Scrap MOT tests?

[Cobbler]

A while back, my boy bought a Toyota Landcruiser from a main dealer. He brought it down for me to have a look at, as I walked round it I noticed there were 2 totally bald front tyres, not just down, totally devoid of any tread & down to the wire on one edge. It had a brand new mot from the main dealer! He looked up the mot history on the web, guess what, failed on 2 tyres, then retested & passed with a tyre warning. Did someone put pressure on the tester, who knows. The sales manager didn't want to know, tyres were OK when it left here! He then emailed the group managing director with a copy of the mot's. He did get a grovelling apology & the cost of 2 new tyres. Dealers really should not test the vehicles they are selling....

 

[Wightsparks]

On the subject of maintenance, went to look at a car the other day, good condition, except I pulled the dipstick to find not a drop of oil on it, not just low but completely gone - no leaks just not looked at for 12 months. Politely declined a test drive until it had some lube in it!

 

[Happy_welder22]

I’d like to see some numbers and sources before we say no vehicle testing doesn’t increase accidents. They let all sorts on the radio. :-)

 

[Gareth J]

I’d like to see some numbers and sources before we say no vehicle testing doesn’t increase accidents. They let all sorts on the radio. :-)

Yea, fair enough. I don't know who was talking about it but he was pretty confident about the data. It was radio 4 around mid morning today if you're seriously interested.

The chap explained carefully that the US was a good place to look at because of devolved State legislation so different states had dropped their "MOT" style tests at different times over the years and it was a good way to look for any correlations. Apparently there was no sensible correlation between lack of testing and accident rate. Even when looking at accidents caused by vehicle defects.

I was surprised by it and I can't vouch for the data but IF it's true and is sensible to apply to our MOT system, what's the point of keeping the MOT system the same?

 

[Gareth J]

Here you go, it was the Adam Smith institute.

https://t.co/eQYYcGo0nA?amp=1

Again, IF their data is sensible, then it makes sense to do things differently

 

[mcostello]

My State has no kind of auto testing, never heard of any problems. Driving and texting on the other hand.................

 

[Gareth J]

My State has no kind of auto testing, never heard of any problems. Driving and texting on the other hand.................

Think that's what the link above was concluding - any accidents down to mechanical fault are insignificant compared to driver error. They were suggesting that if anything, WE should be regularly mot'd!

 

[Happy_welder22]

Thanks for the data. I agree driver error is the big accident causer currently and car safety increases had contributed to a drop in fatalities. However I think looking at fatal accidents is the wrong data. If a MOT doesn’t catch a fault that means in some cases there will be a failure on the road that most likely is a accident but not a fatal one.

If someone is driving around on slicks and rear ends someone else in the wet but there isn’t a fatality that doesn’t show in the data being used.

 

[RonA]

On the subject of maintenance, went to look at a car the other day, good condition, except I pulled the dipstick to find not a drop of oil on it, not just low but completely gone - no leaks just not looked at for 12 months. Politely declined a test drive until it had some lube in it!

Neighbour of mine religously took his car into our local garage for its regular service. One day after his service he noted oil level was on minimum. When he went back to the garage they said they only ever filled it to the minimum mark. The dipstick was marked 1 litre between min & msx. So based on an average car capacity of 5 litres to max the garage was getting the oil for every fifth car serviced for free. Needless to say he takes his car elsewhere for its service now.
RonA

 

[Hopefuldave]

Well done tackle one offence by commiting another.

Nope, he's giving them a visual warning of approach as they obviously can't see him properly with their defective lights....

Dave H. (the other one)

 

[Kent]

Nope, he's giving them a visual warning of approach as they obviously can't see him properly with their defective lights....

Dave H. (the other one)

Where is that one in the highway code then?

 

[Hopefuldave]

Where is that one in the highway code then?

The Highway Code states: 110 - Flashing headlights. Only flash your headlights to let other road users know that you are there. Do not flash your headlights to convey any other message or intimidate other road users

So flashing lights behind the eejit doing 69.5 mph in the overtaking lane with two empty lanes to his left is precisely what they're for!

Dave H. (the other one)

 

[Wozzaaah]

Where is that one in the highway code then?

Rule 110
Flashing headlights. Only flash your headlights to let other road users know that you are there. Do not flash your headlights to convey any other message or intimidate other road users.

 

[pedrobedro]

Do not flash your headlights to convey any other message or intimidate other road users

Intimidate other road users sounds like what you are doing if you give someone "a good dose of high beam" to me. I don't need my headlights on to see if someone else has their headlights on

 

[Kent]

Intimidate other road users sounds like what you are doing if you give someone "a good dose of high beam" to me. I don't need my headlights on to see if someone else has their headlights on

That's my take on it! Why is it the biggest idiot drivers just love to convey thier ideas of superior skills .
Its like the motorcyclist the other week who hung inches off my rear wing gave me a hand gesture and then bobbed I to the slot between me an the next car which forced me to slow to allow the nice gent the grace of not flattening him in the event of an emergency.

Get at least 4 bikers killed a year on that stretch of the a59. 60 zone was doing 50 because of the simple fact that was the speed of those Infront for miles.

Rant over

 

[eLuSiVeMiTe]

That's my take on it! Why is it the biggest idiot drivers just love to convey thier ideas of superior skills

Whats superior skills got to do with flashing you lights...

Theres no excuse for driving your vehicle with one dipped working and main beam on the other side to compensate.
Never far from a garage.

If you cant afford to maintain a vehicle you shouldnt be in one.

As someone said above you reguarly see the same car week after week without replacing the bulb.
What else are they neglecting on there vehicles if they dont consider beong able to see wtf there going a priority.

 

[Shox Dr]

That's my take on it! Why is it the biggest idiot drivers just love to convey thier ideas of superior skills .
Its like the motorcyclist the other week who hung inches off my rear wing gave me a hand gesture and then bobbed I to the slot between me an the next car which forced me to slow to allow the nice gent the grace of not flattening him in the event of an emergency.

Get at least 4 bikers killed a year on that stretch of the a59. 60 zone was doing 50 because of the simple fact that was the speed of those Infront for miles.

Rant over

Pot, kettle, black. ... if you needed to brake to let him in then you were too close to the vehicle in front.

 

[130]

Pot, kettle, black. ... if you needed to brake to let him in then you were too close to the vehicle in front.

Not necessarily, when someone halves your 2 second gap you need to move back, and sometimes they don't halve it they move in and nearly take your nose off

 

[CornishPete]

Don't really see any major problems with the current system myself. Why would anyone check something less regularly than they currently do now? And how can it possibly be as safe? A lot can happen to a car in a year let alone two! £40 per year for peace of mind seams reasonable to me.
Also it won't affect people who keep on top of things but it will help the scroats driving knackered cars cos you can guarantee if it scrapes through it'll be 2 years before anyone looks at it again! How many more pizzas can a s reg Micra deliver in that time?!!

 

[Richiew]

I tend to buy old runabouts. Probably third owner vehicles. Being selfish and cheap I would rather that my potential purchases had the oil level checked at least once in a year. Two year MOTs would probably mean a lot more knackered engines out there.