So after what appears to be months of sorting paper work and counting the numbers it would appear the men and women at the top have a new plan after May 20th next year all motor vehicles older than 1978 will not just have free road tax but will not need to present it for a MOT Test each year as well. So 40 year old Vehicle's I.e cars and Bikes will just need insurance and that is it as to whether road restrictions come in for there use there is no plans in the pipe line at this time. And its going to be a rolling 40 year system as well. Is this a good or bad thing I'm not to sure at this time most of the 70s cars have long gone to the rust heap with a Ford escort mk2 salvageable shell coming in at around 2k-3k and running rs2000 fetching 30k-50k people look after the old stuff.
Pug
__________________
04 250 TTR 1960 Harley panhead 84 Honda xr 250/cb250rs Hybrid plus the new Montesa 4Ride
A great thing, I won't have to take my 64 and 77 bikes for a test, where I pay about £40 for a few hundred miles a year. My bikes are well maintained and have never failed a test.
Sounds mental to me. You can drag something out of a shed insure it. Get a can of easy start and jump leads, and your off.
How the hell is this in the interest of public safety.
Because most classic owners are responsible and look after their vehicles, the mileage they cover is small and they still have to be roadworthy, those who drive uninsured, in mot'd vehicles are unlikely to be searching out 1976 Morris marinas, when they can't buy a corsa for £100 (or nick one)...... This is a bit of deregulation let's welcome it.
And what happens when you're back plays up and you can't get underneath your marina or you forget to fit that split pin?
MOT is there for a reason. Every 2 or 3 years maybe!
You've never had a viechicle fail?
This rule has been around for pre-1960 vehicles for a few years now so is just being brought forward to 40 year old vehicles on a rolling basis, you can still MOT your vehicle if you want to, it's just no longer compulsory!
Most old bikes and cars are owned by enthusiasts and tend to be well looked after which is all part of the enjoyment of ownership. A good idea, although I'm biased like devondan with two old bikes that pass with the odd minor advisory.
I can honestly say I have never had a vehicle fail on a major safety item, ( feeling smug! Well not since I was a kid anyway, and I knew my Ford consul better than the mot tester) but the point is this: be careful what you wish for, everytime something goes wrong someone want to legislate or make rules that in trying to solve one problem cause problems for others. NERC Act 2006 for example. This is something in the motorists favour, how common is that?!
The accident statistics that DfT rely on show the risk of a rolling exemption to be minor if measurable. The decision isn't a random one, and the risk is low. the biggest risk factor in any vehicle is the driver and the bigger risk to the public is from those who drive uninsured, untaxed and uninsured Not from classic cars or bikes, IMHO this is an intiative that will help classic vehicle enthusiasts, lets welcome it rather than than assume it's going to make the roads more dangerous - which it wont.
I beg to differ. I agree most classic owners are responsible and quite a few are knowledgable but we all tend to have blind spots (by this I mean areas of safety we tend to forget about). This could be checking wheel bearings, head races, lights, cables or any number of things which are checked methodically in an MOT. This is why I think having your classic MOTd is still worthwhile.
( feeling smug! Well not since I was a kid anyway, and I knew my Ford consul better than the mot tester) but the point is this: be careful what you wish for, everytime something goes wrong someone want to legislate or make rules that in trying to solve one problem cause problems for others. NERC Act 2006 for example. 
This is something in the motorists favour, how common is that?! 
