No mot for pre-1960 vehicles

[Greybeard]

In France you don't need a MOT (Control Technique) for any motorcycle regardless of age. However you have to keep the bike in roadworthy condition and you will be fined if you get caught using it on the road in poor condition.

Also in the UK you must keep your vehicle in roadworthy condition.

Neil Ives UK

[shabashow]

I've got a feeling that the cops will do you if your MOT exempt bike isn't "road worthy". So whether you get it inspected independetly or not, your lights, horn and brakes must work (to a degree), there should be at least the minimum tread on the tyres and there shouldn't be any bits falling off. Not needing an MOT, for beurocratic reasons, doesn't give you carte blanche for riding any old scrapper, not that anyone on the forum would contemplate such a thing!

[muskrat]

"not that anyone on the forum would contemplate such a thing! wink"
Just won RAT bike trophy on the A65. Club plated bikes need to be inspected yearly. Guess who the club inspector is. .
Cheers

[bsa-bill]

I've got a feeling that the cops will do you if your MOT exempt bike isn't "road worthy".

yep and I have a feeling they wont be as sympathetic to our classics as many MOT guys are

[Triton Thrasher]

I've got a feeling that the cops will do you if your MOT exempt bike isn't "road worthy".

yep and I have a feeling they wont be as sympathetic to our classics as many MOT guys are

Why do you think that?

I can't think of anything that would be ok with a tester, but the cops would do you for, apart from items under Construction and Use regs but not in the MoT Testers' manual. And that was always the case.

[bsa-bill]

Why do you think that?

Not having a go at the cops at all, always found them quite old bike friendly, while said old bike is sitting looking pretty, however would they take original equipments limitations into consideration such as
Silencers - which would not comply with today's  sound levels in particular Goldiy silencers which where not really original road equipment IIRC
Lights - six volt were ok back in the day, would your average traffic policeman know what the law is re adequate illumination on today's roads, for eg how many of the many cyclists riding at night without lights get booked.
Brakes - will they accept that in our classic case the highway code needs changed to allow us twice the amount of "thinking time"

I guess time will tell, meanwhile I intend to get mine mot'd, a fresh set of eyes is always a good thing I think, on the plus side it will be nice not to have to adhere to a certain date once a year to get it done

[lawnmowerman]

I own a 1938 car and also the 1959 SR and I have always found the police to be quite helpful with old vehicles - I even got a push in the car in the pouring rain one day when it had broken down.

Our problem may be with VOSA who are more used to dealing with HGVs and commercial traffic.

As I have said in earlier posts, most of us classic vehicle owners while being quite expert in the maintenance of our vehicles do not possess formal qualifications whereas the police and VOSA do. There are many areas in the MOT which are down to the discretion of MOT testers in some garages who understand the limitations of old vehicles. If we self-certify our vehicles we are not "qualified" to use discretion in those grey areas.

In a dispute with VOSA or the police we will always lose because we are "amateurs" up against "professionals" who may chose not to use discretion and go by the letter of the law.

Having said all that, nothing has really changed as the MOT (old style and new style voluntary) only certifies the vehicle at the time of test and the onus is still on the driver to ensure the vehicle is roadworthy and meets regulations.

What concerns me is the irresponsible few who will undoubtedly see this as an opportunity for cheap travel and put death traps on the road. After a few accidents involving these people the insurance companies will take notice and increase premiums and possibly also introduce independant tests for older vehicles. This could put us in a worse position than we were before the recent government meddling.

Time will tell.

Jim

[Goldy]

Quite a few fellow enthusiasts have been saying that the Insurance companies will start their own tests. Well they cannot do that, if the law says an MOT is not required then they have to accept it, they cannot make their own law.

[iansoady]

Quite a few fellow enthusiasts have been saying that the Insurance companies will start their own tests. Well they cannot do that, if the law says an MOT is not required then they have to accept it, they cannot make their own law.

No they can't but they can impose conditions. For example, a lot of insurers won't accept modifications - which for cars can be as trivial as towbars.

