4-2-2 Frequency change scrapped
01 February 2012, 02:55 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4-2-2 Frequency change scrapped
Good news for all.
In an unexpected statement from the Department for Transport, the government have conceded that the current frequency of MOT testing is appropriate to the UK's needs and will be retained.
The statement, issued by Transport Minister Justine Greening said: "Having listened closely to the very many views put forward and considered the available evidence, I have decided that I am not going to carry out further work in relation to relaxing the first test date or the frequency of testing"
However, the MOT review will still go ahead. Ms Greening added that data from the DfT's executive agency VOSA suggested that because large parts of the MOT are 'subjective', some 12% of testers 'had their overall assessment of the vehicle's roadworthiness challenged by VOSA'. This lead the Minister to announce a raft of new consumer measures which are to include some form of 'customer charter' for motorists when they visit garages.
While the suggestion of frequency change has been scrapped, it is still the government's intention to conduct a full review of the MOT scheme.
Key to the reversal of frequency change was the wealth of data and opinion given by various trade and road safety bodies. This was supported by environmental, and consumer groups as well as members of the general public
The statement, issued by Transport Minister Justine Greening said: "Having listened closely to the very many views put forward and considered the available evidence, I have decided that I am not going to carry out further work in relation to relaxing the first test date or the frequency of testing"
However, the MOT review will still go ahead. Ms Greening added that data from the DfT's executive agency VOSA suggested that because large parts of the MOT are 'subjective', some 12% of testers 'had their overall assessment of the vehicle's roadworthiness challenged by VOSA'. This lead the Minister to announce a raft of new consumer measures which are to include some form of 'customer charter' for motorists when they visit garages.
While the suggestion of frequency change has been scrapped, it is still the government's intention to conduct a full review of the MOT scheme.
Key to the reversal of frequency change was the wealth of data and opinion given by various trade and road safety bodies. This was supported by environmental, and consumer groups as well as members of the general public
01 February 2012, 06:45 PM
#4
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't say I'm crazy about this TBH. I run two cars and a bike, which means about £150/yr in MOTs alone. I service and maintain them properly, so they rarely fail. Increasing the test interval would have saved me both cash and hassle which is largely wasted on unnecessary testing.
In fact I'm surprised that annual testing seems to have the support it does. Surely it could be argued that components which have < 2yrs life left in them would actually have to be replaced earlier in order to pass a bi-annual test than they would with an annual check?
In fact I'm surprised that annual testing seems to have the support it does. Surely it could be argued that components which have < 2yrs life left in them would actually have to be replaced earlier in order to pass a bi-annual test than they would with an annual check?
01 February 2012, 07:14 PM
#5
But the MOT and the associated industry that goes with it would have it's work cut in half overnight if it went 4-2-2....... the MOT people would have a hissy fit ant the treasury would lose out. I'm not surprised they didn't bring in a 6 month MOT !
Shaun
Shaun
01 February 2012, 07:58 PM
#6
Can't say I'm crazy about this TBH. I run two cars and a bike, which means about £150/yr in MOTs alone. I service and maintain them properly, so they rarely fail. Increasing the test interval would have saved me both cash and hassle which is largely wasted on unnecessary testing.
In fact I'm surprised that annual testing seems to have the support it does. Surely it could be argued that components which have < 2yrs life left in them would actually have to be replaced earlier in order to pass a bi-annual test than they would with an annual check?
In fact I'm surprised that annual testing seems to have the support it does. Surely it could be argued that components which have < 2yrs life left in them would actually have to be replaced earlier in order to pass a bi-annual test than they would with an annual check?
I mean say if Mrs blond-brain with her fluffy steering wheel cover who bangs her Freelander up and down the curb on a daily basis. The abuse making the NSF lower arm ball joint so damaged/worn its ready to pop out of the socket; Under the proposed changes, the car could be driven for several years in this dangeous state before it gets any attention. What if during that time it pops out on a bend just as you're comming the other way...they lose control and crash into your pride and joy.
Now a good driver would feel the sloppyness in the front steering/suspension and hear or feel something big rattling and think "hmm, maybe I should get that checked". But some people won't notice, or if they do....too busy, it'll wait until its "oil change" service (so it won't get checked as all the garage does is change the oil), and some will just think it still drives, so must be ok - ain't broke, don't fix etc.
Embarrasingly I fell foul and failed a MOT last year....the rear brake lines on our old BMW had nearly rusted completely through. Seeing that on that BMW, the main 'inspection I and II" service is roughly every 4 years (with "oil change" services inbetween), without MOT, the underside of the car generally went unchecked for 4 years at time. Had it not been for a 12month MOT it would not have been picked up in time. If that line had burst I'd have had no brakes. And would be at the mercy of the gods to dictate what would happen to me.
Worth the £45 IMO.
Pity we can't have yearly driving tests too.
(ok, bit drastic, maybe once every ten years).
Last edited by ALi-B; 01 February 2012 at 08:00 PM.
01 February 2012, 08:14 PM
#7
The trouble with ALL these ideas about how it wouldn't work here is simple: IT DOES WORK IN EUROPE!
So tell me again WHY it wouldn't work here?
Nope: they have adopted all the new stringent European rules, then shat on us all by retaining it as yearly, for purely financial reasons.
So tell me again WHY it wouldn't work here?
Nope: they have adopted all the new stringent European rules, then shat on us all by retaining it as yearly, for purely financial reasons.
Trending Topics
01 February 2012, 10:58 PM
#11
Depends on the state. Some don't bother barring emissions. Some don't even test emissions (its down to some crap about federal standards of air quality...if the state meets it, it doesn't need to test
)California have pretty strict emissions/pollution tests, but they aren't too fussed if you run around on bald tyres, just so long as the catalyst works and the engine doesn't leak oil.
01 February 2012, 11:01 PM
#12
Scooby Regular
Not looking forward to my next MOT at all, my car is mechanically fit as a fiddle but the airbag light wont reset via diagnostics which looks like it may be caused by a faulty airbag ecu BAH!
01 February 2012, 11:17 PM
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Nope. The light has to come on then go off as it would normally. Though I have connected an ABS dash light to the ignition light wire before ....
Dave
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Sam Witwicky
Engine Management and ECU Remapping
17
13 November 2015 10:49 AM