Proposal for MOTs to be bi-annual

Jul 18, 2017
11,939
3,325
32,935
Visit site
To help with the cost of living the government is proposing changing the annual M OT inspection to bi-annual. Do you think this is a good idea? If they go ahead it makes you wonder if there will be an increase of unroadworthy cars on the roads and the possibility the accident rate will increase? I have no objection to the annual MOT which costs us about £70 a year or about £5.83 a month for two cars. Even at £50 per car for the MOT that is slightly over £4 a month so hardly any saving!
 
Nov 6, 2005
7,341
2,046
25,935
Visit site
It's a bad idea - 35% of cars fail their MoT, that % would increase significantly if the interval is extended - far too many drivers do no maintenance to their car, put it in for MoT and even then only do the minimum to pass.

If this comes to pass, I'll continue with annual MoT tests for my peace of mind - I'm aiming at extending my run of no advisories or faults.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JezzerB
Nov 11, 2009
20,098
6,131
50,935
Visit site
This suggestion cropped up a few years back and I thought it a bad idea then; my views haven’t changed. Our family could live with it though since we all have the cars serviced annually or if we hit the service mileage limit before the years up. Main concern is being surrounded by dimbos who never bother to check tyre treads and wouldn’t think to have a car properly serviced.
 

Hoomer

BANNED
Jun 11, 2018
65
9
4,585
Visit site
It's a bad idea - 35% of cars fail their MoT, that % would increase significantly if the interval is extended - far too many drivers do no maintenance to their car, put it in for MoT and even then only do the minimum to pass.

If this comes to pass, I'll continue with annual MoT tests for my peace of mind - I'm aiming at extending my run of no advisories or faults.


The majority of fails are blown bulbs and items that wear out like tyres and brake pads.
You can pass a test on Monday and those tyres are on the limit and over it by next Monday.
An annual MOT doesn't stop people not maintaining their cars.
 
May 7, 2012
8,491
1,753
30,935
Visit site
I do accept that an MOT proves very little and many failures are minor, so I am not convinced that the change will be a major problem. The worst offenders do not have an MOT and possibly insurance and tax so the MOT makes no difference.
 
Jul 18, 2017
11,939
3,325
32,935
Visit site
I think what we need is more traffic police on all the roads and not just motorways. Maybe it is time that the government considered a separate force to specifically to deal with traffic incidences and offences.
When we lived on a housing estate it was common to see untaxed vehicles parked outside the local shop. No point phoning the police as they simply did not have the manpower to attend.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Hoomer
Jan 31, 2018
1,783
850
5,935
Visit site
Madness; by implication-after all an MOT is around £45 and you can find cheaper, it's a licence to put off maintaining the car in a road worthy condition, since the MOT is only supposed to test for road safety. It seems to me the gov are saying , not save £45 every other year, but only bother checking your car every other year and many will drive on oblivious of failing shocks, worn tyres on inner edges where not visible-they won't look, no or broken wipers, brakes the list goes on-it horrifies me and of course there aren't any police on the roads to enforce anything so it'll be when said clown aquaplanes off the road and the police then get them for worn tyres etc or worse. Grrr, rant over! If they want to help household budgets I can think of many, many better ways than hammer poor MOT test stations who've invested in masses of expensive equipment to have their income halved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Buckman

Hoomer

BANNED
Jun 11, 2018
65
9
4,585
Visit site
Madness; by implication-after all an MOT is around £45 and you can find cheaper, it's a licence to put off maintaining the car in a road worthy condition, since the MOT is only supposed to test for road safety. It seems to me the gov are saying , not save £45 every other year, but only bother checking your car every other year and many will drive on oblivious of failing shocks, worn tyres on inner edges where not visible-they won't look, no or broken wipers, brakes the list goes on-it horrifies me and of course there aren't any police on the roads to enforce anything so it'll be when said clown aquaplanes off the road and the police then get them for worn tyres etc or worse. Grrr, rant over! If they want to help household budgets I can think of many, many better ways than hammer poor MOT test stations who've invested in masses of expensive equipment to have their income halved.


New tyres, brake pads, wipers, blown bulbs - I have never been changed them for an MOT, I change them because they need doing. The only thing I do for the MOT is check the washer bottle is topped up and the cars not too scruffy inside.
 
Jul 18, 2017
11,939
3,325
32,935
Visit site
New tyres, brake pads, wipers, blown bulbs - I have never been changed them for an MOT, I change them because they need doing. The only thing I do for the MOT is check the washer bottle is topped up and the cars not too scruffy inside.
Unfortunately many motorists are only concerned that the car starts and moves and don't check tyres, brakes, bulbs etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JezzerB
Nov 11, 2009
20,098
6,131
50,935
Visit site
New tyres, brake pads, wipers, blown bulbs - I have never been changed them for an MOT, I change them because they need doing. The only thing I do for the MOT is check the washer bottle is topped up and the cars not too scruffy inside.
A topped up washer bottle isn’t a requirement to pass the MoT. The washer system though dies have to work.
 
Mar 14, 2005
9,703
602
30,935
lutzschelisch.wix.com
It’s always been every 2 years here in Germany except for vehicles used commercially (in fact it’s only after the third year for cars newly registered) and I don’t get the impression that there are overly many unsafe vehicles on the road.
Testing frequency based on time isn’t really that appropriate anyway. If the unsafe car spends most of the time in the garage it’s no danger to anyone, but if it’s being used every day to commute 50 miles that’s a completely different story.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hoomer
Jun 16, 2020
4,623
1,829
6,935
Visit site
And I also might be wrong, but it is my impression that the German legal system is faster to react with more stringent consequences should a vehicle be unroadworthy for any reason.

