2025 road tax

[DSM10000]

You still hark back to cars being sold - the majority of older cars are cherished and kept for many years , if not decades , by the same owners - selling or buying simply does not come into it .

Which, whilst undoubtedly true isn't mitigation against a basic safety test that the vast majority of vehicles are mandated to have

 

[ChipChop]

No grudge against old cars or the people that drive them - it doesn’t benefit me financially whether or not they pay a very modest annual test fee.

Simply a discussion of the merit of an independent inspection to ensure vehicles are roadworthy once a year.

Ok. So you own a garage that does MOT tests and are touting for more business. Understandable.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

I can’t think of a compelling reason why any car which is intended to be driven on the public road should not be subject to an annual independent safety check performed to the same standard as every other car intended to be driven.

 

[ChipChop]

I can’t think of a compelling reason why any car which is intended to be driven on the public road should not be subject to an annual independent safety check performed to the same standard as every other car intended to be driven.

Maybe you should ask the Police why their vehicles are MOT exempt? I am sure they will be able to give you a reason.

 

[Will]

Ok. So you own a garage that does MOT tests and are touting for more business. Understandable.

Miss.

 

[Will]

Maybe you should ask the Police why their vehicles are MOT exempt? I am sure they will be able to give you a reason.

Are you trying to be obtuse?

 

[ChipChop]

Are you trying to be obtuse?

No. Police vehicles are MOT exempt because they are maintained to a high standard in-house.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Maybe you should ask the Police why their vehicles are MOT exempt? I am sure they will be able to give you a reason.

I’ll be honest I have a greater degree of confidence that Police cars will be inspected, serviced and generally maintained to a sufficient standard than I do the average driver, so I probably won’t bother asking the Police about it.

To be fair the police officer in question is unlikely to be able to answer that particular question with any authority, and so it would be unreasonable to ask . Asking the question would also make the person asking look like a bit…

 

[ChipChop]

I’ll be honest I have a greater degree of confidence that Police cars will be inspected, serviced and generally maintained to a sufficient standard than I do the average driver, so I probably won’t bother asking the Police about it.

To be fair the police officer in question is unlikely to be able to answer that particular question with any authority, and so it would be unreasonable to ask . Asking the question would also make the person asking look like a bit…

Are people that drive historics representative of the average driver in your opinion?

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Are people that drive historics representative of the average driver in your opinion?

No, I would say that they’re in a minority group amongst motorists.

 

[DSM10000]

No. Police vehicles are MOT exempt because they are maintained to a high standard in-house.

Precisely.

A standard that is carried out, mmonitored and documented by trained mechanics.

 

[Will]

No. Police vehicles are MOT exempt because they are maintained to a high standard in-house.

How come they don’t use 40 plus year old vehicles full of chicken wire and fibreglass, on the assumption that because they’re old cars they must be maintained well enough by owners who don’t want to take them for a test?

 

[ChipChop]

Precisely.

A standard that is carried out, mmonitored and documented by trained mechanics.

Historics are maintained to a high standard by their owners and marque specialists.

 

[ChipChop]

No, I would say that they’re in a minority group amongst motorists.

Not the average motorist yet some wish to lump them in with the majority who use a car as a disposable tool for getting from a to b.

 

[ChipChop]

How come they don’t use 40 plus year old vehicles full of chicken wire and fibreglass, on the assumption that because they’re old cars they must be maintained well enough by owners who don’t want to take them for a test?

There is no assumption by historic owners. They know their cars inside out.

Are you for a roadworthness test & tax for cyclists too i wonder?

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Still not heard any compelling reasons why older cars shouldn’t be subject to a safety inspection.

 

[Will]

Historics are maintained to a high standard by their owners and marque specialists.

There is no assumption by historic owners. They know their cars inside out.

Are you for a roadworthness test & tax for cyclists too i wonder?

You can’t speak for them all though can you, when 20% of the ones presented for inspection don’t even meet the basic standards that an MOT test is looking at.

You should welcome re-introducing testing as you are so confident in there being no issues to find. It should be just a friendly formality once a year for these owners

 

[ChipChop]

Still not heard any compelling reasons why older cars shouldn’t be subject to a safety inspection.

The only compelling reasons why 40+ year old cars should be liable for an MOT test is if they have been subject to substantial changes to the chassis, bodyshell, axles and running gear. That is the law.

 

[ChipChop]

You can’t speak for them all though can you, when 20% of the ones presented for inspection don’t even meet the basic standards that an MOT test is looking at.

You should welcome re-introducing testing as you are so confident in there being no issues to find. It should be just a friendly formality once a year for these owners

Write to your MP if you feel so compelled. The response you get back will depend entirely of if said MP is a member/ friend of the House of Commons classic motoring club or not.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

The only compelling reasons why 40+ year old cars should be liable for an MOT test is if they have been subject to substantial changes to the chassis, bodyshell, axles and running gear. That is the law.

The law is a compelling reason for those you describe, and given that was your reply to my previous comment(s) (see below), does that mean that in your opinion there aren’t any compelling reasons why older cars shouldn’t be subject to a safety inspection?

Still not heard any compelling reasons why older cars shouldn’t be subject to a safety inspection.