Forum

Replies

• 

  Matt Brown November 30, 2011 at 10:59pm

  glad to see they are going to incluse the dazzling headlights. the amount of cars that blind people with headlights that are too bright and just as bad the ones with defective bulbs. i had one behind me the other week he or she passed 4 petrol stations with only one headlight why not pull in and for small pocket change replace the bulb.
• 

  choughman December 1, 2011 at 7:53am

  i read somewhere that these tests only apply to newer cars. Now, obviously the mot charge is going to increase significantly because of all these new checks. What i want to know is, will there be two teirs of charges? my 1998 van wont be subject to many of these new tests so the mot should be cheaper! bet it wont be tho!
• 

  Mark Brierley December 1, 2011 at 8:34am

  Ive just had one of my vans MOTed and the tester told me that as of next year the light sockets on your towbars will also be checked for faults. so make sure they work...
• PRO

  Gary RK December 1, 2011 at 8:45am

  In the arcticle, the implication is that we will only be MOT'ing every two years once the tougher laws are in and I guess this harmonises us with the EU.

  Therefore, we might save money?, or perhaps we wait to find out true costs first ?

  Separately, 

  - I'd love to see another vehicle scrappage system bought in to get more older polluting cars off the road... 

  - why not implement the system used in many European countries to display tax/insurance and vehicle test on the windscreen/number plate? Cut down on uninsured drivers or those intent on keeping outside the laws the rest of us have to comply with. One more way to level the playing field ?
  choughman said:

  i read somewhere that these tests only apply to newer cars. Now, obviously the mot charge is going to increase significantly because of all these new checks. What i want to know is, will there be two teirs of charges? my 1998 van wont be subject to many of these new tests so the mot should be cheaper! bet it wont be tho!
• PRO

  Phil Voice December 1, 2011 at 9:37am

  Yep, we only need an MOT (Controle Technique) every two years here (although my Ford Courier van, because of its age [1998] has to have an intermediate emissions test.

  As Gary says, we have to display our current insurance and MOT (CT) in the windscreen.

  We don't, however, have to pay road tax (although I'm sure everyone is aware that there are tolls to pay on may of the French roads).

  
  Gary (mr. rk) RK said:

  In the arcticle, the implication is that we will only be MOT'ing every two years once the tougher laws are in and I guess this harmonises us with the EU.

  Therefore, we might save money?, or perhaps we wait to find out true costs first ?

  Separately, 

  - I'd love to see another vehicle scrappage system bought in to get more older polluting cars off the road... 

  - why not implement the system used in many European countries to display tax/insurance and vehicle test on the windscreen/number plate? Cut down on uninsured drivers or those intent on keeping outside the laws the rest of us have to comply with. One more way to level the playing field ?
  choughman said:

  i read somewhere that these tests only apply to newer cars. Now, obviously the mot charge is going to increase significantly because of all these new checks. What i want to know is, will there be two teirs of charges? my 1998 van wont be subject to many of these new tests so the mot should be cheaper! bet it wont be tho!
• 

  Clive Dearden December 1, 2011 at 11:39am

  I've never understood why trailers aren't included in MOT's Pointless how good the brakes are on the van if the trailer isn't contributing ! In the past I've worked for companies where the maintenance hasn't been that good.

  Clive

  www.thehandmadegarden.com
• 

  choughman December 1, 2011 at 12:05pm

  No no no! scrapage was a farce. dressed up as an enviromental initiative when in reality it was a boost for dealerships ( not that thats bad, whats bad is dressing th idea up as something good for us!). It is obvious to anyone that running a vehicle until its no longer fit for purpose is far better for the enviroment, despite increases in emmisions. Yes if you told everyone with a range rover to scrap it and buy a fiat 500 you might get some gains but that didnt happen.

  Its about time we looked on air travel as a complete luxury and not something to be used at will. With online conferencing ( business) and amazing places ( holidays) in this country we certainly wouldn't miss out.

   
• PRO

  Gary RK December 1, 2011 at 12:18pm

  Scrappage was good for the recommit as it help a key industry thru a difficult patch.
  
  From my understanding 1 badly maintained older vehicle outstrips aany such vehicle as a range rover. Out of any cars now comes a carefully controlled emission. Not so on an old oil burner.
  
  Also look at it in a different light, those driving such vehicles are subsidising you and me thru higher road tax, proportionally higher petrol costs and hence duty, increased car tax as a BIK, service revenues to dealers and hence jobs.
  
  It's easy to focus on just one aspect when in reality it is a very complex circle.
  
  
  So I would rather see 10 range rovers on the road than 10 old bangers.
• 

  choughman December 1, 2011 at 12:25pm

  you raise a few good points gary and i do agree. financially and employment wise scrapage was great. However it was sold to us as a great thing for the enviroment. It wasn't! i shall dig out some facts and figures but if you look at the build process of the average vehicle it certainly isnt better to destroy a perfectly useable older vehicle.

  Yep, bring on the range rovers, lambos, etc etc if you care more about immediate financial gain rather than longterm enviromental cost.
• PRO

  Gary RK December 1, 2011 at 12:36pm

  A pre-cat car emits more noxious fumes than a modern 3l turbo fuel injected car was stated.
  
  If you want to get into the recycling debate, just wait 10 yrs for the issues of recycling current electric car's batteries. It's a time bomb...
  
  Along with the craze for low energy home bulbs that contain some nasty stuff