Author Topic: MoT or Not?  (Read 1344 times)

Offline TrickyMicky

  • SOHC Member
  • Posts: 126
    • View Profile
Re: MoT or Not?
« Reply #15 on: December 04, 2020, 08:13:56 AM »
A MOT certificate only states that it was roadworthy when presented for test.  If you are unfortunate enough to have an incident and the police/VOSA state that your vehicle is unroadworthy, THAT is what an insurance company will take note of. You can present them with a current valid MOT ticket and it won't make one iota of difference. I would like to think that judging by the amount of correspondence on this and other historic vehicle forums, there's an incredible amount of knowledge, skill, and care in the upkeep of these vehicles.

Offline paul G

  • SOHC Master
  • Posts: 1446
  • No room left in the garage
    • View Profile
Re: MoT or Not?
« Reply #16 on: December 04, 2020, 09:51:45 AM »
A MOT certificate only states that it was roadworthy when presented for test.  If you are unfortunate enough to have an incident and the police/VOSA state that your vehicle is unroadworthy, THAT is what an insurance company will take note of. You can present them with a current valid MOT ticket and it won't make one iota of difference. I would like to think that judging by the amount of correspondence on this and other historic vehicle forums, there's an incredible amount of knowledge, skill, and care in the upkeep of these vehicles.
Fully understand that but it proves it was rebuilt to an MOT standard at that point and not a dogs dinner  ;D
Honda CB400 4
Honda CB550 K3
Honda CB750 UK K1
Kawasaki Z650 C2
Kawasaki Z650 cafe racer

Offline Moorey

  • SOHC Master
  • Posts: 1315
    • View Profile
Re: MoT or Not?
« Reply #17 on: December 04, 2020, 12:56:46 PM »

 It would be for the insurance company to prove it was unroadworthy

Offline philward

  • SOHC Master
  • Posts: 1757
    • View Profile
Re: MoT or Not?
« Reply #18 on: December 04, 2020, 02:31:04 PM »
I'm with previous posts - initial MOT after rebuild and then don't bother
Current Bikes:-
Kawasaki ZZR1100D3
Honda CB750K2
Honda CR750 Replica
Kawasaki ZZR250 1990 Project (Not started)
Honda CB500K2 (1973) Project

Offline mike the bike

  • SOHC Jedi
  • Posts: 2556
  • CB400F., GPZ500S
    • View Profile
Re: MoT or Not?
« Reply #19 on: December 04, 2020, 11:00:47 PM »
With 2 cars, my GPZ and my lad's Lexmoto all needing an MOT, it's good to have one that don't need one.
Where's that 10mm socket got to?

Offline Athame57

  • SOHC Pro
  • Posts: 508
    • View Profile
    • SeaWitch Artist
Re: MoT or Not?
« Reply #20 on: December 04, 2020, 11:15:19 PM »
I always saw an MOT test as a means of getting wrecks of the road or forcing maintenance! 
I brake for animals!
1978 CB400F2

Offline Seamus

  • SOHC Pro
  • Posts: 687
    • View Profile
Re: MoT or Not?
« Reply #21 on: December 05, 2020, 08:29:41 AM »
Interesting views, I have tested many classic cars and bikes over the years. Most are fine and the owners only have them tested to have a piece of paper saying they are roadworthy.
Just peace of mine in case somethimng happens.
One classic car specialist that I know has been asked countless times if he could do some sort of road worthyness examination of these vehicles and produce something to say that the vehicle in question was ok. His comment was that a mot would be much cheaper and its an official document.
Again I have had a few cases of careful owners with lots of experience fail on something that they have missed.
Personally, I have my 3 bikes and the car tested annually as do my friends with classic bikes or cars.

I have seen some pretty bad examples of classics, look great untill you start to look closely.

At the end of the day, its your call, but have you missed something?? :-\ ??? ::) ;D

Offline sprinta

  • SOHC Member
  • Posts: 214
    • View Profile
Re: MoT or Not?
« Reply #22 on: December 05, 2020, 03:48:24 PM »
I have not had an MOT on my 550 since Feb 18, I keep it in tip top condition.

When they introduced the MOT exemption, it crossed my mind that what happens in an accident?

Suppose you have an accident and your insurance company asks the questions, was your bike roadworthy at the time of the accident and if so can you prove it?

We all know the lengths insurance companies will go to to avoid paying out.

An MOT is only valid as proof of being roadworthy on the day of issue. At any other time it remains your responsibility, so having a MOT for any other time except for the day of issue would not be proof that the bike was roadworthy at the time of an accident.   

Offline Bryanj

  • Grogu
  • *
  • Posts: 7519
    • View Profile
Re: MoT or Not?
« Reply #23 on: December 05, 2020, 05:07:11 PM »
MOT is only valid at the time of test, not even on the drive home but testing station would get grilled if anything happened.
I once had an AJS for test last thing before lunch and a Matchless first thing after, caught them swapping front wheels in the road when i went for lunch----nothing i could legally do about it but made a note in the testers book

Offline Nurse Julie

  • 1973 CB750 UK K2.1977 CB550/4 Mongrel Brat. 1978 CB400/4.
  • Grogu
  • *
  • Posts: 6096
    • View Profile
Re: MoT or Not?
« Reply #24 on: December 05, 2020, 05:23:52 PM »
I think the older we get, the easier it is to forget or overlook something. Another pair of eyes can see things we don't even remember to look at. To be honest, I think everyone on this forum maintains their bikes to such a high standard, the bike would pass any inspection at any time, just like it's meant to.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2020, 05:34:14 PM by Nurse Julie »
Im a Nurse, trust me, this won't hurt.....much !!!

