Can I drive it? Is It Legal

[Timster]

Hi folks, I'd appreciate some advice here if possible. I've trawled through the forum and can't find a definitive answer:

My MOT expires on 17/05/14, however I put it in today to my local indy who's very good and has looked after my cars for years now. It failed (MOT) on brake pipe corrosion - he's going to fix it on Thursday for me. The question (which has been asked before) is:

Can I still legally drive the car?

My mechanic THINKS yes as it still has an in date MOT

I think no as it is currently a known MOT failure which invalidates the previous one.

(It went through the system as a fail - perhaps I should have suggested he "inspected" it prior to putting it through the system, but I didn't (and I don't like to ask him as he's a good honest bloke)

Anyone know where I legally stand?

 

[Dieselman]

Legally you can drive the car until the old MOT expires, unless the car is considered to be unroadworthy due to the defect.

Corrosion on a fuel pipe doesn't make a car unroadworthy.


The Law is the Law.

 

[Timster]

Thanks for that - even though it's a failure?

Can you point me in the direction of any legislation to back that up? (not that I don't trust you, but It's my luck the police will be out doing spot checks!)

 

[daveenty]

This is a brake pipe not a fuel pipe though according to the OP. In the (albeit unlikely) event of it failing then it could certainly be taken into account that you were aware of a fault yet continued to drive it.

Technically it's legal to drive as far as I'm aware, though I'm not sure where you'd get definitive confirmation of this...

 

[Dieselman]

Google is an amazing application.

https://www.gov.uk/getting-an-mot/after-the-test

 

[Timster]

ok - so why didn't that come up when I just spent 20 mins googling it.

Cheers DM (JFGI to me!)

Good news all the same!
I'm going to gamble that it's not unroadworthy.

Thanks all.
A quick and easy answer!

 

[markjay]

As per DM's link, and some further explanation here:

Blog: Can you drive your car if it?s failed an MOT? - Confused.com

'A VOSA spokesperson confirms:
“Should you present your vehicle early and the vehicle fails the test, your original certificate still remains valid until its expiry date.
But this does not mean that you are entitled to continue to use a defective vehicle.
However, once the defects are repaired you can continue to use the vehicle until either it is retested or the original test certificate expires.
Remember a current test certificate does not allow continued use of a defective vehicle on a public road.” '



In short you will not be prosecuted for not having a valid MOT, but you could be prosecuted for knowingly driving a 'defective' vehicle.

 

[Timster]

How does one, in this case, define defective. The test identified corrosion on the brake pipes, however the brakes were fully functioning and the pipes were not leaking.

It's a grey area, in the legal mumbo-jumbo of motoring!

 

[Dieselman]

It's a grey area, in the legal mumbo-jumbo of motoring!

Please don't start markjay off. If the pipes were in a dangerous condition the mechanic wouldn't allow you to drive the car.
As an MOT inspector he has a duty to notify you of dangerous defects.

 

[meeeb]

'Defective' is not the operative word. The word used is 'unroadworthy', which means that the vehicle is in a condition which is dangerous to you or other road users.

Your MOT testing station is your source of advice in this regard.

 

[druand]

I tester deemed corroded pipe liable to immediate failure, ie fracture and leak during test, he could refuse to test brakes.
Tester must NOT carry out any opperation which could cause vehicle not to be in exactly same condition at end of test as it was when presented for test. Similar situation if a bulge or bad cut found on a tyre, tyre could blow out using brake rollers.
Only exception is corrosion assessment.

 

[BlueQuinn]

It is also legal to drive an MoT failure somewhere to get the failure points rectified, even if there is no MoT or Tax.

 

[Teflonso]

The situation is clear. The tester has an obligation to declare a vehicle as dangerous if that indeed is what it is. If this didnt happen in the case of a corroded brake pipe then he is implicitly saying the vehicle is not inherently dangerous, just that it is likely to become so before the next test.

However, follow this little thought experiment ...........if the driver hits the brakes in an emergency stop and a pipe blows, following which (irrespective of brakes as a contributory cause) he hits another vehicle or squishes a pedestrian, what's there to stop the insurer wriggling out of stumping up on the basis that there was a known defect?

It now becomes the responsibilty of the driver to prove that there was no leak immediately prior to the accident and that brake performance was unaffected until after both vehicles came to rest.

I suspect that conversely, there would be a little more room for maneuver in a death by dangereous driving charge, since the prosecution would have to prove that the brake pipe was a significant component of the cause of the crash or the severity of the result. Driver argues that pipe popped after or during the crash so can claim reasonable doubt.

It is NOT necesarily legal to drive an MOT failure to get repairs done even if still in date. For example, if the car has failed for a bald tyre then 3 points are waiting if you get pulled up. An insurer would almost definately back heel a claim as well, it wouldn't even need to be raining. Possession of a valid MOT is no guarantee of roadworthiness, only that the vehicle was okay on the day it passed.

.

 

[Spinal]

So on this note - can one drive a car without road tax to an MOT station?

 

[Timster]

It's not always as black and white as it first seems.

For those interested - I've decided not to use my car. It'll be fixed and mot'd by Friday so it's not a major issue. My wife has kindly let me use hers for work.

Just didn't seem worth it in the long run. Too many what ifs etc!

 

[daveenty]

So on this note - can one drive a car without road tax to an MOT station?

As long as there's insurance in place then yes, though the test must be pre-booked. Interestingly enough, it doesn't have to be the nearest station either, could be anywhere.

 

[219]

So on this note - can one drive a car without road tax to an MOT station?

Since , in order to get road tax ( yes , I know it is VED ) , the vehicle must first have a current MOT certificate if it is of an age to require one , then there has to be a mechanism to permit this .

It is therefore legal to drive a car to or from a pre-arranged MOT test provided insurance is in place .

As with the original question , this dispensation does not exempt you from driving an unroadworthy vehicle on the road - you can still be charged for any defects present , just as you could even if the car had full tax , MOT and insurance in effect .

 

[Dieselman]

It's not always as black and white as it first seems.

For those interested - I've decided not to use my car. It'll be fixed and mot'd by Friday so it's not a major issue. My wife has kindly let me use hers for work.

Just didn't seem worth it in the long run. Too many what ifs etc!

Who has said it's not black or white? There are no if's or buts. Unless instructed the car is dangerous, you can drive it until the original certificate expires.

What if you hadn't had the car tested until next week, would you have driven it?

 

[st13phil]

What if you hadn't had the car tested until next week, would you have driven it?

Too logical, I'm afraid.

 

[Teflonso]

........... Unless instructed the car is dangerous, you can drive it until the original certificate expires.

........ or until you run into someone, which ever comes first.