nickclarke
Member
I've read the same, but can't find any kind of official source to back it up.
I've read the same, but can't find any kind of official source to back it up.
Have now found it, 75mm puddle in 5 minutes, either a single source or multiple which aggregate
MOT Inspection Manual update of 20 May 2018, para 8.4.1 about environmental nuisance. Available to browse on gov.uk website
Doesn't apply to coolant, screen wash or adblue although the last needn't concern series owners!
MOT Inspection Manual update of 20 May 2018, para 8.4.1 about environmental nuisance. Available to browse on gov.uk website
Doesn't apply to coolant, screen wash or adblue although the last needn't concern series owners!
Moron
Well-Known Member
Yes , a 75mm diameter puddle in 5 minutes is the standard...........now just watch someone ( no name) argue that I'm wrong....
Agripper
Member
I went to speak to my local MOT station and he also confirmed that 40 plus are exempt but you can still take them in for testing if you want. Check some of the small print in the insurance providers. I noticed on mine that it states only market value will be paid in any claim if no MOT even for exempt vehicles.
just taxed my 3 vhi, seems there are some changes to what has gone before for mot and tax exempt vehicles, although this is the first time my 3 has been mot exempt I have had mot and tax exempt vehicles before.
the v11 now just says "this vehicle may require an appropriate test", when taxing online there is a poorly worded declaration about whether or not it has been "substantially modified".
I know mine hasn't so I just ticked the agree box
the v11 now just says "this vehicle may require an appropriate test", when taxing online there is a poorly worded declaration about whether or not it has been "substantially modified".
I know mine hasn't so I just ticked the agree box
Just done same, ticked "agree" and taxed it. Rang insurers (Lancaster) and asked what their policy was. They siad they are getting asked a lot and they have contacted all their underwriters and so far none have raised any issues. If that changes they will let policy holders know (I have a feeling it may). Mine is ag/val so I will see if the valuation renewal asks for an MOT, not due for a few months yet. They also said many owners are continuing to get MOTs for peace of mind.
I will also be MOTing my old lady(1971) In case of insurance/police issues.
Citizen Kane
Well-Known Member
Now the dust has started to settle on this and I'm confident mine sits within the rules required for MOT exemption I wont be getting mine MOT tested again.
If your not confident that you can maintain your Land Rover in a suitable condition surely you be better off paying a marque specialist to perform an inspection, this is probably cheaper than and MOT and vehicle specific so better all round. Of course if you really want an MOT you can still get one each year, or maybe have a couple its up to you.
As to getting an MOT to appease the insurance company, you wouldn't do it on a 2 year old car so why would you do it on a 40 year old car.
Its been said time and time again, your vehicle must be road worthy at all times. Clearly something like a Series Land Rover needs a bit more attention than a simple service every 12 thousands miles or 12 months, whichever comes first, but you know that, you own one.
If your not confident that you can maintain your Land Rover in a suitable condition surely you be better off paying a marque specialist to perform an inspection, this is probably cheaper than and MOT and vehicle specific so better all round. Of course if you really want an MOT you can still get one each year, or maybe have a couple its up to you.
As to getting an MOT to appease the insurance company, you wouldn't do it on a 2 year old car so why would you do it on a 40 year old car.
Its been said time and time again, your vehicle must be road worthy at all times. Clearly something like a Series Land Rover needs a bit more attention than a simple service every 12 thousands miles or 12 months, whichever comes first, but you know that, you own one.
I think that's the conclusion many are coming to. There's also the problem of assurering road worthiness in the case of an accident. I fully appreaciate that the legal status of an MOT is that it only proves road worthiness at the time of the MOT, hower in practice it shows that the vehicle was in a fit condtion at that time and the owner was prepared to get it tested. At the moment we are all less than a year away from MOTs, the vast majority will service their vehicles as before or even more deligently just in case. But I fear some wont and so we will get a few years down the line with some absolute death traps on the road that could place a cloud over the rest of us.
300bhp/ton
Well-Known Member
Flawed logic.
neilly
Well-Known Member
I look at it this way, anyone who has kept an older car on the road for so long would be in control of the vehicles roadworthiness.
If they got rid of an MOT style test for newer motors, then that would be when the probs would start. Newer motors are cheaper.
Cheers
Citizen Kane
Well-Known Member
I would have thought that a service record or an inspection report from a marque specialist would carry equal gravitas in such circumstances. Why spend money on paperwork which only inspects a subset of the components and functions on your vehicle when for the same or less money you could buy an expert opinion or service from someone who's been kicking Land Rover tyres for decades.
Moron
Well-Known Member
Yes that is correct......75mm in diameter in 5 minutes for an oil leak
could you expand on that?
My insurer (Lancaster) told me many owners are continueing to get MOTs on a voluntary basis for "peace of mind". I have mixed feelings about this and while the "flawed logic" comment is not mine there are some issues. One of the arguments made by HMG for exempting vehicles was that the expertise was no longer there in MOT stations to carry out effective MOTs on older vehicles. It therefore begs the question "so why go back there?". Either MOT stations can test older vehiles or they cannot. It also opens up a can of worms regarding a failure or advisories. I'm assuming that a fail means the vehicle can no longer be used until its passed, otherwise this would open up all sorts of appeals on newer vehicles, but what of advisories? Some will be obvious, if its a tyre or exhaust we would all fix it, but what if its a feature of all Series such as "steering play" or "high brake pedal pressure" that now sits on record unitl some unfortunate incident? I've not had my S2A MOTed since its exempt and I may get an "engineers report" if ii insurence or agreed value become an issue but for me the leagal status of the MOT plus the justifcation for the exemption make the "voluntary MOT" (in my view) a risky option.
dag019
Well-Known Member
My understanding (although happy to be corrected) was that once a vehicle was exempt the MOT stations were no longer to enter the details on the online database as it "dropped off the system". Therefore by putting it in for an MOT all you could achieve was an engineers report into the road-worthiness of the vehicle and any advisories and failures were no longer kept on record as they were with a traditional MOT.
300bhp/ton
Well-Known Member
Because MoT exempt vehicles are not a new thing. And if it’s perfectly legal not to MoT a vehicle. An insurer cannot refuse to payout because you are following the law.
This is all tried and tested and well established.
There is no harm getting an MoT if it makes you feel better. But having one or not will make no odds insurance wise when a vehicle is eligible for MoT exemption.
I can see myself having to get an engineers report for the agreed value. Time will tell. At the moment the AgVal is self declaration plus photos and it may stay that way, but the MOT is an independent check. Regarding being on the system, I honestly don't know, I'll ask. Because people were geting MOTs I assumed they were being logged in, but you are quite right, they may not be.
