My MOT expires on 25th October, but for various reasons I'd like to renew it this week.
My question is, if it fails this week's test, is the car still road legal until 25th October, under its existing MOT?
Thanks for any advice
Stewart
|
Yes......
But if it fails on something that makes it unroadworthy you could be on a sticky wicket, but you can't be done for no MOT.
Edited by martint123 on 05/08/2009 at 21:39
|
Yes...... But if it fails on something that makes it unroadworthy you could be on a sticky wicket but you can't be done for no MOT.
A friend planning to trade his 12 year old Alfa under scrappage had it tested 2 weeks before expiry, it failed on emissions and minor faults; main dealers for two makes refused to accept it for scrappage because the fail is recorded on VOSA records.
So ANPR cameras could pick it up as not having a valid MOT, whether he would be 'done ' for this might depend on the officer's discretion but I would not risk it.
|
|
A condition of your insurance is that you maintain your car in a roadworthy condition. The MOT test is all about safety, so it wouldn't help your case if you had an accident whilst driving a car which had failed it's MOT.
|
|
|
A friend planning to trade his 12 year old Alfa under scrappage had it tested 2 weeks before expiry it failed on emissions and minor faults; main dealers for two makes refused to accept it for scrappage because the fail is recorded on VOSA records. So ANPR cameras could pick it up as not having a valid MOT whether he would be 'done ' for this might depend on the officer's discretion but I would not risk it.
A VT30 Notification of Refusal of an MOT Test Certificate does not override an existing VT20 MOT Test Certificate. ANPR cameras could not pick it up as not having a valid MOT because it has one, which will also be shown on VOSA records, with the date of expiry. I rather think the dealers are wrong too in refusing to accept it for scrappage. I would report them to the appropriate department. I just put my 1997 Reg. car in for MOT 4 weeks early. If it had failed expensively I would have considered scrappage as the existing MOT still had 4 weeks left on it. In the event it acquired a VT30 for headlamps set too low. then an immediate VT20 when one of the mechanics twiddled them up at no charge. VOSA records now show a 'fail' and I have an MOT valid until 24 August 2010. VT30's appear on VOSA records for the sake of completeness. To reiterate, they do not invalidate an existing MOT.
|
If any failure is fixed just after an MOT test, then an MOT certificate is issued (as datostar points out), even if the problem was only a blown bulb. The failure is still recorded.
|
|
|
|
So ANPR cameras could pick it up as not having a valid MOT whether he would be 'done ' for this might depend on the officer's discretion but I would not risk it.
No, it still has a valid MOT and therefore would not be 'done' for no MOT.
|
It still has a valid MOT
BUT it may not be road legal as the MOT fail may mean it is not roadworthy.
AFAIK there is a requirement to have a valid MOT
AND
A requirement for the vehicle to be roadworthy
You would meet one but not the other. Only really an issue if you get stopped or have an accident and the fail was a factor.
|
An MOT is a report on a vehicle on one particular day out of 365 (or 366) - it is not cast in stone.
|
An MOT is a report on a vehicle on one particular day out of 365 (or 366) - it is not cast in stone.
at one particular hour of that day,
|
SQ
at one particular hour of that day
On a small number of items checked.
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 06/08/2009 at 20:24
|
And that minumum standard has to be maintained for 365 days a year.
A fail would mean that the car should be removed from the highway until the minimum standard could be met again
|
so if your taillight bulb blows, which would be an MOT fail, you need to get the car off the road immediately?
little bit black and white methinks
|
Pass / fail
Black / white
Same as.....................................................
|
try calling the AA out because you have a blown bulb in the middle of nowhere see what response you get.
If MOT fail always rendered the car unroadworthy you would not be allowed to drive it anywhere else to get it repaired.
|
A blown bulb doesn't constitute a breakdown (AA / RAC / whoever), it does mean that the car doesn't meet the minimum requirement to be roadworthy - an MOT failure.
One blown bulb
One defective tyre
One defective brake
Where do you draw the line?
|
|
As far as I know, if the MOT tester says that the vehicle is unsafe to drive, he will tell you so, and you mustn't drive it. I have never heard of anyone being told that, though. Has anyone here?
|
As far as I know if the MOT tester says that the vehicle is unsafe to drive he will tell you so and you mustn't drive it. I have never heard of anyone being told that though. Has anyone here?
Indirectly, perhaps, when severe structural corrosion makes it unsafe to conduct the brake test. As far as I'm aware, MOT testers can't actually issue prohibition certificates so in theory the driver could still take it away at his own risk. Test Stations, most of them private garages, wouldn't want to be cluttered up with wrecks!
|
A fail would mean that the car should be removed from the highway until the minimum standard could be met again
So why does the law make provision for the vehicle to be removed from the Testing Station for rectification and return for a reduced price retest? At the least aiding and abetting if not actually counselling and procuring this heinous crime.
|
"Not Roadworthy" surely has a narrower definition than "MOT failure"? There is a box on an MOT failure sheet for the examiner to tick if he considers the car unroadworthy.
A car could have a number plate that failed to comply with the latest BS specification or had a fixing bolt the wrong colour. Hardly "unroadworthy"?
Or it could pass an MOT but be declared unsafe because it had a dog mascot on the bonnet.
|
|
|
|
