Owners of classic cars would welcome an age-specific MOT test, despite their vehicles currently being exempt.
Under today’s rules motor vehicles that have reached 40 years are defined as “historic” by the DVLA and do not have to undertake the annual MOT check, as long as they have had no substantial changes within the last 30 years.
However, according to a recent survey by Hagerty, the majority of owners would support a test for classic cars to ensure that they’re kept in roadworthy condition.
With more than 1,200 enthusiasts responding to our questionnaire, 64 per cent of respondents said they would actually welcome a classic vehicle version of the MOT.
“A more sympathetic approach to older car testing would help keep unroadworthy cars off the road,” noted one respondent who owns a modern classic Citroën.
“A proportionate and appropriate testing regime would not be unwelcome, and if there is a broader concern in the non-classic car community that our vehicles are unsafe, and that could be addressed by such a move then this could be helpful,” replied another collector of classic cars and bikes.
“I don’t want unsafe classic cars on the road, but I also don’t think they should be tested as if they were modern cars,” added an Audi owner.
Some 90 per cent of those that took part in the survey currently own a classic car, and benefit from the existing system, yet 43 per cent said they still choose to put their cars through an annual MOT test, even though it is not a legal requirement.
Many drivers feel that the current MOT test is not suitable for older vehicles, but 43 per cent of respondents still said they would pay more for a classic that has a valid MOT certificate and 47 per cent believe that mandatory MOTs would help preserve classics for future generations.
“I cannot understand why you would not have an MOT test on classic vehicles,” said one enthusiast who owns a Triumph TR3 and Citroën 2CV.
“I don’t think any vehicle should be exempt from some kind of test,” contributed the owner of a Ford Capri.
These views reflect a wide concern over the safety of older cars on the road. More than half (51 per cent) of those who took part in the survey said that they feel the exemption rules help drivers use unroadworthy vehicles. 69 per cent said it’s more likely for unroadworthy cars to be on the road and 21 per cent said they’ve actually seen unroadworthy vehicles driving on the roads thanks to the MOT exemption.
“Our survey shows many classic vehicle owners have concerns over MOT exemption,” commented Mark Roper, Managing Director of Hagerty UK. “It is clear that many owners would welcome a classic-specific MOT test, one that proves roadworthiness with tests more appropriate for the age of vehicle. Most agree there should be some form of annual inspection, ideally by a classic car expert, particularly as many popular cars are now exempt from any form of annual test and can be driven freely regardless of condition.”
While many owners seem to be broadly in support of a new type of MOT for older vehicles there are those who support the status quo, with 61 per cent of classic car enthusiasts who participated in the survey saying that MOT exemption is a good thing, mostly because the MOT test is not suited to older vehicles.
“In general, non-classic vehicle owners have little or no mechanical understanding and are far more likely to drive a defective vehicle on the roads than an owner of a classic car,” noted a collector of Austins, Rovers, Toyotas and VWs.
“People who are willing to own and operate a 40-plus-year-old car are already committed to keeping classic cars on the road, which, by definition, means maintaining and repairing them, otherwise they would own something else,” said one Porsche owner.
Supporting this statement, 98 per cent of those drivers questioned who do not submit their cars for a regular MOT claim that they maintain their vehicles to a standard that would pass anyway.
The classic car industry, meanwhile, appears to be in favour of some form of testing, while still being in supporting exemptions.
“We support regular safety and roadworthiness checks for historic vehicles that are exempt from the statutory MOT, particularly when a vehicle is being returned to the road after a period of storage, following restoration or significant mechanical work,“ said Dale Keller, CEO of the HCVA: Historic & Classic Vehicles Alliance. “There is a clear rationale for the current exemption, not least because historic vehicles can require specialist knowledge to assess properly. However, we believe there is a strong case for developing an optional, industry-led roadworthiness inspection specifically for MOT-exempt historic vehicles.”
A definate NO to mandatory testing. Let those that want an mot get a regular mot, they wont be turned away!! I keep my cars to a good & safe standard mot & tax exempt. To be fair tho.. i did see a mk10 Jag at my local show with a steady drip of fuel from one of the tanks! and he knew about it, and still drove it there!!!
Mot great idea but like every with compulsory with dvla will start up cheep give a few years the price will rise very fast and fewer and fewer classic cars will be on the road the main reason we look after our cars mine is a 1961 ROVERP4 100 1961
This a way of government cashing in on classic car
I drive 1955 Morris minor series 2
It in top condition I don’t need a rip of government
Who out to grab taxes to keep the invaders in welfare and hotel and if not pensioners it the classic cars
This government the labour party or disgrace to British people people who own classical cars keep them in top condition not like London transport buses in London as you labour run London it 20 miles a hour rubbish hole
I believe if going mot old cars put people who own them not to people you just made up
This government will be asking to tax them next more rubbish coming I bet 🇬🇧👀
I totally agree with mandatory MOT. It should never have been stopped.
As discussed with a classic car mechanic, we agreed the point , too many owners , some his customers don’t know one end of a spanner from the other. Another point is when a car come up for sale and hasn’t been MOT,d since 2018, I wouldn’t touch it, especially something like a Stag for example. Not everyone knows what to look or listen out for. Anyway,if you own a classic the n you can afford to pay for Mot,s ,it’s not expensive really.
People who own classic cars are enthusiasts and they look after their vehicles either doing the maintenance themselves or subbing it out .I think they should remain MOT exempt
There are many Classic Car owners who have not got a clue of Car maintenance, a form of MOT is essential for Classics is essential for Safety.
You will get “rogue’s” in all aspects of life! Bent police, dodgy MP’s, that doesn’t mean we should abolish the system! The “classic cars ” that are likely to be unsafe are more likely to be “modern classics” if Hagerty must meddle with the current laws perhaps the 40 year rule should be a 50 year exemption? And can anyone tell me how many “classic cars” have been involved in accidents due to their “unsafe” condition?
For goodness sake the classic car movement needs to stop giving an open goal to the government for more regulation.
Fine if you’re unsure of the safety of your car get an MOT, but no to it being compulsory.
Remember that when you tax a historic vehicle you tick a box to confirm it’s roadworthy.
I would like a voluntary mot test for classic cars that is for guidance.
Hopefully it would flag any safety issues so that a car would not be dangerous to other road users but would allow unlimited time for repairs as sometimes this can take longer with classic cars ( finding spare parts, or someone able to do the repair).
Why bring politics into this?
I find your comment offensive
I did add my views to the survey as I agree that an an age specific test could be useful. However I would add again that I suggest a test should be less frequent than annually as many classic cars cover such low miles. My three don’t often exceed 1000 miles p/a.
In agreement with Kevin Whiteside. If you want an MOT, then go and get one. Stop trying to force this on everyoe else.
My only foray into the world of classic cars back in the 1990s was a disaster. The car, a MGB GT looked good, came with a current MOT but as a restorer told me subsequently, whoever had examined the car had done so with ‘rose-tinted spectacles’ – in other words a very dodgy MOT. If I was tempted to buy again it would be only after a thorough check by, for example, the AA or similar service.
” 69 per cent said it’s more likely for unroadworthy cars to be on the road [if they are not subjected to an MoT test]”
– and that is why unroadworthy classic cars figure so highly in accident statistics, isn’t it. Um, no, wait …….
Once we have MoT’s, they will tax us to make sure the MoT is current. Terrible idea – a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist.
“.. i did see a mk10 Jag at my local show with a steady drip of fuel from one of the tanks! and he knew about it, and still drove it there!!!…”
And an MoT would have prevented that how?
The survey of “enthusiasts” is suspect. Do another survey of verified owners of classic cars within each decade 40-years and older. I suggest the result would be very different. The exemption should remain. All owners have the option to subject their classic cars for a test of roadworthiness if they lack confidence in their ability to maintain a car to a proper standard – including those with a “modern classic Citroen” 😂
As an owner of a nearly 70 year old car, I think testing would be a good idea. I have an agreement with the garage who look after our other cars to give it an annual looking over, in case I have missed something. There is one BIG problem; can we trust government?
I wonder who you actually asked in the survey? I am a member of several car clubs dealing with classic and vintage cars and there is zero appetite for compulsory MOT testing. Governments, even with the best of intentions, generally make a mess of so called health and safety requirements and I can see any attempt at a classic friendly MOT being a total fiasco. In any case, I understand that there are no statistics to prove that MOT free Historics are a liability in road safety terms, so If you want to MOT your car, because you dont feel competent to ensure its roadworthiness, then by all means go for a voluntary MOT ( if you can find a garage that can or will do one) , but don’t try and drag the rest of us into a complusory and unnecessary system.
