternative way of saving money, such as a reduction in vehicle excise duty or fuel duty.

High failure rate for first MoTs​

The SMMT highlights that more than 300,000 new cars fail their first MoT test each year, with safety issues often arising in relation to tyres, brakes, lights and suspension. The organisation’s research suggests 23, 19 and 17 per cent of drivers don’t check the condition of their brakes, tyres and lights respectively on a regular basis. Meanwhile, 66 per cent of those surveyed said they wouldn’t buy a three-year-old car without an MoT.

• 
  
  What is an MOT: how much does it cost and how long does it take?

Mike Hawes, chief executive of the SMMT, said: “Safety is the number one priority for the automotive industry and the MoT is a crucial component in keeping the UK’s vehicles and roads safe. Our survey shows that drivers support the existing MoT frequency and that there is little appetite to change it, despite the increased cost of living.
“If changes to the MoT are to be made, these should enable testing of advanced electrified powertrains, driver assistance technologies and connected and automated features, as drivers value the peace of mind the MOT offers.”
The Independent Garage Association (IGA) has responded to the DfT’s consultation and also opposes the plans. Its chief executive, Stuart James, commented: “Based on the research and member feedback compiled when writing our consultation response, it is clear that any changes made will impact road safety far more than the Government anticipates.
What are your thoughts on the idea of requiring a car's first MoT after four years? Let us know in the comments...

 

[Gadget Geek]

This has popped up today on Auto Express
Les

NEWS

• Home
• News

Plans for cars to have first MoT after four years branded "dangerous"​

Government plans for new cars to require their first MoT after four or five years instead of three have been met with criticism​

by: Tristan Shale-Hester
22 Mar 2023
17

The automotive industry has spoken out against Government proposals to change the MoT system, branding the idea “dangerous”.
A Department for Transport (DfT) consultation has asked whether a ‘4-1-1’ MoT system should be adopted. This would see new cars requiring their first MoT after four – or even five – years instead of three, with tests then continuing on an annual basis after that.

• 
  
  MoT test checklist: top tips to help your car pass first time

The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) commissioned a survey of 1,784 drivers, asking for their thoughts on the proposals. Some 67 per cent said they were concerned that extending the period after which the first MoT is required would put lives in danger, while 74 per cent said the typical MoT cost of between £35 and £45 is a price worth paying to ensure their car is roadworthy.
The DfT has estimated that the 4-1-1 MoT system would save drivers £91million and £117million per year, but 87 per cent of respondents said they would prefer an alternative way of saving money, such as a reduction in vehicle excise duty or fuel duty.

High failure rate for first MoTs​

The SMMT highlights that more than 300,000 new cars fail their first MoT test each year, with safety issues often arising in relation to tyres, brakes, lights and suspension. The organisation’s research suggests 23, 19 and 17 per cent of drivers don’t check the condition of their brakes, tyres and lights respectively on a regular basis. Meanwhile, 66 per cent of those surveyed said they wouldn’t buy a three-year-old car without an MoT.

• 
  
  What is an MOT: how much does it cost and how long does it take?

Mike Hawes, chief executive of the SMMT, said: “Safety is the number one priority for the automotive industry and the MoT is a crucial component in keeping the UK’s vehicles and roads safe. Our survey shows that drivers support the existing MoT frequency and that there is little appetite to change it, despite the increased cost of living.
“If changes to the MoT are to be made, these should enable testing of advanced electrified powertrains, driver assistance technologies and connected and automated features, as drivers value the peace of mind the MOT offers.”
The Independent Garage Association (IGA) has responded to the DfT’s consultation and also opposes the plans. Its chief executive, Stuart James, commented: “Based on the research and member feedback compiled when writing our consultation response, it is clear that any changes made will impact road safety far more than the Government anticipates.
What are your thoughts on the idea of requiring a car's first MoT after four years? Let us know in the comments...

300,000 is a high number for 3 year old cars. Why weren't the tyres, brakes and suspension picked up on the previous services as advisories?

 

[Ian Key]

Because they were just that, advisories, and the owners thought the garage was trying to rip them off with work that wasn't necessary.

 

[Gadget Geek]

With an advisory through, you can check the tyres and brakes yourself or get a second opinion at a cheaper tyre fitter or garage, so there is no real incentive for the dealership to be dishonest in this case.

 

[robertb]

The government have accurate pass/fail data, we have anecdotal evidence. They know statistically how many newly registered cars pass or fail their first test, they even know which makes and models these are and how many miles they have done in that period.

Whether or not the government choose the correct thing to do with that data is certainly up for debate but the fact remains. They have hard data to drive their decision making, we don't.
The question should be "Do we trust them to arrive at the correct decision?".

 

[Spinynorman]

Isn’t usage a better measure for examining road-worthiness after a three year period? For example, due to personal circumstances, I only do short and periodic journeys so in 3 years had only done 1,600 miles. My car could easily have its MOT date extended for at least another year, whereas if a car had done say 20-30K then first MOT should be done as it is now.
it’s just a question of wear and tear at the end of the day.
I still service my car every year and this should incorporate an MOT mandatorily…
just my 4p worth…

 

[Gomev]

...
just my 4p worth…

Dammed inflation everywhere you look