The Ford Capri Laser Page

Hi.

Yep this Sunday the new 40yr old mot rules come into force. No need to mot any more !! The One Show just did a piece on this and most classic owners still want an independant second opinion and insurance companies may penalise those who dont have a yearly roadworthy test of sorts. One guy was ademant tho that he was never going to mot again and his friends the same as they were 100% confident that they kept their cars well maintained enough not to mot. Intetesting....

All the best

Nick

Fordoholic Nick wrote:Hi.

Yep this Sunday the new 40yr old mot rules come into force. No need to mot any more !! The One Show just did a piece on this and most classic owners still want an independant second opinion and insurance companies may penalise those who dont have a yearly roadworthy test of sorts. Intetesting....

All the best

Nick

Hi Nick
Everyone I have spoken too about this who drives a Classic Car thinks it's a bad idea!

IMO, structure, brakes and suspension have to be right. Side lights or wiper blades/windscreen washers not working is not so important and should be advisory not a fail, especially as many are dry and daytime use only.

From the people I've spoken to, opinion is divided on this matter.
It's a fact that even though the test itself will not be compulsory, cars will still need to be roadworthy. However well maintained a car is, I feel it might be wise to still get an MOT in order to get a second opinion from an experienced tester.

Andrew.

To be honest anyone who welcomes this is a bloody idiot. I wouldn't trust certain owners to maintain the vehicle in a roadworthy condition and without the MOT test I would imagine there'd be all kinds of things ignored, tyres, brakes, lights and structural bodywork immediately springs to mind.

I really don't understand the fear that the annual MOT test seems to instill into some owners, if the car is in a good sound condition then chances are any failure will be minor. If on the other hand the failures are more serious isn't it better to have them identified, the cost of repair will be more expensive but at least the car will be safe to drive once the test has been passed.

Yes with you all on this I don’t think a classic Capri that has been MOT and one that’s been left for years will be worth as much also I can see insurance company’s saying no to cars not MOT .

We have all had it saying the car drives so nice then at the mot they find something that we have missed .

Now free car tax that I wish they did on cars over 30 years old .

I would be in favour of having a softer version of the standard MOT test. Basic functional checks on brakes, lights etc and a visual check for corrosion damage on significant areas. Having no requirement for an MOT at all seems a bit unwise.

Ive realised that under this rule I would put my 1979 MGB back on the road with almost no work at all, just add it to my classic car policy and drive it. Given that Ive had the front end straightened, replaced the steering, suspension and cross member etc since it arrived with me as an accident damaged vehicle frankly i think it would be irresponsible to be able to put this car back on the road without an MOT to check the safety and quality of my work.

That said, when my Capri qualifies in a few years, would i really want to bother with fretting over the risk of a sidelight bulb failing on the day, the exhaust being considered as too loud or the indicators being the wrong shade of yellow ?