[Triton Thrasher]

, they cannot make their own law.

They can decide how expensive the premium is or, of course, they can decide to refuse you any insurance.

[Triton Thrasher]

Why do you think that?

Not having a go at the cops at all, always found them quite old bike friendly, while said old bike is sitting looking pretty, however would they take original equipments limitations into consideration such as
Silencers - which would not comply with today's  sound levels in particular Goldiy silencers which where not really original road equipment IIRC

Back in the good old days, before CE marks etc, a silencer was illegally loud if a copper said it sounded too loud.

Lights - six volt were ok back in the day, would your average traffic policeman know what the law is re adequate illumination on today's roads, .

Even a 30/24W 6V headlight looks like a lit headlight to someone who looks at it.

Brakes - will they accept that in our classic case the highway code needs changed to allow us twice the amount of "thinking time"

Are we that slow-thinking?

[bsa-bill]

Back in the good old days, before CE marks etc, a silencer was illegally loud if a copper said it sounded too loud.

My point exactly my silencer has no CE marks that I know of, I'd welcome your comments if you can tell me how many of our retro silencers have, perhaps I'm buying from the wrong sources.

Even a 30/24W 6V headlight looks like a lit headlight to someone who looks at it.

what odds does it makes to anyone looking at it that it's lit, it's how much it allows the person sitting behind it that matters

Are we that slow-thinking?

of course not but our bikes are that slow braking compared to modern vehicles designed to brake in much heavier traffic now than then

anyhow looks like we must agree to disagree as previously stated I'm pretty happy with our local police.
I just wonder if in the case of any accidents opposing lawyers might make some kind of point against a bike that had no MOT (required or not) and police evidence re the above points might not be favourable to any biker concerned - lets hope not
 

[Triton Thrasher]

Back in the good old days, before CE marks etc, a silencer was illegally loud if a copper said it sounded too loud.

My point exactly my silencer has no CE marks that I know of, I'd welcome your comments if you can tell me how many of our retro silencers have, perhaps I'm buying from the wrong sources.

I didn't say "retro silencers" have CE marks. I implied that we are now living in the days of CE marks, which we are.  I don't actually know if modern ones have CE marks, but they have some sort of stupid marks.

Even a 30/24W 6V headlight looks like a lit headlight to someone who looks at it.

what odds does it makes to anyone looking at it that it's lit, it's how much it allows the person sitting behind it that matters

It makes this odds- the Police do not sit behind it and ride your bike. They stand and look at it. We were talking about Police, remember?

Are we that slow-thinking?

of course not but our bikes are that slow braking compared to modern vehicles designed to brake in much heavier traffic now than then

That's not "thinking time" then. Take your brake to someone who can make it work. I'm sure there are plenty guys on this forum who can help.

anyhow looks like we must agree to disagree as previously stated I'm pretty happy with our local police.

I'm happy with mine too.

I just wonder if in the case of any accidents opposing lawyers might make some kind of point against a bike that had no MOT (required or not) and police evidence re the above points might not be favourable to any biker concerned - lets hope not

A Lawyer might well raise the subject.  Actually brakes didn't have to be very good to pass the MoT.

Even if you have an MoT, an insurer or his lawyer might mention 60-year old brakes.
 

[morris]

What concerns me is the irresponsible few who will undoubtedly see this as an opportunity for cheap travel and put death traps on the road. After a few accidents involving these people the insurance companies will take notice and increase premiums and possibly also introduce independant tests for older vehicles. This could put us in a worse position than we were before the recent government meddling.

I personally don't think that "the irresponsible few" ever bother with MOT, let alone insurance or driving licenses or whatever.
This is one of the reasons insurances are so expensive, because we "responsible citizens" pay extra premium to cover for the damage caused by these hooligans who don't give a s**t about anyone or anything

[Ted_Flash]

The UK MOT method for testing brakes was pointless.  It did not test a brakes efficiency at converting rotational energy into heat, but just how good it was as a parking brake.  Drum brakes always passed unless really awful.