Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25

Thread: VHI - Vehicles of Historic Interest

  1. #11
    I have a good relationship with a local MOT station that I have used for many years. They're very fair and honest and will only fail the car if it's necessary. I will speak to them about getting the equivalent of an MOT test in the form of an engineers report (assuming I don't need an MOT of course). I'm pretty sure they would relish the opportunity to go over the car with a fine tooth comb and report back any deficiencies (including observations that may not be a part of the official MOT testing program).

    Failing that, I would use them anyway for a proper MOT if it is a requirement though my interpretation of the changes ahead suggest that it won't be.
    "The most beautiful kit car in the world - Motor"

  2. #12
    I use to use a garage close to my parents, but after stupidly going to them for a number of years it was very clear that they looked for any chance to fail a car (they did repair work). After several fails on ridiculous points I changed to using an MOT garage near my sisters. They were the other extreme and let almost anything through unless it was really dangerous. To be fair to them they talk you through the problems and give you the benefit of the doubt you will sort them without the need to fail you. You can guess which one I continue to go to

  3. #13
    ***Euro-Nova Supporter*** Spacenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Hampshire, UK
    I agree with Dave, I cannot see this legislation being extended to kit cars. For most people (policy makers included) no kit can be of historical interest. It's why the sight of a Nova creates such a reaction - nobody can believe it is a kit car.

    Tax exemption may have been a good idea for the classic car movement but MoT exemption is potentially a safety issue and I am not in favour of that, much as I dislike the MoT experience.
    only Pythagoras can save me now!

  4. #14
    Senior Member BlueNova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    St Andrews, Scotland
    Been doing some background digging on this issue and found this at the start of the Government's Response to the Consultation ....

    "1. 899 respondents to this question supported the Government’s proposal to exempt
    vehicles over 40 years old from MOT testing, while 1,130 respondents were opposed.
    The chief argument against the exemption was that all vehicles travelling on the
    highway should have an annual test for safety reasons.

    2. The Government has decided to proceed with the exemption for all vehicles
    constructed or first registered more than 40 years ago, on a rolling basis, as
    proposed in the consultation document

    The decision to use bold text was theirs, not mine. That's 44% in favour, and 56% against by the way!

    The changes were promoted by the All Party Parliamentary Historic Vehicles Group, which is chaired by Conservative MP Sir Greg Knight.

    I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions ....

    If your car does qualify for being MOT exempt and you intend to claim that exemption, I think it would be wise to discuss the matter with your insurance company beforehand. I would like to think that insurance companies would give a discount for vehicles that have passed an MOT test? However, on reflection, they're more likely to penalize those which haven't.


  5. #15
    Vested interests always play a part....

    Some internet searches brought up :-

    "Green Party candidate Mike Jackson said: "This man is bizarre. He spends his time in parliament complaining about road works, playing drums in a band and polishing his collection of classic cars."

    he is critical of initiatives seen as 'anti-car', such as congestion charging, pedestrianisation schemes, speed humps and some 'park and ride' proposals. He is Chairman of the All-Party Parliamentary Historic Vehicles Group"

    "In 2007, he was named as one of the 50 most influential people worldwide in the Historic Vehicle Movement. In 2011 he was shortlisted as the ‘Industry Champion of the Year’ by the International Historic Motoring Awards, for his work in supporting the historic and classic car movement"

  6. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueNova View Post
    I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions ....

    'Consultation' in Newspeak means 'let people make valid objections, reasoned alternatives and comments which we completely ignore and do exactly what we planned in the first place'....... The spirit of 1984 is alive and well!
    It's a 50 year old car and everything works, just not always at the same time.......and it's probably about to get jealous!
    *Donate to Euro-Nova today!*

  7. #17
    Senior Member bushboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Grays Essex
    You may find that it will be the insurance companies that finally decide the fate of MOT's or not. It will be easy to insert a clause that says "your car MUST have a current MOT" Full stop regardless of what the "Law" says. No insurance, No Driving.

    Unless you have a stable of historic cars that you intend to drive on a regular basis then dodging an MOT for each car will have a financial benefit.

    My stable is 1 car, and if I was told I did not need an MOT then I will still have VSI. And I'm sure that MOT stations will very soon advertise these for MOT exempt vehicles (Vehicle Safety Inspection).

    I'm happy to be tax exempt, but dodging a safety check............

    Be safe out there Kids

    "Always do what you are afraid to do"
    "I can accept failure, but I can't accept not trying"

  8. #18


    Quote Originally Posted by Gaisa View Post
    While a car may be considered a vehicle of historical interest and MAY be exempt from MoT's, only an idiot would go without some kind of road safety check and since an MoT fits that bill, why change it? They exist for a reason, after all.
    bang on i agree with you .i will be submitting mine for one befor it goes on the road if only to keep it safe to use. and to keep the insurance company happy should i need to claim

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Near Eastbourne

    Quote Originally Posted by supernova2 View Post
    bang on i agree with you .i will be submitting mine for one befor it goes on the road if only to keep it safe to use. and to keep the insurance company happy should i need to claim

  10. #20
    Have you seen the new proposals that they intend to implement very soon where you won't legally be able to drive away a failed car (even a minor fail and even if you've taken the car for an early MOT?) So no repairing MOT stations will need massive car parks, or everyone will have to have full pre-tests. It really is time policy was thought about by people in the real world rather than office bound clueless numpties....
    It's a 50 year old car and everything works, just not always at the same time.......and it's probably about to get jealous!
    *Donate to Euro-Nova today!*

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts