MOT Consultation - 40 Year exemption.

[stuartu]

Yes, but none of us will have any modifications done after 1988, will we?
I'm sure I wont?

Of course you won't, Alan. Same here. Unlike the unfortunate Albert, I do not have a stick with a horse's head handle. Furthermore, if I did have such a thing, I would bear Albert's fate in mind and keep my stick securely on the right side of the bars. Wouldn't we all?

Regards,
Stuart

[Alan]

I've never been to Blackpool and Woolworths is closed down. Should be ok.

[Ruairidh Dunford]

Wot's to-do?

[Alan]

Yon lion's et Albert

[Stuart Giles]

Looks like the FBHVC might be awake after all...

http://www.fbhvc.co.uk/about-us/news/_ar...rom-fbhvc/

[Douglas Alderson]

It would appear that this has been on the cards for some time as it comes from a EU Diarective 2014/45, this is were the substantial change comes from which our Government is now trying to define, any one know how other EU countries have defined "substantial change"

1. vehicle of historical interest’ means any vehicle which is considered to be historical by the Member State of registration or one of its appointed authorising bodies and which fulfils all the following conditions:
   — it was manufactured or registered for the first time at least 30 years ago;
   — its specific type, as defined in the relevant Union or national law, is no longer in production;
   — it is historically preserved and maintained in its original state and has not undergone substantial changes in the technical characteristics of its main components; 
   

[Albert S]

Yon lion's et Albert

"What a nasty mis'ap"
.. especially as "we'd paid to come in"

---

My internet machine's been up the creek for a few weeks,very cathartic,recommended,only to return to this poorly worded piece of legislation.. without exception every car forum i visit is awash with various interpretations ... most twisting the facts to suit.
Is it fair to say that the point system has been with us for sometime but people have chosen to ignore it? As a consequence we now have this mandatory system on its way to becoming law...so in a nutshell :

"You need to check whether the vehicle has been substantially altered since 1988, checking against the criteria . If it has been altered substantially a valid MOT certificate will continue to be required.”

As I read it, a valid MOT certificate will be required, because as soon as you know how many points you have under the VHI rules, you also know how many points you have under the “Radically altered vehicles” rules (which they have pointed out explicitly).

If your check reveals a full house of 14 points (everything on the DVLA 8 point list) you are VHI.No MOT no tax.
If your check reveals 8 or more, but less than 14, you are still Historic (if over 40 years old) but need an MOT.
If your check reveals less than 8 points, you need to tell the DVLA you have a ‘radically altered vehicle’.
At which point you lose your current registration and need to pass BIVA to get a new Q plate. "

The majority of us have no issue with an annual road worthiness check,nor paying road tax... what does grate mindyou is the lack of consideration given to many out there who since the inception of the motor car have spent energy and time constructing fine quality specials or replicas with no intention of avoiding legal process or payment of tax are now lumped into conforming to a BIVA test.
The FBHVC are not looking out for our corner,never have.

[Stuart Giles]

Yon lion's et Albert

"What a nasty mis'ap"
.. especially as "we'd paid to come in"

---

If your check reveals a full house of 14 points (everything on the DVLA 8 point list) you are VHI.No MOT no tax.
If your check reveals 8 or more, but less than 14, you are still Historic (if over 40 years old) but need an MOT.

Having read them a few times, I haven't seen any statement or intimation in any of the three published documents that says that a car will still reside in the "Historic" road tax category if it has less than 14 points. 

I'm sure most enthusiasts wouldn't be too troubled about needing an MOT. But they might be a bit bothered by finding their car in an "everyday" road tax bracket, paying whatever the going rate happens to be, and unable to pass through or enter low emissions zones etc. 

Outwith that, in an everyday road tax bracket they would likely get hit with any future punitive government  road tax hikes aimed at "getting these old polluting cars off the road" when we are living in the bright electric/hybrid car future.

[Albert S]

Stuart,

Apologies,you're spot on.. that was obviously my misinterpretation  ...but how odd,and like most things I guess,debateable,any pre 88 vehicle should loose its historic identity due to an arbitrary points system ?

[Charles P]

The biggest non-sequitur is that they want to eliminate the MOT for older cars because the MOT "isn't relevant" to these old cars. I read this as meaning as the MOT gets ever more complex they can't see the point in adding to an ever increasing list of age related exemptions.
Therefore how will the MOT be applied to "old" cars needing one (through a points or performance score) when the rules don't fit? Indeed how will the "voluntary" MOT work when the rules diverge too much?

Frankly I'd much rather pay for a mandatory MOT and avoid being treated differently.

Charles