• Welcome to DOSBODS

    Please consider creating a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

Sign in to follow this  
Libspero

Time To Scrap MOTs?

Recommended Posts

Is it time to scrap MOTs?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/07/25/mot-test-obselete-makes-roads-no-safer-time-scrap/

Yet there’s little evidence that MOT tests actually do the job they are supposed to do: namely, prevent accidents and save lives. The best defenders of the status quo can do is point to failure rates and repairs carried out. But when you look at results, there’s no evidence that MOTs reduce road deaths.

Across the pond, most US states don’t require MOT-style annual check-ups. As of January, Utah became the 34th state to scrap mandatory vehicle inspections entirely. In 2015 a US federal government report, that compared crash rates between those US states with and those without MOT-like tests, couldn’t find any evidence that mandatory safety testing lead to fewer road deaths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A big aspect of the MoT these days, and a frequent point of failure, is emissions testing.

If you're not going to have a MoT then inevitably, given the current fashionability of air pollution measures, a separate emissions testing regime will be called for so you may as well just keep the MoT.

I would personally have one even if not compulsory as do most owners of pre ?1950 cars which are now exempt because it makes me feel safer and does provide me early warning of other problems in the form of advisories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always saw MOTs as like dog licenses.  The real benefit is indirect - gives a way to hassle/interdict/disrupt scroats cheaply.  No MOT and driving a dangerous car?  seize car.

 

Get rid of MOT, and it's one less way of actually punishing people for bad behaviour

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dgul said:

I think the sort of people that write this sort of thing have nice 3 year old cars on a pcp deal and find the whole MOT thing a bit bizarre.   If they spent any time at all in with real people they'd start to realise that without an annual MOT there'd be loads more cars on the road with bald tyres, bulbs blows, brakes marginal and fraying seat belts -- most of these don't actually fail because they're fixed before they actually get in front of the MOT guy.

What makes the article interesting is that apparently the reality doesn't bear this out (at least from real world data from the US).  I presume it is because people know if there are issues when they take their car in for a service anyway.  The sorts of people who wouldn't fix a broken seatbelt (does that really happen?!) or change bald tyres are presumably the same ones already doing so with a dodgy MOT or no road tax and insurance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Libspero said:

What makes the article interesting is that apparently the reality doesn't bear this out (at least from real world data from the US).  I presume it is because people know if there are issues when they take their car in for a service anyway.  The sorts of people who wouldn't fix a broken seatbelt (does that really happen?!) or change bald tyres are presumably the same ones already doing so with a dodgy MOT or no road tax and insurance.

No - the real world data is not showing all those criminals who make sure their cars are up to code because they do not want to be stopped.  It also does not show those criminals/scumbags taken off the road because the cops are able to find cause for a stop due to a car related safety issue.

 

In other words, they have not measured the incidental benefits...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dgul said:

I think the sort of people that write this sort of thing have nice 3 year old cars on a pcp deal and find the whole MOT thing a bit bizarre.   If they spent any time at all in with real people they'd start to realise that without an annual MOT there'd be loads more cars on the road with bald tyres, bulbs blows, brakes marginal and fraying seat belts -- most of these don't actually fail because they're fixed before they actually get in front of the MOT guy.

A friend of mine runs a dealer in very expensive cars, most are 'leased'.

The number that come in for service with illegal tyres and faulty lights is astounding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, wherebee said:

No - the real world data is not showing all those criminals who make sure their cars are up to code because they do not want to be stopped.  It also does not show those criminals/scumbags taken off the road because the cops are able to find cause for a stop due to a car related safety issue.

 

In other words, they have not measured the incidental benefits...

I think I understand your point as being that by creating arbitrary hurdles and costs on society, you can more easily identify people who don’t comply with such legislation..  and the chances are those people are probably bad eggs.

I think your premise is wrong. The law would still require you have a road legal vehicle. The police would still have the ability to stop you for having a light out. Not requiring an MOT might even make it more likely that “the scum” has a light out and then you would have even more opportunity to harass them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Libspero said:

What makes the article interesting is that apparently the reality doesn't bear this out (at least from real world data from the US).  I presume it is because people know if there are issues when they take their car in for a service anyway.  The sorts of people who wouldn't fix a broken seatbelt (does that really happen?!) or change bald tyres are presumably the same ones already doing so with a dodgy MOT or no road tax and insurance.

Errr... :ph34r: I failed on that once,  didn't realise it had a slight cut in it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it goes and there is no replacement emissions tests I would expect a sizable number of people would take advantage of the performance and economy gains to be had from ditching the catalytic converter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, mooncat69 said:

But MOTs aren't actually expensive. Unless your car is fucked.