LINK TO MY CB400/4 ENGINE STRIP / ASSESSMENT AND REBUILD...NOW COMPLETE
http://www.sohc.co.uk/index.php/topic,14049.msg112691/topicseen.html#new

Offline Green1

  • SOHC Jedi
  • Posts: 2595
    • View Profile
Re: MoT or Not?
« Reply #25 on: December 05, 2020, 09:57:16 PM »
I will carry on with out an MOT on my classics.
Its not hard to check things over on the bench once a year.
A classic car I think I would have checked as its harder to get underneath to check things over.

I took my Aprilia for its test last year and he picked up on a small amount of play in the rear shock linkage.
I have striped the rear end recently and found no play in the back end at all.New bearings seals and shock has now gone in with half a tin of fresh grease in everything so if it gets picked up again there is something fishy going on.

I checked my Transit tipper over just before its test recently everything was working great as the tester drove it up the ramp all the rear lights went out on one side. A quik wiggle of the loom all was back before the ramp had finished rising.
Current bikes
Honda CB750k1 Valley Green Metallic
Honda CB750k1 Candy Gold
Honda CB550k Candy Jade Green
Honda CG125
Aprilia Pegaso 650
Moto guzzi 1200 sport
Kawasaki EX650R (Mine until dave pays for it)
Kawasaki ZXR400 J

Offline Lobo

  • Lobo
  • SOHC Master
  • Posts: 1151
  • Lobo
    • View Profile
    • Lobo
Re: MoT or Not?
« Reply #26 on: December 06, 2020, 06:41:34 AM »
Not relevant to this UK forum, though interesting is that here in QLD / Oz a Roadworthy Cert is only required when selling on a vehicle. Which means there are plenty driving around in 10yo vehicles which have never been tested since leaving the Dealership 😱. Honestly I’m not sure how it ‘works’, given modern Ins Companies reluctances to pay out, coupled with Joe Blogs tech knowledge / maintenance of his vehicle.
Personally I like the system, but then I tend to be meticulous about my vehicles.

Offline mike the bike

  • SOHC Jedi
  • Posts: 2556
  • CB400F., GPZ500S
    • View Profile
Re: MoT or Not?
« Reply #27 on: December 06, 2020, 09:03:46 AM »
When I was a field service engineer, I used to keep track of how many missing brake lights I would see in a day.  It was rarely less than 12, my record being 29.
Most of these drivers would take their vehicles for a MOT like that without checking the lights.
Where's that 10mm socket got to?

Offline Bryanj

  • Grogu
  • *
  • Posts: 7519
    • View Profile
Re: MoT or Not?
« Reply #28 on: December 06, 2020, 04:14:52 PM »
To be honest when i was running old bangers i would not even change a bulb, just take it in and either fix what failed or scrap the car if too much cost, never let anything serious go but also mot'd every 6 months as at that time the failure did not overide the pass so i had time to fix it

Offline Macabethiele (Ted)

  • SOHC Expert
  • Posts: 473
    • View Profile
Re: MoT or Not?
« Reply #29 on: December 08, 2020, 12:17:27 AM »
To be honest when i was running old bangers i would not even change a bulb, just take it in and either fix what failed or scrap the car if too much cost, never let anything serious go but also mot'd every 6 months as at that time the failure did not overide the pass so i had time to fix it

An interesting point you raise about a failure overriding a pass when re-tested before the due expiry date - this line of argument seems to be propagated by testing stations that rightfully worry about duty of care to the customer.

My understanding is that the MoT is valid until it expires so a test failure does not actually invalidate the old test as a matter/point of law.  Also of course an MoT test is not proof of a vehicle roadworthiness. The issue then revolves as to the category of the failure as to if the vehicle can be legally used on a road to take it to a place of repair etc. If the existing MoT is "Overtrumped" by the Test failure the the VED would have to be refunded by DVLA  as it does not meet the requirement of having a valid test certificate

Similar uncertainties  surround the validity of Insurance with regards to faults with a vehicles roadworthiness if say a tyre is below the legal limit or does not meet original specifications. In law Insurance Companies cannot escape Road Traffic Act Cover liability  once a certificate of insurance has been delivered to the insured person. If this was the case vehicle insurance companies would wiggle out of their responsibilities due to minor irregularities. (Yes they can dodge the comprehensive cover but not the Third Party Road Traffic aspect that is the only legal requirement) The obvious exception is where the driver/rider is disqualified or the policy has been obtained by a false declaration / deception.

To invalidate Third Party Cover the Insurance Company have to go through a legal process called "Voiding" the policy with a legal requirements to obtain the surrender of the Insurance Certificate from the insured party. At least this was the case when I worked in Police Prosecutions over 20 years ago. I concede  correction on the points raised if new legislation has changed caselaw.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2020, 12:21:21 AM by Macabethiele (Ted) »
Honda CB400F2 under restoration
Jeep Grand Cherokee WJ
Jeep Grand Cherokee WK
Mercedes R129 SL500

 

SimplePortal 2.3.5 © 2008-2012, SimplePortal