no mot, out by 3 days fixed penalty help!!!

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
If the dates have expired, you are done, No excuse.
 
If you genuinely did nothing wrong then do not pay the fine, BUT..... If you drove your vehicle on the public highway without a valid MOT, then I would respectfully suggest you did do something very wrong!

Yes it was only a little out of date, but that in a way was academic. Your car was not booked in for an MOT and you had no intention of getting it done? I only say this because you appear to have forgotten all about it?

When we take on the responsibility of driving a motor vehicle we must surely accept all the other responsibilities which include having a car that is fully street legal. I feel for you and life can be a swine, but thankfully no one was injured, and no harm has been done. A lesson has hopefully be learnt and this situation may never arise again.

John

Beyond belief.

He could have had a valid ticket, and the car not been roadworthy, and worse could have been driving with no ticket, the car in a dangerous condition and known about both.

Sure sure sure, there is no excuse for not knowing the expiry date, but you know sometimes human beings have other pressures in their lives and without malice, they forget or neglect.

As for the suggestion that his car was uninsured, then why hasn't he been prosecuted for the much more serious offence? Because the car was insured.

The guy knows he made a mistake, he wasn't asking for a defense to drink driving, just a slightly expired MOT.

Since it is going to be busy today, I'm leaving early to get myself an Ivory Tower .
 
Sadly with MOT 's we do not get reminders, with insurance and road tax we do, it is easy to overlook the renewal date, I have done it on a few occasions.

I will suggest to my MOT guys that now it is all compterized they could send out reminders
 
Sadly with MOT 's we do not get reminders, with insurance and road tax we do, it is easy to overlook the renewal date, I have done it on a few occasions.

I will suggest to my MOT guys that now it is all compterized they could send out reminders

Or you could always put the little sticker from your mot printout on your windscreen, or some other place you will see it often.;)
 
Or you could always put the little sticker from your mot printout on your windscreen, or some other place you will see it often.;)


Thats another way and very good, thank you, I will suggest his too:):):)
 
I renewed my road tax at the end of last month at my local DVLA office and made a comment about these paperwork even though it been computerised. He told me the ins cert is still needed. Confirm this is the last bit of info still not computerised.

Watch out if you have declared SORN, you are very likely to be stopped because they are obliged to check your road tax even though you know you got a valid one. I was stopped after visiting a hotel for B&B near Fleet. The car came from nowhere. They thought I had a drink. I told them not a sip. They said blow blow. I did. They let me off with a ticket as receipt.
 
Serves you right for going to Fleet.

Last time I taxed at a PO, I had the MOT and Insurance, but they seemed to have it all on line and didn't check it.
 
There is nothing to stop you having an MOT more often than once a year.

So this means, if you have bought a car with an MOT that needs renewing in 3 months. you can have it done right now, and it will requiring doing again with your insurance, which will help remind you.

You can always have it done with your service, if you get a service every year, or more often.

Obvioulsy some CDF needs to be applied to this, but you don't have to wait a year and risk forgetting.
 
I renewed my road tax at the end of last month at my local DVLA office and made a comment about these paperwork even though it been computerised. He told me the ins cert is still needed. Confirm this is the last bit of info still not computerised.
.

Its on the computer as DVLA check when you renew on line
 
Beyond belief..
Hi Fred,
Why the antagonism?
In my very first post I stated this could have happened to anyone, but the author genuinely believes he has done nothing wrong? That is what I have picked up on. Of course it is only THREE DAYS and it might be harsh to get prosecuted. BUT it is wrong and I'm sure the author has accepted this? If we miss out on the lottery by just one number, would we expect a pay-out? :devil: :)

Could you point out where I suggested the car was uninsured? Dav comes across as a sensible responsible person that made a slight mistake.

John
 
Serves you right for going to Fleet.

Last time I taxed at a PO, I had the MOT and Insurance, but they seemed to have it all on line and didn't check it.

Can't help it I have to earn my living. You are right, stay away Hampshire. You can see speeding cars along M3 but no police cars but loads not along M3 hiding behind bushes.
 
Why? I find this attitude extremely belittling:-

If you genuinely did nothing wrong then do not pay the fine, BUT..... If you drove your vehicle on the public highway without a valid MOT, then I would respectfully suggest you did do something very wrong!

So, he could have had a valid MOT, bald tyres, duff brakes, holes in the chassis, but it would have been OK.

He got a fixed penalty and I would suggest if he was a different person driving a different car, then nothing would have happened.

but thankfully no one was injured, and no harm has been done

He wasn't driving intoxicated or dangerously or without insurance, so why the necessity to take such a superior attitude?

The only thing injured is the guys wallet.

I'll put my hands up - I've done the same thing on a few occasions, I make sure that the MOT runs out after the tax so that in the event of being outside the UK, I can tax the car online without having to get someone to MOT the car.
 
Hi Fred,
Why the antagonism?
In my very first post I stated this could have happened to anyone, but the author genuinely believes he has done nothing wrong? That is what I have picked up on. Of course it is only THREE DAYS and it might be harsh to get prosecuted. BUT it is wrong and I'm sure the author has accepted this? If we miss out on the lottery by just one number, would we expect a pay-out? :devil: :)

Could you point out where I suggested the car was uninsured? Dav comes across as a sensible responsible person that made a slight mistake.