It's £50 I'd rather not spend though. Not to mention the time and trouble of taking it in for a test. I fix my own cars, I don't see why I have to get them checked by a third party to make sure they're safe. It's fundamentally illiberal interference by the state, not to mention it very likely has negative outcomes on a cost benefit basis i.e. the time and money could be better spent elsewhere. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mooncat69 said:

But MOTs aren't actually expensive. Unless your car is fucked.

That's the first time I've ever heard anyone say MoTs aren't expensive - unless speaking to a consistent brand new or almost brand new car keeper - or mate of a garage owner and so on.

After the zero MoT period your car is finished at any rate unless you do the required work.  All cars need maintenance.  That or buy a new/fresh car which is just as pricey one way or another.

It's all a money spinner.  

The actual test fee isn't expensive in itself.  "Cheap MoT" ;)

Edited by twocents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let’s face it, MOT being obligatory or not will only have an effect on the law abiding. 

The two feckers who were driving erratically and aggressively within half a mile of each other I experienced this evening probably couldn’t give a single fuck between them. That’s even if they know of the existence of the MOT test. One of them certainly seemed to be unaware of the need to display registration plates on their old Toyota.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, twocents said:

That's the first time I've ever heard anyone say MoTs aren't expensive - unless speaking to a consistent brand new or almost brand new car keeper.

After the zero MoT period your car is finished at any rate unless you do the required work.  All cars need maintenance.  That or buy a new/fresh car which is just as pricey one way or another.

It's all a money spinner.  

The actual test fee isn't expensive in itself.  "Cheap MoT" ;)

Exactly (almost). Other than the MOT fee, the rest of the cost is on keeping your vehicle in some pretence of road-worthiness for at least one day a year. It's not a money spinner to force you to maintain your car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, whitevanman said:

It's £50 I'd rather not spend though. Not to mention the time and trouble of taking it in for a test. I fix my own cars, I don't see why I have to get them checked by a third party to make sure they're safe. It's fundamentally illiberal interference by the state, not to mention it very likely has negative outcomes on a cost benefit basis i.e. the time and money could be better spent elsewhere. 

Agreed totally.  I think the Govt has started to realise that the hard working tax payer is shafted by everyone.  If life becomes too unaffordable and expensive we shall have civil unrest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will just say that I have now managed to fix my jeep engine management light which is good because otherwise a perfectly good car was going to become several tonnes of scrap metal. Which would have been a right pain in the arse.

The trick is you turn the ignition on and off again three times with a second delay in between each.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ina said:

Agreed totally.  I think the Govt has started to realise that the hard working tax payer is shafted by everyone.  If life becomes too unaffordable and expensive we shall have civil unrest.

I’m not convinced that government are anywhere near seeing the sap taxpayer as anything other than an entitled cash cow ready for exploitation. 

4 minutes ago, Cunning Plan said:

I will just say that I have now managed to fix my jeep engine management light which is good because otherwise a perfectly good car was going to become several tonnes of scrap metal. Which would have been a right pain in the arse.

The trick is you turn the ignition on and off again three times with a second delay in between each.

 

Or, cut the ire to the bulb in the dash. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, One percent said:

I’m not convinced that government are anywhere near seeing the sap taxpayer as anything other than an entitled cash cow ready for exploitation. 

Or, cut the ire to the bulb in the dash. 

You're right. I was very angry with it before I tried the off and on again thing. But I don't think mellowing had anything to do with it now behaving as it should.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, mooncat69 said:

Exactly (almost). Other than the MOT fee, the rest of the cost is on keeping your vehicle in some pretence of road-worthiness for at least one day a year. It's not a money spinner to force you to maintain your car.

Indeed and it's essential to maintain road worthiness and it is the law - but I believe that many garages use the fact of a captured market to increase the work and their profits beyond what is strictly required for normal maintenance. 

Many other people believe that as well and there are plenty of anecdotes which seem to confirm that.

I think the MoT does have it's uses but I think some and maybe many garages exploit it.

 

Edited by twocents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Cunning Plan said:

I will just say that I have now managed to fix my jeep engine management light which is good because otherwise a perfectly good car was going to become several tonnes of scrap metal. Which would have been a right pain in the arse.

The trick is you turn the ignition on and off again three times with a second delay in between each.

 

i just wipe mine out with an ODBCII scanner. Comes back on if i hammer it, so i just drive nice and gently and it stays off for weeks.

It will just be a failed lambda sensor according to the error code, but thems 80-90 squid a piece so if i can keep it off over the MOT day then i wont bother fixing it.

Edited by leonardratso

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Cunning Plan said:

You're right. I was very angry with it before I tried the off and on again thing. But I don't think mellowing had anything to do with it now behaving as it should.

How did the turning it off and on again work?  

Did you get the advice from the IT bods?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, leonardratso said:

i just wipe mine out with an ODBCII scanner. Comes back on if i hammer it, so i just drive nice and gently and it stays off for weeks.

Your way sounds very technical. I gained my skills from years of working with Microsoft Windows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.