I totally agree that an annual MoT is essential for all vehicles over 3 years old, including classic cars. I get an MoT for my classic (1969) every year because they inspect parts of the car that I would not know how to test eg play on suspension arms etc. Without annual MoT checks for classic vehicles, there is simply a disaster waiting to happen somewhere! Bear in mind, that if a non-MoT’d car in poor condition caused a serious accident, this could give the government an excuse to ban classic cars from our roads or limit their use.
I also support an ‘age appropriate MoT’, which requires vehicles to adhere to standards appropriate for a car of that age, and not compare it with modern standards.
It’s ok publishing surveys about stuff like this but where’s the evidence to substantiate the need other than a load of opinions? In other words has the exemption actually led to an increase in the number of unroadworthy vehicles appearing on the roads? If it has then yes go ahead, but prove it first.
I can see an annual or biannual roadworthy check on older cars would be useful for those amongst us who do not inspect and work on their own cars. A simplified MOT looking at lights, horn, structure, brakes and suspension. Something to ensure that car isn’t a danger.
I have my own workshop with full rise ramp and sophisticated tools to hand so for me an annual or biannual test would be an added cost and an inconvenience as most of my classics are rarely driven.
I have a 1937 Morris 12/4, my local garages have all said they would not know how to MOT test it as there is no data to test it against, apart from a visual inspection of tyres etc and I can do that myself, so NO, just another money spinner from this failing government.
What evidence is there that classic cars are involved in more accidents due to being “unsafe “. I suspect there is none, sadly many owners now have never known a time before MOTs are not aware that the original test just covered brakes lights and steering. It was a 10 year test at first openly designed to remove older cars from the road to help our failing motor industry. Once implemented the government realized that it was a marvellous way to increase revenue from the motorists and changed it to 3 year test.If the classic test is reintroduced you will find it rapidly becomes more complex and more expensive .
I have my 58 year old Alfa Spider MOT’d so I can demonstrate it is road worthy and that proper diligence has been taken in the event of an accident
I consider it £50 well spent
As the owner of a 1934 Ford the last thing I would want is someone who knows nothing about classic cars testing it! I had a 1960 Rover which I put through an MOT the ‘Shaker’ used during the test destroyed the geometry of the front suspension and steering and, even though he passed it, it meant a complete rebuild! I’m not sure even modern cars need such violence!
My classic cars are ‘tested’ by a mechanic who knows all about those cars.
There were surveys done at the time of the proposals, I think by the FBHVC, that showed a majority of owners at the time were against scrapping the MOT for historic vehicles. Safety concerns and unscrupulous traders were just two concerns and sure enough just after the announcement a certain well known auction site was flooded with ‘barn finds’ that you could just ‘drive away with no MOT needed’.
Whilst there are a lot of owners that do look after their cars and know what to look for, there are also a lot who don’t know one end of a spanner from the other. It’s very easy to do ‘a forecourt job’ and filler and new paint can hide a multitude of sins. People new to our hobby have no idea where to look for rot on the underside. I was against the 40 year rolling rule as now many cars are capable of 70 mph plus and being used on a regular basis, especially if going into one of the so called clean air zones.
A different type of MOT is needed to get cars checked. A Mini rots all over the place, a Bentley T1 can have as much rot as an 80’s Lancia but unless you get a car in the air problems can be difficult to spot. And there’s wheel bearings, track rod ends, brakes, lights etc. It also helps knowing whether a recorded mileage is correct or whether the low milage car offered has had several thousand miles knocked off the clock.
I have a collection of cars from 1904 to 1991. The older ones I know what I am doing but things like the 1966 Mini need a professional eye cast over them. It’s easy to miss bits. I’ve seen pictures of old historic cars involved in accidents posted all over FB. Usually it’s not the HC car driver that’s at fault but there’s the usual comments of of well it’s not got an MOT. People who aren’t involved in our hobby don’t really understand it and some will say anything to try and get them banned. I get my cars checked over so if anything does happen the Insurance Company can’t look for a reason not to pay out.