I remember having a meeting with some Germans in Hamburg, one had taken a risk and driven to the meeting. We then had to move on a few miles. He pleaded with me to drive his car, saying he would be thrown in jail without question if caught. He had already be caught for being over the limit.


John
 
  • Like
Reactions: JezzerB and Hoomer
Mar 14, 2005
9,703
602
30,935
lutzschelisch.wix.com
And I also might be wrong, but it is my impression that the German legal system is faster to react with more stringent consequences should a vehicle be unroadworthy for any reason.

I remember having a meeting with some Germans in Hamburg, one had taken a risk and driven to the meeting. We then had to move on a few miles. He pleaded with me to drive his car, saying he would be thrown in jail without question if caught. He had already be caught for being over the limit.


John

I think he was exaggerating a bit to say that he would be thrown into jail for driving a car where the due date for its test had expired. There's a €15 fine for being between two and four months overdue, €25 between four and eight months and €60 plus points on your licence beyond that.
 
Jul 18, 2017
11,939
3,325
32,935
Visit site
I think he was exaggerating a bit to say that he would be thrown into jail for driving a car where the due date for its test had expired. There's a €15 fine for being between two and four months overdue, €25 between four and eight months and €60 plus points on your licence beyond that.
I think John was referring to his alcohol limit?
 
Mar 14, 2005
9,703
602
30,935
lutzschelisch.wix.com
Even if that’s the case he wouldn’t be thrown into jail unless he caused a fatal accident. There would, of course, be a substantial fine and he could say “good bye” to his driving licence for quite a while.
 
Jul 18, 2017
11,939
3,325
32,935
Visit site
Even if that’s the case he wouldn’t be thrown into jail unless he caused a fatal accident. There would, of course, be a substantial fine and he could say “good bye” to his driving licence for quite a while.
I thought that they would have been arrested and taken to the police station and maybe put into a holding cell after further tests were conducted? Germany must be very lenient on drunk drivers?
 
Jun 16, 2020
4,623
1,829
6,935
Visit site
I think he was exaggerating a bit to say that he would be thrown into jail for driving a car where the due date for its test had expired. There's a €15 fine for being between two and four months overdue, €25 between four and eight months and €60 plus points on your licence beyond that.

It was for drink driving offences. I don't know the details of his history but he was scared stiff about being caught, he did say he would be imprisoned without question, but he might have been exagerating to make a point and get me to drive his car. This was about 1977.

I think it was the first time I drove on the ‘wrong side of the road’. I did not find that to be a problem, but could not get the hang of using the right hand to change gear, so the Beetles indicators got treated as a column change!

John
 
May 7, 2012
8,491
1,753
30,935
Visit site
Frankly the cost of the MOT is not going to change any ones financial position. Do we need one annually, who really knows?
If the test is moved to every two years only time will tell although possibly you might need an alternative of every two years up to say ten and then annually after that.
 
Mar 14, 2005
1,134
191
19,235
jondogoescaravanning.com
Changing to a bi-annual MOT was talked about a few years ago and nothing ever came of it. There was a strong protest from the SMMT and the government was persuaded to push it to the back burner. I suspect the same will happen again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dustydog
Mar 4, 2019
49
12
10,535
Visit site
It’s always been every 2 years here in Germany except for vehicles used commercially (in fact it’s only after the third year for cars newly registered) and I don’t get the impression that there are overly many unsafe vehicles on the road.
Testing frequency based on time isn’t really that appropriate anyway. If the unsafe car spends most of the time in the garage it’s no danger to anyone, but if it’s being used every day to commute 50 miles that’s a completely different story.
I agree with this. Slovakia every 2 years and 4 years from new
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hutch
Jun 20, 2005
17,263
3,486
50,935
Visit site
I‘d prefer a mileage based system not time. A private hire being used 24/7 by three drivers may cover 40k + per annum. So under the latest proposal it could cover 80k+ before an MOT. My lower mileage usage may be less than 20k for two years.
Surely plenty of wear on suspension , brakes etc may make the high mileage car a risk that would be caught at an annual check?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jcloughie
Jul 18, 2017
11,939
3,325
32,935
Visit site
I‘d prefer a mileage based system not time. A private hire being used 24/7 by three drivers may cover 40k + per annum. So under the latest proposal it could cover 80k+ before an MOT. My lower mileage usage may be less than 20k for two years.
Surely plenty of wear on suspension , brakes etc may make the high mileage car a risk that would be caught at an annual check?
Overall in the past 26 years our one car has done an average of about 400 miles a month. However since we bought it in 2012 it has done an average of about 200 miles a month being a second car. I think it has only been on the motorway once in the past 10 years as it is mainly used as an around town car.
 
Mar 14, 2005
17,557
3,051
50,935
Visit site
I‘d prefer a mileage based system not time. A private hire being used 24/7 by three drivers may cover 40k + per annum. So under the latest proposal it could cover 80k+ before an MOT. My lower mileage usage may be less than 20k for two years.
Surely plenty of wear on suspension , brakes etc may make the high mileage car a risk that would be caught at an annual check?
In principle that's a good idea, but I can think of two significant drawbacks.

Firstly, there would be no way the authorities could check whether an MOT was active or expired just from checking the number plate, as they would need to know the actual milage.

And secondly, cars often fail MOTs through age related deterioration rather than distance, so as Buckman has pointed out some cars can do very little milage each year and as such it could be many years before it triggered a check based on mileage, in which time several critical components could have corroded.
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts