New MOT legislation and more...

[markm]

COCK. Tax runs out at the end of this month and cannot be renewed because the car wont have a valid MOT when it comes to taxing it.

Bugger, means ive got to do another MOT for the car

[Burma-Shave]

Do you need a previous valid MOT for tax when it is MOT exempt though Mark? If you came to tax it for June after the new legislation comes in, will it not offer you MOT exempt status anyway? If your tax is still running you could SORN and then re-apply?

If this worked if it was currently taxed until November say, you could SORN it in May and then apply to re-tax it in June, and from that point on it would not need MOT..?

I think there are swings and roundabouts for MOTing anyway. For example, my SC MOT missed a loose strut gland nut which was obvious on driving and potentially dangerous, missed cos of the nature of the test not a mistake by the tester and I only discovered a split inner front driveshaft boot on my 964 by chance, as it is obscured by the front undertray and so invisible for MOT purposes. It had obviously been gone for a while and I guess could have eventually seized or let go at Motorway speeds.

[911hillclimber]

I think you are probably right.
As to the effectiveness of the MoT, that's a longer running issue than this thread!

Where I go (a small village garage) he is very very tight, little gets past him, but that is assuring.
The DfT is bothered about the younger MoT inspector not understanding the older cars...one of the reasons for the exemption.

[KS]

Today's the day...

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... n-from-mot

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... om-mot.pdf

[Lightweight_911]

.

I've just tested the new system:

The MOT on my 1969 Alfa Spider had expired on 30th January & the car has been unused/in storage since then.

The road tax ran out at the end of March & I decided not to MOT the car but to 'SORN' it & see if the new system would require me to have a valid MOT when the new regulations came into force.

I have just logged into the system - declaring that my car is not 'substantially modified (which it isn't) - & successfully taxed my car (which, being a 1969 model, was already 'historic' status).

I wonder if this now means that any old car over 40 years old that isn't 'substantially modified' - no matter what condition it's in - can be taxed without needing an MOT ?

I'm particularly thinking of how it affects unroadworthy cars with potentially valuable registration numbers ....


.

[Bootsy]

I’m guessing they’ve thought of that. Possibly a trigger depending on how long it’s been untaxed or when it was last MOT’d

Transferring a number from an old car which was previously off the road for a while often resulted in an inspection with the car requiring to be driven to the office for inspection. I’ve taken 2 cars before for inspection but given so much is now automated I guess there must be triggers in the system somewhere

[Nick Moss]

Plates can be transferred from SORNed cars, has been this way for a year or so.

[964RS]

Pretty sure when transferring a plate recently I read that it could only come from a car that had had an Mot for 12 months...

How this now works with historic cars not needing an mot I’m not so sure...

[amallagh]

My Tax is due this month on the 914/6 GT.
It has normal GT extras plus a 2.8 twin plug engine and 915 box like a 916.
It has a 2.8 twin plug on an early case so I'm assuming that is OK based on the guidance that 'Engine – alternative cubic capacities of the same basic engine and alternative original equipment engines' is not considered a substantial modification'
I am also assuming that the GT appendages to arches and all the fibreglass panels/bumpers are OK based on the statement that 'Changes of a type that have been made when the type of vehicle was in production or in general use (within ten years of the end of production)' are not considered a substantial modification.
This 2nd statement seems to cover a multitude of things, but what it seem to say is that 'period modifications' (of a type made within 10 years after original manufacture) in general use at the time are OK.
I assume this could also then apply to the 915 gearbox as this was used in the 916 variant of the 914/6 ?

Do you think I'm interpreting this incorrectly ?

Same then applies to a '74 shell backdated to '73 wide body 2.8 twin plug RSR spec with a genuine '74 Carrera engine.
Only issue is that some of the lightweight panels are carbon fibre like bonnet and doors
Does any use of carbon fibre at all in the vehicle constitute significant modification ?

