hi all just read on yahoo that the government are thinking of changing the annual mot from 12 months to 24 also changing a new cars mot from 3 years to 4 what do you think good or bad . personally i think it is ok as it is
changes to the MOT
- Thread starter yendall24
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2007
- Messages
- 2,350
- Reaction score
- 5
- Points
- 38
- Location
- noun: a particular place or position
An annual check is all some people ever give their cars, extending it will only lead to more deaths that will no doubt be blamed on speed, rather than poor maintenance.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2007
- Messages
- 2,350
- Reaction score
- 5
- Points
- 38
- Location
- noun: a particular place or position
That's ok then. Let's have a few more cars on the road with chassis' rusting through and non-existent brake pads, as long as we don't have to swap bulbs very often. 
mikeyg
Registered User
I think it should be left as it is, as said some people dont bother getting their cars looked over and leave it till MOT time. After 2 years they could be quite dangerous.
And im sure the price of the MOT would rise,and repair bills also much higher.
And im sure the price of the MOT would rise,and repair bills also much higher.
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2010
- Messages
- 15,084
- Reaction score
- 1,131
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Plymouth
- Website
- wheelsnwires.blogspot.com
They've been talking about for some time.
I really hope they don't do it.
Its a very stupid idea and very dangerous idea.
There will be so many cars running on warn out brake pads, warn bushes, collapsed bearings and terminal rust.
The roads could turn in to a real life death race.
I really hope they don't do it.
Its a very stupid idea and very dangerous idea.
There will be so many cars running on warn out brake pads, warn bushes, collapsed bearings and terminal rust.
The roads could turn in to a real life death race.
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2008
- Messages
- 18,708
- Reaction score
- 909
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Glenrothes, Fife, Scotland
I think a lot of Europe seems to do a bi-annual check.
I guess the question is do you then make the MOT test itself much stricter?
A lot of things that might fail, are often down to the testers opinion anyway, so a balljoint that has a tiny bit of play now, he might thing "it'll last a year" and pass it, whereas if it was two years would fail it instead.
The real issue is that people are basically too stupid to actually look after their car themselves. IMO a car should never fail an MOT. If it does, your not looking after it properly. I've never yet had a car fail a test, and although every time there may be one or two things i'm not happy with on the car, they're never bad enough to actually fail.
I guess the question is do you then make the MOT test itself much stricter?
A lot of things that might fail, are often down to the testers opinion anyway, so a balljoint that has a tiny bit of play now, he might thing "it'll last a year" and pass it, whereas if it was two years would fail it instead.
The real issue is that people are basically too stupid to actually look after their car themselves. IMO a car should never fail an MOT. If it does, your not looking after it properly. I've never yet had a car fail a test, and although every time there may be one or two things i'm not happy with on the car, they're never bad enough to actually fail.
