Rolling 40 year MOT Exempt. Yippe.

[Rex]

is it true that some insurance providers on classics wont insure without an mot? and if you are involved in an accident proving the vehicle was roadworthy can be a minefield

No it's not true, and the onus isn't on the owner/rider/driver to prove anything.
On the other hand, if your ancient rock-hard and visibly perished front tyre blows and you lose control hitting another car in the ensuing accident, then the insurance company do have the right to reduce any subsequent payout.

[bsa-bill]

A little clarification here https://www.gov.uk/government/news/mot-changes-20-may-2018

I intend to get my 61 flash MOT's , (currently sorned), what this means is that now ( well in May) I can get it taxed and ride to the MOT place legally, I have done this before but always making sure  I had an appointment made and didn't meet Mr Policeman in any bad circumstance.
Have just resprayed the front mudguard following an unfortunate accident in the shed, once this is fixed and an MOT acquired 61 Flash goes up for sale, leaving me with the Rocket Gold Flash to finish off and more time for riding and looking out for next (possibly lighter ) project

[RogerSB]

I've always understood that an MOT only proves roadworthiness at the time it's examined - later the same day it could be unroadworthy

[muskrat]

I like to have my bikes inspected in case there's something I missed. Down here for full registration it must be inspected yearly no matter it's age. For bikes +30 on club permit (historic registration) the club has designated inspectors who check the bike and fill a form that has to be presented to the registry office.
Cheers

[cyclobutch]

I've always understood that an MOT only proves roadworthiness at the time it's examined - later the same day it could be unroadworthy

Yep that was my view.

I'm now in the position that only 4 of my 13 bikes legally need an MOT. I'm happy to enjoy the savings on those costs ... however misguided.
 

[Greybeard]

I like to have my bikes inspected in case there's something I missed.

I can see the value of that but here I wouldn't take my bike to a bike shop; they wouldn't have a clue. They probably couldn't even start it! Also of course, classic vehicles have different testing standards; eg. exhaust emissions which means testers need to know the rules.

I don't think the BSAOC or VMCC would have the resources to check machines.

I feel confident in my abilities to keep my bike safe.

[Rex]

Indeed, and as it should be. The MoT test is so basic on "our" bikes that the possibility of them finding something we can't is miniscule. If someone can't check tyres brakes and lights etc should they be riding old BSA's?

[bsa-bill]

I've always understood that an MOT only proves roadworthiness at the time it's examined - later the same day it could be unroadworthy

true, but once a year you have to get that bit of paper that states that on that day it was roadworthy, any vehicle anywhere could become unroadworhty in a second (puncture anyone), thankfully these days mechanical failure is a very rare thing compared to back in the day as they say

[muskrat]

I was one of my clubs inspectors for over 10 years. 99% of the time the bikes were OK. Once in a while I'd get one trying to sneak through wit a sus tyre or chain/sprocket. Most classic bike riders maintain their bikes very well but there are some that haven't got a clue so I'll take their money.
Our test down here isn't that stringent. If the brakes and lights work and there isn't anything going to fall off your through.
Cheers

[Topdad]

For years my testing station would only do the mot if the boss was in as the new mechanics(?) didn't have a clue with my bike, the Boss in turn told me he was taking money under false pretences as I knew more about my bike than he did ! After say always past the brake test which was the only thing that had any relavance  to actually being tested .