Same would apply to the SWB 911R I'm building as it has a carbon bonnet but otherwise it is 2.0 litre twin plug 911R replica

I'm assuming electronic ignition and things like MSD or updated spark boxes do not constitute significant modifications ? Is that correct ?

Lastly is a '73 2.4E presented as a '73 RS lightweight. It has all the necessary modern rally car bits. Again I'm assuming this is 'not substantially modified'

Any specific advice from any one who has tested these specific questions is much appreciated. I have read the government's on line guidance document and I am none the wiser on some of these specific issues.

Cheers
Andrew

[KS]

Bolt-on body panels are of no consequence.

[Peter]

On the question of transferring a private registration plate, the car must be MOT’d I believe. Certainly, for me to transfer a plate I’ve had for years onto my Porsche, I was told the receiving car had to have an MOT, even though it is MOT exempt. I am getting it MOT’d today!

[964RS]

My Tax is due this month on the 914/6 GT.
It has normal GT extras plus a 2.8 twin plug engine and 915 box like a 916.
It has a 2.8 twin plug on an early case so I'm assuming that is OK based on the guidance that 'Engine – alternative cubic capacities of the same basic engine and alternative original equipment engines' is not considered a substantial modification'
I am also assuming that the GT appendages to arches and all the fibreglass panels/bumpers are OK based on the statement that 'Changes of a type that have been made when the type of vehicle was in production or in general use (within ten years of the end of production)' are not considered a substantial modification.
This 2nd statement seems to cover a multitude of things, but what it seem to say is that 'period modifications' (of a type made within 10 years after original manufacture) in general use at the time are OK.
I assume this could also then apply to the 915 gearbox as this was used in the 916 variant of the 914/6 ?

Do you think I'm interpreting this incorrectly ?

Same then applies to a '74 shell backdated to '73 wide body 2.8 twin plug RSR spec with a genuine '74 Carrera engine.
Only issue is that some of the lightweight panels are carbon fibre like bonnet and doors
Does any use of carbon fibre at all in the vehicle constitute significant modification ?

Same would apply to the SWB 911R I'm building as it has a carbon bonnet but otherwise it is 2.0 litre twin plug 911R replica

I'm assuming electronic ignition and things like MSD or updated spark boxes do not constitute significant modifications ? Is that correct ?

Lastly is a '73 2.4E presented as a '73 RS lightweight. It has all the necessary modern rally car bits. Again I'm assuming this is 'not substantially modified'

Any specific advice from any one who has tested these specific questions is much appreciated. I have read the government's on line guidance document and I am none the wiser on some of these specific issues.

Cheers
Andrew

I doubt anyone is going to take responsibility and advise, its individual opinion.

I found it easier to pay £30 for an MOT and peace of mind, helps keep its maintenance record up to date also....

[911hillclimber]

Couldn't agree more with 964.
Every word of advice I've had from all manner of sources, Specialist, Government included always leave an element of doubt.
There is no black or white answer, just what you arrive at in your own common sense way unless the car is radically rather than substantially modified, and those definitions are blurred too.

Don't bother with exemption if modified beyond the bolt on mods criteria, just pay the MoT every 12 months, and you have a great peace of mind.

If the car is bog standard then claim exemption, you can always have the car checked by an MoT technician if you wish, he can issue a paper saying all is safe on the examination day.
If it fails this inspection the garage can still stop the car being driven away for repairs.
If stopped out on the road, you will have to convince the person the car is maintained to a safe standard. The person asking could be a policeman.
How you prove that is a mute point. A valid MoT is a good start imho.

MoTs will get tougher, emissions and condition of the vehicle will all become more stringent to get the duffers off the roads.

[Peter]

Well I just got a fresh MOT on mine today. It sailed through of course, but still worth it.

[911hillclimber]

My substantially modified 73T goes in next week for its routine 12 monthly MoT.
The station does lots of classics, so it will be interesting to hear his take potential lost business.
He has done 23 of the car's 28 MoTs in my ownership.

In a year's time it would be interesting to see how many have actually stopped having an MoT.