Morris Minor Owners Club

I believe they have since stopped asking for engineers reports for engine changes, originally it was bought in to stop folks saying they had fitted a smaller engine for emissions or to avoid the congestion charge.

The funny thing is... I've never ever been to a garage that had a qualified engineer working as a mechanic.
In this country there is no official status that qualifies anyone to write that "engineer's report" and no legislation stopping anyone from selling a second hand car engine. (although there is legislation that stops you running an unregulated scrap yard - removing parts from ONE car before sending the remains to a scrap yard does not necessarily break any rules whatsoever)

Properly qualified engineers might be able to design the engine , design the parts that go into it, the tools that produce it, and the methods to check it after the engine has been built... but they are busy doing engineering and unlikely to be working as a mechanic!
Mechanic and/or vehicle technician qualifications make you a mechanic and/or technician (not an engineer).

Based on the statistics quoted by the minister, something like 7000 pre-60 cars fail the annual MOT.
Over the last 20+ years some of them would have been mine.
I've bought cars with "very dubious" existing MOT's and whilst that is frustrating, it's better than no MOT at all.

I have on occassion forgotten to tighten a suspension bolt
Thank goodness I've never forgotten / left undone anything that caused an issue. for anything safety related, I prefer an independent check, and am happy to pay for it.
I have all the equipment I need to rebuild a Minor from ground up, but none of the equipment required for an MOT, neither the will to get it or the space to put it. I generally do a good job (maybe more than most) but am not happy to gamble on the safety of friends and family or the bus queue - Long live the MOT!

Here here Ray! Totally agree what price do you put on your own safety and that of your passengers. I'd rather my car failed the MOT and the problem got sorted than not know there was a problem.

I look on the MOT as my car's annual safety check.

ASL642 wrote:Here here Ray! Totally agree what price do you put on your own safety and that of your passengers. I'd rather my car failed the MOT and the problem got sorted than not know there was a problem.

I look on the MOT as my car's annual safety check.

Agreed. I had problems with car only recently that I didn't know about till I took it for the MOT, I'm glad we can still do them optionally

Austingirl wrote:I worry that this is the thin end of a wedge whereby pre 1960's vehicles are thought of only as museum pieces and we are eventually told how and where we can use them
Hope I'm proved wrong

I really doubt it. My minor is a 1955 series 2, so wouldnt like to think so! Besides, why would they tell you when and where you can use them, as you can legally use a horse and cart on any road, beside motorways, and also bicycles, so they would restrict there use first, certaintly before a car despite its age.
If that day happens, when the government decides what car you can use on the roads, and when, I'm outta here. It would certaintly signal the end of a free society.

rayofleamington wrote:

I believe they have since stopped asking for engineers reports for engine changes, originally it was bought in to stop folks saying they had fitted a smaller engine for emissions or to avoid the congestion charge.

The funny thing is... I've never ever been to a garage that had a qualified engineer working as a mechanic.
In this country there is no official status that qualifies anyone to write that "engineer's report" and no legislation stopping anyone from selling a second hand car engine. (although there is legislation that stops you running an unregulated scrap yard - removing parts from ONE car before sending the remains to a scrap yard does not necessarily break any rules whatsoever)

Properly qualified engineers might be able to design the engine , design the parts that go into it, the tools that produce it, and the methods to check it after the engine has been built... but they are busy doing engineering and unlikely to be working as a mechanic!
Mechanic and/or vehicle technician qualifications make you a mechanic and/or technician (not an engineer).

Based on the statistics quoted by the minister, something like 7000 pre-60 cars fail the annual MOT.
Over the last 20+ years some of them would have been mine.
I've bought cars with "very dubious" existing MOT's and whilst that is frustrating, it's better than no MOT at all.

I have on occassion forgotten to tighten a suspension bolt
Thank goodness I've never forgotten / left undone anything that caused an issue. for anything safety related, I prefer an independent check, and am happy to pay for it.
I have all the equipment I need to rebuild a Minor from ground up, but none of the equipment required for an MOT, neither the will to get it or the space to put it. I generally do a good job (maybe more than most) but am not happy to gamble on the safety of friends and family or the bus queue - Long live the MOT!

So do you take your car for a check every time you work on brakes or suspension?

Nothing in the new ruling would prevent anyone from taking their car for an annual MOT and that is stated quite clearly.

Your points are good and valid, but not really relevant to the argument against the new legislation. The MOT is still here and available.

yes the mot will still be available, for honest owners of pre 60,not talking just about minor owners,we are all honest ,but there will be loads of dodgey owners of old cars who just couldn't care one way or another or can't afford to make sure that the vehicle is road worthy.they are the ones who will be causing accidents in the future.Don't forget that classic insurance is about the only affordable type for young drivers,who have no expirience or mechanical knowledge.

i have a question regarding this.......

my car is a 1955, so won't require an MOT. its due one next year in april.

if i were to take it in for an MOT and it failed, what would the outcome be? could i still drive the car afterwards as it would be exempt from MOT? would they keep a record on the dvla database that my car has failed yet i can still drive it?

seems a question that i've not found an answer too yet...........

Regardless of whether a car is 'MOT exempt' or not there is still a legal requirement for it to be roadworthy. Therefore if you take it for an MOT and it fails you shouldn't be driving it on the road afterwards without the fault(s) being fixed. All MOT's are now computerised so there will be a record kept and the DVLA will have access to this.

LouiseM wrote:Regardless of whether a car is 'MOT exempt' or not there is still a legal requirement for it to be roadworthy. Therefore if you take it for an MOT and it fails you shouldn't be driving it on the road afterwards without the fault(s) being fixed. All MOT's are now computerised so there will be a record kept and the DVLA will have access to this.

but your missing the point here. if it were to fail, how can you not drive it on the road if it fails, when it doesn't have to have an MOT in the 1st place?

the debate of whether it is safe to drive or not, is a toss up between the owner and the garage that MOT it. tyake it to another garage down the road and they'll fail it on something else or pass it.

Yes the MOT is rather subjective but as said, I think the point being made is, if it has failed an MOT for known faults that you choose to ignore then a) you could be liable for prosecution in the eyes of the law. i.e dodgy tyres, brakes, chassis. lights etc.

And b) more importantly, your insurance could be void in the event of an accident, if you knew the car to be faulty and it was registered at the DVLA as it being so.

Insurance companies do not like paying up. A few years ago our car was 'T-boned' at a junction. It was clear that the other driver was at fault. However, I was slightly miffed that I and my wife's driving licences, as well as the current MOT had to sent and verified by the other persons insurance company.
All was in order but it was clear that they were looking for a reason not to pay up. And so, the question is, what do you think they will make of the pre 1960 cars that are involved in any accidents?

So do you take your car for a check every time you work on brakes or suspension?

For the last few years I've only had one on the road and it's not failed anything.

Prior to that my cars usually stayed off the road if something needed doing as I drove the other ones instead
The work usually only got done when I needed one back on the road to get an MOT.
(e.g. rebuilding the scabby pick up just before the LEO rally)

So for the last 6 or 8 years I'd probably say they did get an MOT straight after any major work - but mostly due to not having any time to work on them 'for fun' anymore.