3. e mail johnathan Drea at the DTI as above email address. He clearly has some major influence here.
4. encourage as many people as you can to do likewise.
5. Gordon Brown who is trying for political capital by pushing this. let him know.
If one person dies as a result of reduced car safety by 4-2-2, is the £450 million saving to motorists he claims ,is that now the price worth paying for that one life?

You have to wonder what they are thinking, if they asked anybody in the MOT scheme if this was a good idea, they would get a resounding NO. How can you justify putting peoples lifes at risk to 'save the public money'?

I have written to my local MP and will look at that DTI info you posted. The more people that do this the better like you said.

Paul

I have been to see my MP and he is broadly in agreement with those who oppose 4-2-2 testing. However, he is not receiving much in the way of protest from the MOT industry. I was only the second person to write to, or visit him, despite a large number of MOT stations in his constituency.
I did post on this earlier, and obviously some UK Autotalk members are not opposed to 4-2-2 testing either.
If 4-4-2 testing is imposed, and if the response from the MOT industry in Buckinghamshire is mirrored countrywide, we'll deserve it.
Politicians don't take much notice of petitions, Matthew Parris wrote a good article in the Times explaining why, some time ago.
Out of interest, the Conservatives will oppose 4-2-2, so this could influence your vote next time, should you agree with them. Which of course you may not, it's a free country (but getting less free with every passing day).

Tom W

To have any effect, opposition needs to come from organizations that represent car owners and safety groups. better still the are owners themselves.

Would be interesting to no how insurance companies are viewing this.

Aidan

I do not do mots but a lot of the small repairers near me only do mot repairs along with a yearly service that customers have done at same time hoping it helps get an mot pass.

I can see all this disappearing.

Those left will look for new ways to earn money and will no doubt try to do diagnostics, air con etc.

This will affect me along with less emmission based mot work aswell.

So yes it affects us all. But we have a vested interest so the best way is to get safety organisations, the press, motoring programs on tv, watchdog etc involved.

We don,t all drive 3 year old or less cars as the people who make the rules do.

Look around you streets and see how many older cars are being used. How many watchdog programs have there been about dodgy repairers or dodgy by the roadside car sales. These are the cars that will no longer be checked at all.

The local budget car sellers only do the mot. Its the only check the car gets before its sold.They often have a list of advisaries but they never get done its just the bear minimum.

Without the mot? well what can I say.

john

It's a figure of speech.

Tom

Ford Focus 1.6 1999 (T) 68,564 miles

My son referred a friend of his to me as someone had spotted something silver on his tyres.......when the car came in i was pretty shocked, mostly because my son had been in this vehicle the week before doing a round trip of 140 miles on the motorway to see friends at University

The young lad (21 years old) had purchased the car form a Dealer (use this term very loosly) back on 11th January 2007 for £2995:00 with 66,234 miles on the clock, they also stamped the service book on the same day, so assume a service was carried out

The MOT certificate was in the glove box and expires on 7th July 2007

Now under the new proposed scheme this vehicle will not get an inspection until 7th July 2008, and probably not have a service till 11th January 2008

Both tyres had less than 10 psi pressure

This young lad was very fortunate that someone had spotted the state of the tyres. How can anyone in policy making hold their hands up as say that 2 year inspections are the way forward

With the play station youth of today who do not have a clue on how their vehicles work, let alone do any periodic checks or maintenance......just drive till it breaks.....these kids are riding around in vehicles that they can ill afford and certainly have no money to maintain or service correctly

As one of the most safety conscious countries in the world, we are just going to throw a major safety issue out the window on the whim of an uninformed MP

Would you let your son or daughter into a vehicle in this state and let them go off up the motorway at 70/80 mph

But i suppose it makes good TV watching the "Traffic Cops" scrapping our kids of the crash barriers

Peter

Graham

Kind regards

Paul

3 May 2007

We received a petition asking:

"We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Reconsider the government's stated intention to defer the MOT until a vehicle's fourth year and then MOT test every two years thereafter."

Details of petition:

"Reducing the periodicity of the UK MOT to comply with the minimum EC requirement will allow millions of reckless car users to save money by skipping vital servicing of safety and emissions systems, making the roads less safe for all road users, costing them more money in insurance and increasing emissions generally."

Read the petition
Petitions home page
Read the Government's response hereThe proposal to reduce MOT frequency was initiated by the Davidson Review Team and the Better Regulation Commission whose purpose is to look at the implementation of EU law in the UK, and the legislative burden on UK businesses.

The Department for Transport will shortly launch a public consultation on whether the UK should move away from its current pattern of testing. Those with an interest will be able to comment on whether or not the EC minimum frequency of testing would be more appropriate for the UK, and provide any evidence to support their views. One area for close consideration is that of road safety, which will be addressed in the consultation process.

No decisions will be taken on the issue of the frequency of MOT testing until we have had the opportunity to fully consider all the responses to the consultation later in the year.