Re: MOT exemption, good thing or no?
Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:45 am
So as that reads then: Some newer vehicles become exempt and some that are already exempt will cease to be so, but all of this is to be self declared by the keeper whose P&J's test status is decided at the filling in of some form? In other words, if the seller of that "Series 2" Land Rover which is on eBay, you know, the one with the coil chassis, the S3 or later bulkhead and the later TD engine, one piece doors and a body that to anyone with working eyes is in fact that of a Defender, wishes to declare their vehicle to be a "VHI" then there's no involvement by VOSA, no application of any agency-supplied common sense and more worryingly; no need for anyone to produce actual evidence that their vehicle genuinely has absence of substantial deviations from its factory specification.
The same will doubtless apply to minis, VWs, pretty much any Ford that meets the one criterion: its age and by the way it looks, any vehicle vaguely the same shape as it was at the time of its build.
How about we extend this principle to include self declaration in all things formerly defined in rather less vague, official terms? I'm off to murder someone but don't worry, I shall fill in the appropriate declaration at the post office counter so I can get away with it because I say that a bigger boy did it then ran off, which must be correct - because it's written in plain English - and will save many hours of the legal system's precious time.
I see trouble arising out of this ill-conceived mess! Unless of course the article, to which Rich has provided the link, is in itself inaccurate and so wide of the point as to be meaningless in comparison with the actual rules as they shall be in May! Expect many teething troubles, U turns and edits as we go, this will give rise to absolute mayhem, not least among the already crooked few who taint venues such as eBay with their automotive faery lore and their "Historic" cars made up of a rusty slab of original shell with a brown log book and an illegible sliver of steel claimed to be the location where the factory attached the chassis plate in pre-VIN days.
Common Sense. Born: The dawn of humankind, died: May 2018. May it rest in rusty pieces.
The same will doubtless apply to minis, VWs, pretty much any Ford that meets the one criterion: its age and by the way it looks, any vehicle vaguely the same shape as it was at the time of its build.
How about we extend this principle to include self declaration in all things formerly defined in rather less vague, official terms? I'm off to murder someone but don't worry, I shall fill in the appropriate declaration at the post office counter so I can get away with it because I say that a bigger boy did it then ran off, which must be correct - because it's written in plain English - and will save many hours of the legal system's precious time.
I see trouble arising out of this ill-conceived mess! Unless of course the article, to which Rich has provided the link, is in itself inaccurate and so wide of the point as to be meaningless in comparison with the actual rules as they shall be in May! Expect many teething troubles, U turns and edits as we go, this will give rise to absolute mayhem, not least among the already crooked few who taint venues such as eBay with their automotive faery lore and their "Historic" cars made up of a rusty slab of original shell with a brown log book and an illegible sliver of steel claimed to be the location where the factory attached the chassis plate in pre-VIN days.
Common Sense. Born: The dawn of humankind, died: May 2018. May it rest in rusty pieces.