Gov.uk details about 40yr MOT exemption

[Pete Lewis]

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/670431/vehicles-of-historical-interest-substantial-change-guidance.pdf

 there's been much said about this during the year , but mine is due 29th may so will soon be testing the system

From May 20th 2018 cars without substantial changes will not require a mandatory MOT 

you can have one carried out voluntarily if you so wish

the above link to a pdf spells it out quite clearly !!!   

Pete

vehicles-of-historical-interest-substantial-change-guidance.pdf

[TomL]

Very helpful Pete, thank you.

I will probably go down the route of the voluntary test.   There's got to be something said for having an unbiased third-party check over the car.

Tom

[dave.vitesse]

Pete, Many thanks for the info. Good to see there are no restrictions on improving brakes or fitting better dampers. Hopefully sense has now prevailed.

Dave

[Anglefire]

This reminded me to check the Tax rules had changed - which they have so I can now declare mine a VHI and get the tax back as well. 

[euan douglas]

Thanks for that Pete  -  but still a bit confused!  My V5 says Historic, so I guess that means I still have to fill in a V112 form to claim the MOT exemption, otherwise I'll still need an MOT?  Or does exemption occur automatically as it says Historic on the V5? 

I think filling in the V112 must be done when applying for the tax renewal and not at any other time. 

Is all of this correct???

Euan

[Pete Lewis]

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/declaration-of-exemption-from-mot

 

apart from these are all written by a civil servant so the actual critical bit you need in simple speak is always cloudy

as i read this you only need a V112 if applying for a VHI road tax at a  Post Office as the  guy behind the screen needs to see an MOT which you dont have to have so this declaration informs him to go boil an egg, , im sure they have access to the dvla site  so why is the techy so out with the fairies and not joined up writting

humbug !

Pete

 

 

[AidanT]

Post office? What's that?  Pay your  £0.00 on-line and it has all that's needed

Last time I did it it knew the car had an up-to-date mot so I assume next time the progran won't even bother looking !!

Aidan 

 

 

[Pete Lewis]

my reminder says tax runs out april 30th,  and this vehicle requires a valid MOT certificate ( which till the  may 20th i guess thtas right)

taxed online ok,  12 months for £000

the reminder tells about V112   only  needed at a PO 

but like all gov  forms you can read into it what ever you like ,is it clear and concise   lots blurrb about what you dont need to know  .

just trying to fit a throttle cable to the 2000..... head , arms ,hands , torch all get in the way    of a simple clip   Grrr. ..................bring back the Vitesse !!!! 

or some yoofness

Pete

    

[Pete Lewis]

gully has done more sherlock activity and says the V112  is still showing pre 1960 , its not been updated  !!!!!

there's no hope  

bet the revised forms dont turn up till the 20th may when the rules change 

good to see common sense is applied to these gov.uk  ideas   GRrrr !!

time for the revolution..    start with Pot holes and crap infrastructure we have to accept when we pay tax on cars , road fund, fuel tax , income tax, council tax . VAT

and everywhere the roads are really diabolical

and the suns out 

Pete

[Anglefire]

Just checked and mine is due on the 30th May - so will also be testing it! I'm also going to try and get it registered as a VHI this afternoon so will see what that results in come MOT time! I guess nothing until its due for tax again in June/July or whenever it runs out - Unless it gets taxed for 12months from now........

[Anglefire]

2 minutes ago, Pete Lewis said:

gully has done more sherlock activity and says the V112  is still showing pre 1960 , its not been updated  !!!!!

The Tax rules only changed on 1st April so nothing changed until then!

[AidanT]

Sorry guys terminology confusion. Is VHI  the same as the car being registered as historic?

Aidan

[Anglefire]

Vehicle of Historic Interest - essentially yes!

[Clive]

But YOU have to make the declaration that it is a VHI, it is not automatic (That is my understanding)

So unless you have an engine swap you can make the declaration, changes to stuff like brakes/suspension(ie fitting Koni shocks, uprtaed springs) and type 9 gearboxes are all OK And I think changing an engine within  the same car family? ie 1500 instead of a 1300, or 2.5 in place of a 1600, are OK. Still not 100% about gitfires, and my zetec powered spit still needs an MoT (which it would get anyway, as will all my old cars)

[dougbgt6]

Clive,

Yes, that's what I think to. Currently I have a Heritage Vehicle which is exempt road tax, to gain Vehicle of Historical Interest status I have to apply and then the car gains MOT exemption.

