Pre-1985 vehicles 'could' become MOT-exempt.

[VIP]

Currently in its consultation stage, EU Directive 2014/45/EU stipulates that 'vehicles of historic interest' are;

Directive said:

(7) ‘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.

eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014L0045&from=EN

Now, I'm not entirely sure what the second point means, whether it would refer to a model/chassis being no longer in production, as opposed to a 'type' of vehicle, but the DfT, DSVA and the VHRA (amongst others) have recently met to discuss the consultation document, and how it might be applied in the UK.

www.vhra.co.uk/VHRA/News/Entries/2014/8/10_Classic_Vehicles__exemptions_from_periodic_testing.html

It was indicated that the current DVLA 8-point 'Radically Altered Vehicle' rules could be applied in the case of the third clause of 'historically preserved and maintained in its original state', which could result in your modestly modified 1970’s Alfa or 1983 Nissan Laurel becoming MOT-exempt.

Now the EU Directive does allow individual member states to set the period and content of any roadworthiness testing for 'vehicles of historic interest', but seeing as the current precedent is 'MOT-exempt' for pre-60 historic vehicles, who knows how this will pan out.

Interesting reading!

[baggabones]

I never understood why they scrapped the rolling 25 year tax exemption....but mot exemption scares me to be to honest?

[VIP]

Aug 11, 2014 12:38:49 GMT baggabones said:

I never understood why they scrapped the rolling 25 year tax exemption....but mot exemption scares me to be to honest?

Because the current Government at the time needed all the money it could get its hands on because it was spending hand over fist, but that's beside the point and not for discussion here.

You make a valid point about MOT exemption. Even in its current form it is open to abuse, and to open it up to a vastly higher number of available vehicles is a concern. On the plus side, any pre-1985 vehicle in your stable would appreciate in value overnight!

[hkr91]

Aug 11, 2014 12:38:49 GMT baggabones said:

I never understood why they scrapped the rolling 25 year tax exemption....but mot exemption scares me to be to honest?

I'd say due to money being lost, imagine the thousands of cars that were getting free road tax, that money could be well spent... Errr... Giving them a yearly bonus! It has however changed to 40 years iirc, pre 74 is now exempt.

I've got a '58 Morris minor that is mot and text exempt. Car is an absolute rot box and I wouldn't trust it on the road at all (I don't drive it btw) - scares me to think some people without the mechanical know how won't be checking the simplest of things which could be dangerous. A lot of people use their MOT to tell themselves if the car needs any work doing to it.

[uncleterry]

Aug 11, 2014 12:47:34 GMT VIP said:

Aug 11, 2014 12:38:49 GMT baggabones said:

On the plus side, any pre-1985 vehicle in your stable would appreciate in value overnight!

Referring to the third point "it is historically preserved and maintained in its original state and has not undergone substantial changes in the technical characteristics of its main components" - I doubt many of the pre-85 cars on here have survived without substantial changes in their technical characteristics of their main components. I'm not sure who would decide this, but I would assume it means big changes such as engine change would be out of the questions. But what about suspension or colour changes? Not sure mine would count or not, depending on this criteria...

[VIP]

Aug 11, 2014 12:51:48 GMT uncleterry said:

Referring to the third point "it is historically preserved and maintained in its original state and has not undergone substantial changes in the technical characteristics of its main components" - I doubt many of the pre-85 cars on here have survived without substantial changes in their technical characteristics of their main components. I'm not sure who would decide this, but I would assume it means big changes such as engine change would be out of the questions. But what about suspension or colour changes? Not sure mine would count or not, depending on this criteria...

As I posted in the OP, and detailed in the VHRA document, the proposal is to use the current DVLA 8-point Radically Altered Vehicle scheme to determine the "substantial changes" referred to in the Regulation.

[grifterkid]

There are many things that the government should do to encourage the use and preservation of old cars but MOT exemption is not one of those things I think!

The word preservation is an important one to use as I doubt that everyone out there (and I could be wrong so I apologise in advance) would want to 'preserve' their cars in the correct manner if they know they don't have to get said cars through an MOT...?!

All this does is get dangerous cars out on the road in my view... Then, when an accident happens with one of these cars it will instantly make people sceptical of us wierd folk and our dangerous 'hobby' and pretty much immediately make the powers that be slap stupidly tight rules on the cars that we love...!!!

Obviously, these words are just conjecture and of the 'worst case scenario' type of vibe but you just never know these days do you...?!

I'd just be happy if they could keep the 40 year rolling tax exemption rule going... Leave it at that please!

[chairchild]

oh my.... the "2 year MOT" scared me enough. But having more cars that will never EVER have to go through an MOT?

Count me out

[Deleted]

Not realy sure on  this to be honest,  Just a quick glance at Ebay , car and classic etc and nothing in the pre 60 bracket has shot up in price due to  Mot exemption, Ive bought and sold a couple since its introduction....

 
I can see this (if it comes in) being just as irrelivent as the pre 60 exemption.

Aug 11, 2014 12:47:34 GMT VIP said:

Aug 11, 2014 12:38:49 GMT baggabones said:

. On the plus side, any pre-1985 vehicle in your stable would appreciate in value overnight!

[Copey]

Aug 11, 2014 14:33:30 GMT chairchild said:

oh my.... the "2 year MOT" scared me enough. But having more cars that will never EVER have to go through an MOT?

Count me out

i am with you!!

i get that the assumption is that because they are classics that the owners will look after them properly, but how many people will end up buying a late 70's/early 80's car to bomb round in with no worries of an MOT? personally i hate the idea of anything not being at least looked at on a regular basis, even just a quick look for rot and test the brakes, not a proper MOT and nothing that a car can fail per say, just a "look, this is dangerous and needs sorting" kind of thing

[AB car pix]

Sounds like the German system. And having an older modified car is extremely costly and difficult there.