John
On reading it again, I think the OP felt that is was a bit harsh to have got a fine for just 3 days overdue,,it has been said here also that had he obtained a new MOT and took that down then maybe nothing would have happened.

No where have you said that the car was not insured:)
 
On reading it again, I think the OP felt that is was a bit harsh to have got a fine for just 3 days overdue,,it has been said here also that had he obtained a new MOT and took that down then maybe nothing would have happened.

No where have you said that the car was not insured:)

I didn't say he did - it was suggested elsewhere that a car with no MOT was by default uninsured which is not the case.

Yes, it was suggested that if may have got a new MOT and taken it with him then maybe there wouldn't have been a FP.

I also think it was a bit tough not tapping the guy on the shoulder and sending him on his way.

I bet there wouldn't be the level of superiority if it had been someone in their CLS 500 forgetting the first MOT and getting fined for being three days late.

My point is that there is no need to be too superior and judgemental.
 
I didn't say he did - it was suggested elsewhere that a car with no MOT was by default uninsured which is not the case.

Yes, it was suggested that if may have got a new MOT and taken it with him then maybe there wouldn't have been a FP.

I also think it was a bit tough not tapping the guy on the shoulder and sending him on his way.

I bet there wouldn't be the level of superiority if it had been someone in their CLS 500 forgetting the first MOT and getting fined for being three days late.

My point is that there is no need to be too superior and judgemental.

Yes and fair comment :):)
 
Why? I find this attitude extremely belittling:-



So, he could have had a valid MOT, bald tyres, duff brakes, holes in the chassis, but it would have been OK..
Fred,
What on earth are you saying??? Where have I EVER stated it was acceptable to do any of what you are suggesting? If you want to slag me off, then fine but please try to be accurate in what your saying. Can't you see how things get exaggerated

He got a fixed penalty and I would suggest if he was a different person driving a different car, then nothing would have happened..
I understand what your saying, as my son drives a 1.8 Golf GTi. (He has been stopped twice in two years) but with todays technology it is possible that most of us might get stopped if we do not have the correct documentation.

He wasn't driving intoxicated or dangerously or without insurance, so why the necessity to take such a superior attitude?.
Where on earth did I suggest this? You are reading things that are simply not there. I merely stated that if the author genuinely believes he don e nothing wrong, then he should plead not guilty. I have not added insult nor abuse. I am simply saying if anyone believes they are innocent they should contest their case. What is wrong with that? My own view is in line with your last paragraph.

I'll put my hands up - I've done the same thing on a few occasions, I make sure that the MOT runs out after the tax so that in the event of being outside the UK, I can tax the car online without having to get someone to MOT the car.
If you read my first p[ost correctly then you will see that I have also stated there but for the grace of what's his name go I. Why are you suggesting points that I quite clearly never said, never suggested, nor even thought possible.

I say again.... The author appears to be a sensible young man that has made an oversight, they forgot to renew the MOT, but and I mean this most respectfully... They were wrong, it is the degree of wrongness that might have prompted the post. This is completely different from doing nothing wrong. Doing nothing wrong would mean there was a current MOT and if they had a current MOT then they must not plead guilty. They are innocent and did nothing wrong! Yes it was three days but it might have been longer and sadly the result might have had the same result!

No doubt you can dissect my post and find something you interpret as criticism, but I can assure the author he has my FULL sympathy and I'm the first to admit..... I have an awful memory.

Chill out Fred, that glass is half full :)

John
 
3 days is an oversight, 3 months is evasion but in Britain today, everything is Black or White.
 
Fred,
What on earth are you saying??? Where have I EVER stated it was acceptable to do any of what you are suggesting? If you want to slag me off, then fine but please try to be accurate in what your saying. Can't you see how things get exaggerated

I understand what your saying, as my son drives a 1.8 Golf GTi. (He has been stopped twice in two years) but with todays technology it is possible that most of us might get stopped if we do not have the correct documentation.

Where on earth did I suggest this? You are reading things that are simply not there. I merely stated that if the author genuinely believes he don e nothing wrong, then he should plead not guilty. I have not added insult nor abuse. I am simply saying if anyone believes they are innocent they should contest their case. What is wrong with that? My own view is in line with your last paragraph.

If you read my first p[ost correctly then you will see that I have also stated there but for the grace of what's his name go I. Why are you suggesting points that I quite clearly never said, never suggested, nor even thought possible.

I say again.... The author appears to be a sensible young man that has made an oversight, they forgot to renew the MOT, but and I mean this most respectfully... They were wrong, it is the degree of wrongness that might have prompted the post. This is completely different from doing nothing wrong. Doing nothing wrong would mean there was a current MOT and if they had a current MOT then they must not plead guilty. They are innocent and did nothing wrong! Yes it was three days but it might have been longer and sadly the result might have had the same result!

No doubt you can dissect my post and find something you interpret as criticism, but I can assure the author he has my FULL sympathy and I'm the first to admit..... I have an awful memory.

Chill out Fred, that glass is half full :)

John

There is the promise of a bit of sunshine today and I don't intend to butter the parsnips again with this.

something very wrong!
and
but thankfully no one was injured, and no harm has been done

And I did read your post again, and again, and like I said I felt that your attitude was unnecessarily superior and judgemental.

If he (OP) only ever lets his MOT get three days late in his life, then he will be extremely lucky (and virtuous).
 
One day , I want to be perfect too
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom