I think I've just become unpopular on a kit car page for suggesting if you are worried about passing an MOT, your car shouldn't be on the road.
But I would be annoyed at having to pay VED again for the 100 miles a year it does.
- Thread starter bricol
- Start date
I think I've just become unpopular on a kit car page for suggesting if you are worried about passing an MOT, your car shouldn't be on the road.
But I would be annoyed at having to pay VED again for the 100 miles a year it does.
A classic vehicle has to be in a pretty poor condition to fail an MOT. It's not a difficult test to pass, and it doesn't hurt to have another pair of eyes to check it over. You just need a tester that knows what he's looking at, not one of these d*ckheads that fails it for the tiny bit of play in tapered front wheel bearings, or worse still, tightens them up to remove the play altogether.
Just ask the bloke I knew, who had just that happen, and a few hundred miles later the bearing broke up and collapsed. In the middle of France.....
Just ask the bloke I knew, who had just that happen, and a few hundred miles later the bearing broke up and collapsed. In the middle of France.....
Pigeon_Droppings2
Member
- Messages
- 6,818
- Location
- london
Pretty sure it's an MOT exemption not a road worthiness exemption.
IMHO I think if folk abuse the exemption then it'll simply get revoked in future.
AFAIK it would. It's a replacement made to the same spec as the original.
If you put a coil sprung chassis under a series landy then you'd be right.
I've actually had to change MOT garages over taper roller wheel bearings.
I wonder whether actually reporting the tester for that would make any difference whatsoever.
It's such a dangerous thing to do.
He didn't try to tighten mine just failed it. After I told him they are taper roller he said "what difference does that make" I thought time to find another tester
Mick Annick
Forum Supporter
- Messages
- 3,023
- Location
- Burgundy, France (450 miles SE of Somerset)
If it’s any consolation I’ve found a similar problem here - to the extent that I’ve seen on the historic vehicle federation website a list of classic friendly testing stations. Last but one test the guy inflated the tyres on my Morgan to 35psi - I run it at 19/20 psi, it only weighs 900kg! I had a go at him so he got a right sulk on.
It has been for some categories - that's the update.
I complete in trials - you run lower pressures for better off-road grip. Meaning quite often to comply with the event regulations, I often have to more than double the pressure in the tyres, for one club, triple.
He should still be reported for failing it...
Show he hasn't got a clue, and do we really want people like that in control of everybody's safety?
Back in the day when I had my Alfa 75, a tester failed it for holes in the front suspension drag links bushes . . . the holes that were supposed to be in them for compliance . . .
However, I have had warning for things that maybe should have failed, as the tester knew I'd fix them, so swings and stingingly hot on a summers days tall slides...
ajlelectronics
Forum Supporter
- Messages
- 11,208
- Location
- Gloucester, England
I had to take the factory workshop in to show the tester who failed mine on front wheel bearings. He was still having none of it until I explained how they are supposed to work. He refused to remove the subsequent advisory though.
Smallfry
HE's Spartacus.
- Messages
- 3,156
- Location
- Kent UK
Come on, cough up. Think of the greater good of the country !
I think I've just become unpopular on a kit car page for suggesting if you are worried about passing an MOT, your car shouldn't be on the road.
But I would be annoyed at having to pay VED again for the 100 miles a year it does.
Mick Annick
Forum Supporter
- Messages
- 3,023
- Location
- Burgundy, France (450 miles SE of Somerset)
I do motorcycle trials, 10psi is a bit hard for mud…
Exempt vehicles must still be roadworthy. If you kill someone with your MOT exempt vehicle caused by a vehicle defect, they're going to come chasing you for negligence, so I'd say there's an even greater impetus to keep on top of maintenance.
Some will abuse the system and just ignore vehicle maintenance, but there are enough people that do that with non MOT exempt vehicles to still cause plenty of problems. You'd be better with a 15 year old car and a ghost MOT if you were that way inclined than trying to run something 40+ years old.
I have no concerns with the running gear or structural integrity of any of our fleet, but passing emissions is always cause for quiet panic.
Smallfry
HE's Spartacus.
- Messages
- 3,156
- Location
- Kent UK
They should indeed, but at the end of the day it is down to opinion.
What qualifies you/me to make that opinion ? I know an MOT test is only really valid on the day, but unless you have some paper qualification to make that judgement, in a court case anyone could find themselves in deep trouble.
At least if you have a valid MOT certificate, you have half a chance. I have three vehicle that are MOT exempt, but I get them done anyway because of this.
