MOT test every two years?

  WhiteTruckMan 20:26 16 Feb 2007

Heard about this on the radio this evening.

click here

Is it just sour grapes on the part of the industry, or potentially a huge own goal on the part of HMG? What do you think?


  laurie53 20:31 16 Feb 2007

I have always said that it is drivers who should have a roadworthiness check every year, not vehicles!


  Jak_1 20:32 16 Feb 2007

Considering an MOT certificate is not worth the paper it's written on, only valid for the time the vehicle is waiting to be collected. Once back on the road all it proves it that it passed the test at a given time on a given day.

If it does go to be every 2 years then you can bet your life the cost of it will increase significantly!

  STREETWORK 21:17 16 Feb 2007

How about...

First test after 4 years.

Then every 2 years.

Then every year once the vehicle is over 10 year old.

And, to sell a car it must have a MOT not older than 6 months.

I could go with this big time...

  Belatucadrus 00:08 17 Feb 2007

Gordon Brown doesn't drive and clearly knows sod all about vehicles of any description, yet as always sees himself as the fount of all knowledge.
Or perhaps the "cynical" comments on the end about potential tax revenue benefits for the treasury aren't so cynical, if there's one thing GB is a whizz at it's maximising his tax revenues.

  WhiteTruckMan 00:24 17 Feb 2007

Jak_1 has a point. A current MOT ticket really only means something while the car is in the testing station. (it couls pass, and blow a bulb while being driven out, rendering it a failure).

STREETWORK, why not expand on that. I would say that every car sold by a dealer should have a new ticket. (if the car will not pass then its obviously not fit for purpose). Not sure about private or auction sales though. Have to think about that.

fourm member: I chose that link to illustrate that its a 'real' story. Googleing it provides numerous references. The interview I heard was also banging on about job losses as the aftermarket parts people would suffer. Tyres, brakes and exhausts would not be replaced as often. (NOT my claim, please note, merely repeating what I heard).


  WhiteTruckMan 00:31 17 Feb 2007

From the same site as my first link

click here

makes for an interesting read about the new style test.


  rdave13 00:55 17 Feb 2007

If the bi-annual test does come in then it will undoubtfully cost twice as much. Is the M.O.T. test in Europe every two years and is this the case for the UK to fall in-line?

  jack 08:51 17 Feb 2007

This a well put argument - for maintaining or making the test ever more rigorous- by a Professional Test/ Safety proponent.
However the annual test should be the minimum, not extended it.
As stated - the Pass is as good as the vehicle on the ramp. The inspection is by human eye and experience coupled with a few simple instruments, component failure can happen any time- clip a kerb as it leaves the test station- a 'done' tyre, switch on a light - hit a bump/pothole- bulb blown.
An MOT does not let a driver off the hook.
And yes every vehicle sold should come with a full year MOT private or trade and be taxed [therefore insured]in the new drivers name too before it leaves the fore court.
Well done, vehicles should be to a standard to be safe on the roads.

When ever a new proposal is but up by a government minister we should bear in mind that a large proportion of the time the individual- standing there in Parliament reading his paper knows less about the subject than John Humphreys reading the news ,Gordon Brown does not need to be a driver- to put forward more money grabbing proposals.

  Quickbeam 09:05 17 Feb 2007

Bearing in mind the blown headlamp thread running here... some people only ever check & change items because they need to pass the test. These people will then drive on, in complete oblivion of any faults until the next due date for an MOT.

There are lots of people now who change cars every 3 years or less have no idea of basic driver servicing & consider it OK to leave all faults until a garage service. Better every year from new to make people more aware of legal requirements that have always been there.

  johndrew 14:44 17 Feb 2007

Interesting aside to this on the radio (BBC 2) where one of the motoring officionados was saying that in his opinion a two year test would lead to more road deaths as the current one year test is the only control over tyres and brakes.

I found this interesting because if, as recommended, you have your car serviced each year - normally at the same time as the MOT - then part of that servicing is to check all items the MOT will check (except perhaps emissions) and more.

Additionally, it is possible to wear out a set of tyres in less than 3 years if you either drive the car hard or do a lot of miles (or both) and there is no check until the end of the 3rd. year.

Bit of a flawed arguement I thought.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

OnePlus 5 review

See the work of famous artists playing with toys

iPad Pro 10.5in (2017) review

Comment faire une capture d’écran sur un Mac ?