My historic classic car is only driven a few hundred miles a year and is kept in a dehumidified garage the rest of the time, so wear and tear and corrosion levels are much lower than that of a more modern daily driver, that does more miles in a week than mine does in a year and commonly lives on the drive or street in all weathers. No one is advocating that these high mileage drivers should have their car tested every week, so why should I have mine tested every year when the annual mileage and use is so small.
I think you should have an MOT at least once every 2 years. It also shows you are maintaining your car as the insurance company would want to see.
I also think trailers and caravans should have a test every 2 years
As a classic owner and mechanic and MOT tester I believe there should be some sort of safety check for vwhicles over 40 years old. I had the ‘pleasure’ of testing a 40 yr old Landrover Defender 2 weeks ago, it had been without MOT for over a year, the owner desperate to get an MOT on it in order to then register itas an historic vehicle and therefore avoid MOT and road tax. It failed, it was in a shocking state and by far the worse vehicle I have ever driven absolutely worn out. To be frank the MOT test could not fail it enough and it will be on the road again shortly., the owner angry it failed and can’t wait to spend nothing on it going forward, this is what we are up against. Most classic enthusiasts take care of their vehicles but then it only takes one
The current law is that a vehicle has to be roadworthy whether it be classic or modern.
Same rules apply to both.
The biggest issue for me is that very few modern garages and mechanics (technicians?) understand older cars. The older the car, the less they understand. There would need to be much work and investment in training for a network of suitably qualified staff and appointed garages. Also, we need to be very aware that once politicians get a foot in, there will be no stopping them. This must be overseen and managed by a suitable body, FBHVC would be ideal.
A professional insection certificate may be useful in event of an insurance claim. It would also ensure that parts replaced in tbe last 30 years are appropriate.
No need as most owners maintain the vehicle to a standard better than garage’s ,even getting welding sorted by expert,s when you consider the cost of road tax and mot that could over £1000.+ so leave it as it is
I own a 42 year old renault dodge 50 van. It is an absolute labour of love that is constant. I have 2 mechanics that look over it regulary and do the work as and when. I take full responsibility and pride in its magnificent condition! An mot for older vehicles is just another money earner for an all ready over reaching government to spend on bombs and surveillance. Also the amount of electric cars glitching out and crashing or spontaneously combusting is way way greater than classic car accidents.
And if you have not noticed – the registered keeper is not necessarily the owner. DVLA owns all our cars anyway. Ownership is an illusion. Tax and mot are a massive scam and mot parameters get tighter yearly, as they would for classics until we are all off the road and forced into electric ai cars. Embrace your sovereignty classic vehicle owners 🙏
This ‘result’ is typical of the risk-averse ‘safety’ culture that infiltrates every day-to-day activity these days.
For those who ‘think’ that having an MOT will make the roads safer, they are welcome have one for their classic car if it gives them peace of mind.
Meanwhile where’s the actual independent evidence that classic cars present any quantifiable danger on the road?
All the classic owners I know take maintaining roadworthiness as a responsibility implicit in owning such a vehicle. Why would they risk something that of necessity requires the investment of significant personal time and money?
If it ain’t broke don’t fix it!
In Northern Ireland, MOT testing is at government-run testing centres, not by garages.
These centres are already overwhelmed by demand, and clearly couldn’t cope with re-introducing classic cars, either in terms of volume or addition training, so there would be greater incentive to bring in legislation to force us off the road.
You can’t book an MOT for an exempt vehicle, but many garages offer “Pre-MOT checks” and there’s nothing to prevent anyone taking their car for one of these, especially as some are free.
Your allowing government to get involved and once they put their mits in it won’t stop there , rule changes price increases they are not to be trusted and then there would be no going back . I believe we would loose a great many cars that are not standard and that have been modified that bring something different to the table instead of boring row upon row of standard classics we’ve all seen before .
I asked my local trusted garage about a lesser MOT testing the basics on my 50 year old classics. IE no ABS or any modern stuff. They said its not worth it for them to spend say 15 minutes for a shorter test for say £20.
If you are involved in a serious Road Accident The Insurance Company will insist on Prove that the Car is Road Worthy. The consequence of this could render very serious implications to the owner of that Classic Car. Speak to your insurance Company
I was never a supporter of the MOT exemption in the first place. I have always had my XK150 tested annually.