Doug

[Colin Lindsay]

I'm getting a bit miffed as I'm TRYING desperately to get an MOT, despite not needing one, but a tiny bit - the least, most insignificant bit - of welding is causing me all sorts of nightmares, on a car that no longer requires one.

[Anglefire]

1 hour ago, clive said:

ie 1500 instead of a 1300, or 2.5 in place of a 1600, are OK. Still not 100% about gitfires,

As I understand from reading the documentation linked to above by Pete, if the vehicle was available with any options of engine size, gearbox etc, that is not a significant change, nor is a chassis swap or monococ swap as long as its the "same" as original.  Suspension changes may be considered a substantial change depending on what they are - but if its for environmental or safety reasons then it's ok.

I would say a Gitfire would not be exempt as its a different number of pots and never available as an option. Unless it was changed more than 30years ago - and you can prove it!

Although the MOT rules apply from 20th May, the current forms are not updated to reflect the revised date so it can't yet be applied for. 

[Clive]

8 hours ago, Colin Lindsay said:

I'm getting a bit miffed as I'm TRYING desperately to get an MOT, despite not needing one, but a tiny bit - the least, most insignificant bit - of welding is causing me all sorts of nightmares, on a car that no longer requires one.

Ah, but you shouldn't use the car on the road. Despite not requiring an MoT, it still needs to be safe and capable of passing one.

That is the biggest issue with this nonsensical change. People think they can use their car unchecked and the standard of maintenance no longer matters. It does.

Mark, the guidance is muddy about engines. Different number of cylinders probably means no exemption. But can you argue a vitesse and herald are essentially the same cars? Likewise spit and GT6? Possibly. But if Mr X has claimed the exemption with a gitfire, and is standing in court having just killed somebody in an accident, would you feel confident? In fact would they be confident that your word would be accepted that they had serviced and checked the car thoroughly some months earlier, and how could they predict brake failure that caused the accident. That is why I will be getting my cars Mot'd.....My posterior will be covered

[Anglefire]

Clive, I don't disagree with any of your arguments. But even with an MOT in your hand, you end up in court, its not worth a pinch of salt as it only truly valid for that one day as it has to be kept in a roadworthy condition at all times. Now, I agree that you have a stronger case with a valid MOT, but if your tyres have worn below minimum or the brakes have worn out then, it is no longer roadworthy!

Its been the same for pre-1960's cars for some time and there is no evidence of a major statistical change for pre-and post 1960's cars.

But I also agree that there are potentially a lot more cars from the 70's that are now affordable for many who just want a car and don't give a stuff. But then they would buy a 10year old modern for £500 if they were that way inclined?

I haven't decided about what I'll do with mine yet. There is no reason why you couldn't do a  "MOT" check list and go through that annually or every 3/6/9/12 months - would be equally valid.

 

[Anglefire]

There is even a check list on the DVLA website - not much too it! https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/449392/mot-inspection-checklist-vt29.pdf

[Blitz]

A agree with the mot comments but I’d rather be in court with one than without one. It’s independent and that counts for a lot. 

Also everyone knows insurance companies will find any excuse not to pay out. As a non mechanical minded person who has never worked on cars professionally they could rightly argue I wouldn’t know what was safe and what wasn’t. Mine has a mot and I intend to keep it that way. 

[Anglefire]

Not been an issue with pre-1960 vehicles (The insurance bit!) 

1 minute ago, Blitz said:

It’s independent and that counts for a lot.

Well yes sort of. They can't use that as an reason as they allow the practice!  From a practical perspective it might make it easier to argue. But you would still have to prove it was roadworthy at the time of the accident.

But I'm not going to argue that you shouldn't have an MOT!

[Blitz]

Oh I agree mot is only really valid until you drive away. I’m only really saying that some members have excellent knowledge of their cars and would sound impressive in court and then theirs me, who would come across like a clown 

 

[dave.vitesse]

I will carry on with an MOT on the Vitesse. A second set of eyes is always a good thing.

Dave

 

[Pete Lewis]

thats a echo , not many have any clues about how good or how bad their brakes and  lh rh  balance is until they are in a ditch  too late