I'd rather take a pass on any honey traps like free tax and MOTs and stick with what we've got for as long as possible!

[uncleterry]

Aug 11, 2014 12:55:53 GMT VIP said:

Aug 11, 2014 12:51:48 GMT uncleterry said:

Referring to the third point "it is historically preserved and maintained in its original state and has not undergone substantial changes in the technical characteristics of its main components" - I doubt many of the pre-85 cars on here have survived without substantial changes in their technical characteristics of their main components. I'm not sure who would decide this, but I would assume it means big changes such as engine change would be out of the questions. But what about suspension or colour changes? Not sure mine would count or not, depending on this criteria...

As I posted in the OP, and detailed in the VHRA document, the proposal is to use the current DVLA 8-point Radically Altered Vehicle scheme to determine the "substantial changes" referred to in the Regulation.

Ah apologies, I missed that bit!

I'd just about qualify then

[Ryannn]

Would make it a lot easier to buy a car to stick infront of a house you don't like... lol

[Clement]

It's not really the subject discusse here but in France, up until 2009 we used to have the possibility of an MOT exemption for cars over 25 years old (it came with a restriction in using the car, and a non-reversible switch to historical registration). It has now switched to a 5-year MOT for this category instead of the 2 for regularly-registered cars.

If anything, this kind of registration is usually seen as less "clean", because :
- it has been used to register ringers
- if you can't even be bothered to prove your car is safe, what else is left out?
- it's for collector cars which never get used.

I was delighted that the Préfecture clerk who transferred my ex-Cortina's registration to my name forgot to carry on the "historical" category. 80 euros for a complete brake test, suspension check (both visual and on a rolling road), etc is cheap imo.

Many cars will just be left to rot if there's no push to keep them in roadworthy condition.

Tax exemption, on the other hand...

[gurnersimps1963]

Aug 11, 2014 13:47:17 GMT grifterkid said:

There are many things that the government shouldl do to encourage the use and preservation of old cars but MOT exemption is not one of those things I think!

The word preservation is an important one to use as I doubt that everyone out there (and I could be wrong so I apologise in advance) would want to 'preserve' their cars in the correct manner if they know they don't have to get said cars through an MOT...?!

All this does is get dangerous cars out on the road in my view... Then, when an accident happens with one of these cars it will instantly make people sceptical of us wierd folk and our dangerous 'hobby' and pretty much immediately make the powers that be slap stupidly tight rules on the cars that we love...!!!

Obviously, these words are just conjecture and of the 'worst case scenario' type of vibe but you just never know these days do you...?!

I'd just be happy if they could keep the 40 year rolling tax exemption rule going... Leave it at that please!

Spot on.

[jules1200]

It WON'T happen, end of!

[VIP]

Aug 11, 2014 18:40:28 GMT jules1200 said:

It WON'T happen, end of!

That's a ridiculous viewpoint, and saying 'end of' like you are a ruling authority doesn't help open discussion. The Regulation is in draft format, and undergoing consultation. Its not simply a proposal that can be turned up, its way past that.

[dodgerover]

Other countries have different roadworthness rules (I'm thinking some states of Australia which don't have any compulsory testing here) and you don't see nuns and kittens dieing by the boat load, in fact I saw more dodgy vehicles on the road in New Zealand which has a 6 monthly MOT equivalent.

It will all come down to owner attitude at the end of the day.

I can also understand the current MOT exemption on pre'60 HGV's more than on normal pre '60 vehicles though, anyway we live in a democracy so we will all be able to have our say and should expect our views to be listened to and considered.........

[georgeb]

Aug 11, 2014 22:24:11 GMT dodgerover said:

Other countries have different roadworthness rules (I'm thinking some states of Australia which don't have any compulsory testing here) and you don't see nuns and kittens dieing by the boat load,

Whereas in Malaysia, where there is no testing, you do! Once you get out of Kuala Lumpur and into the sticks, there's all manner of sheds rolling (just) around.

In the Philippines, testing varies greatly from a pencil rubbing of the VIN plate, which mine had, to a check lights, brakes and tyres but you still get stuff like this smoking (literally) around



What seems sensible is to have different categories of "Historic/Classic" or whatever name you want to give it, as some countries have. If you want MOT exempt, then you get a different plate and limited use, if you want to roll as a daily, or at least reasonably often, you submit for MOT and keep your plates with no restrictions. That keeps the show queens and collectors happy and still means that the rest have to be maintained to a standard of sorts. You pays your money, and you takes your choice.

In Singapore, where car ownership is eye-wateringly expensive they even have differing categories of this for new cars, although not on testing admittedly. You can go for limited registration which gives you different plates but you are limited to driving on the island at weekends and, IIRC, between 7pm and 7am. However, there is a significant discount on the various (lots of!) taxes and you can buy a single "day license" if you want to drive in restricted hours. There also used to be, and may still be, a historic category which was even cheaper but this is more limited still, with mileage restrictions as well.

The only downside to this is having a system where this can be reversed without creating a bureaucratic nightmare (at which the British are exceedingly good!), i.e. someone buys a show queen on restricted plates but wants to use it more often, with an appropriate MOT regime. Again, in Singapore, once you have transferred a car to "historic" status, that was it. No way back.

As has been said, if I was in the UK, just tax exemption alone would be fine for me. Keep the MOT.

[fred]

Aug 11, 2014 14:33:30 GMT chairchild said:

oh my.... the "2 year MOT" scared me enough. But having more cars that will never EVER have to go through an MOT?

Count me out

Agreed muchly I want some sort of official proof I'm not going fall through the floor pan a day after I buy something