I see too many cars in my workshop (that take advantage of the exemption) which I consider are not fit to be on the road, most of them high performance vehicles. Usually the response from the owner is “Well it doesn’t need an MOT”.Seized brakes, worn suspension components and leaking PAS rack were on a V12 E Type, to recall just one.
The current MOT is quite adequate for classic cars, provided the tester has sufficient experience with such vehicles. A special test is not required. We should not give the government the opportunity to dream up something which we may all regret!
MOT is not always proof it’s road worthy of mechcanicaly sound we will soon be saying after buying a classic we want our money back after buying expecting a 70/60/50 year old car to drive like there new Audi or BMW other makes available there is nobody stopping you having your classic tested if that will make you feel better
To add to David Emerson’s comment – I complete the survey and described the MOT situation in Northern Ireland. However, no mention in the “results” that Northern Ireland has a different and wholly inefficient government agency system for MOT testing with long waiting lists for a test and operatives who do not understand how to test older vehicles and have a “computer says no” attitude. I would also have liked to see a proper report of the survey with a data breakdown instead of a journalistic generalised report as above.
If you know nothing about cars and own a classic, simply book it in for an MOT . I’ve never heard such a load of nonsense people demanding a classic specific MOT ? What’s that exactly? A sweep it under the carpet MOT for those with old bangers ? Most people with classic cars look after them and they are often in very good condition. As a mechanic and previous MOT tester I can assure you that your local MOT station is more than capable of carrying out a test on what is bound to be a much simpler design of vehicle than modern day stuff. I can’t understand why anyone would think they would struggle? What do you want? Retired 80 year old testers to be pulled back into service just to test old cars , come on ? I’d shut up about it before some lefty twat in government withdraws the whole 40 year exemption altogether because silly people can’t manage to pick up a phone and book themselves an MOT test !!!
I am glad the word ‘car’ was in the heading because 50% of classic vehicles are motorcycles and I doubt asking them would give a similar result probably because they tend to enjoy working on their bikes as much as riding them.
The MOT Testers Manual is quite clear about what does or does not apply when testing older vehicles, there is no need for an older car MOT test. It is likely that a Tester may take longer to test an older vehicle as they may want to refer to the Testers Manual to verify testable items and applicable criteria, as this also varies according to first use. Any one can take an historic vehicle for test. Some companies offer an older vehicle inspection outside of the official MOT Test scheme. However given that some companies are currently offering MOT at a fee under £40.00, it’s actually quite a cheap inspection. Don’t forget your insurance may be invalid if the vehicle is unroadworthy and an MOT may be of benefit in this case.
We have, in the family , 25 cars, all in tip top shape, everyone of them is exercised during the year in some form or other., be it club rally’s, trials or Historic stage rally’s. Some only do 50 miles a year. They are regularly checked by the mechanic. If I had to MOT all of them every year it would be impossible. This was the case 20 years ago and we sold 6 cars that had not been MOT’d for 5 years. It is my understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner / driver to make sure their car is road worthy.
SO it’s a NO to MOT’s
I could put up with an MOT every 5 years
Well said David.
Our system is different from the mainland. It should be the responsibility of the driver or a classic or vintage car to be happy that it is road worthy.
As far as I’m concerned an MOT on an older car is a waste of time and money, old car owners DO KNOW the condition of their cars and keep them maintained for their own safety and preservation of the vehicle as much as anything else and I do not believe many are “old bangers” as has been suggested by some people. I have experienced over the years very inexperienced MOT testers from younger generations who do not know the design specialities of the very old cars. I have found the very experienced older generation testers to be more knowledgeable about what is safe and what is not. It would add considerable expense to owners of vehicle collections if each of their vehicles had to be regularly MOT’d and I suspect that any registered Classic Car testers would be few and far between thus causing vehicles to be taken miles from home to get them tested. In any case the Police already have the power to remove off the road any “old bangers” that they suspect are not roadworthy. Older vehicles were not designed with the finite engineering tolerances like modern cars and these tolerances were different depending on the age of the vehicle. You cannot compare a 1904 De Dion to a “modern” 1964 Triumph TR4 and so it would be fairly impossible to set meaningful standards.
A very definite NO to Classic Car MOT’s from me, and it would be interesting to see the demographics of those who responded to the Hagerty survey because I feel there would be many people who did not take the survey who might have different opinions.