Automotive Discussion

Back to Forum

Post a Response

New MOT test proposal 4-1-1 #

Posted by Peter Warman on January 30, 2017, 2:18 pm
Peter Warman

Here is a quote from the new MOT 4-1-1 proposal

It does beggar belief that the Government already know that struggling Independents are going to lose out on the 3rd year test fee. It will be up to Independents to drum up new business to fill the revenue gap

.....but still allow some MOT stations to do tests for £20.00

Knock on effects all down the line, parts sales, tyre sales.......just to save the motoring public a £50.00 (or £20.00) annual safety check

Government want to hike the road tax in 2017, give back with one hand and take back with the other

" 3.7

Any extension to the first test period would result in lost revenue to MOT garages as they would lose the fee for those vehicles no longer requiring the three year test. Many MOT businesses are small or micro operations, usually carrying out routine maintenance and servicing as well as MOT testing.

Garages affected by a loss in revenue will need to look at options for utilising the freed up resource from doing fewer tests, and may face transitional costs associated with new work or services implemented to fill that gap.

Motorists will still be required to keep their vehicles in a roadworthy condition and therefore necessary repairs would still need to be made "

UKAT

Re: New MOT test proposal 4-1-1 #

Posted by Graham Bullock on January 30, 2017, 4:50 pm, in reply to "New MOT test proposal 4-1-1 #"
Graham Bullock

Andrew Jones MP has obviously not seen the three year old cars that I have!

Probably don't need to say this as you already have thought the same as me,if Andrew Jones is proposing to save the motorist £100 million then he is also proposing to reduce the income from test stations by £100 million in which case how many are going to give up?

Probably the majority of those that do give up will be the honest traders, leaving a bigger percentage of rogues to benefit from the poor motorist which may then force some sort of licensing to try and prevent the scams where motorists have been robbed of £100 million.

Half the reason three to four year old vehicle accidents relating to vehicle defects have dropped is because they did have a test at three years old and did have to have repairs carried out.

And for those that haven't relised a PRS counts as two MOT's so effectively cutting the failure rate in half

Pleas complete survey

LINK TO GOV MOT SURVEY

Graham

Re: New MOT test proposal 4-1-1 #

Posted by Philip Dunmore on January 30, 2017, 8:23 pm, in reply to "Re: New MOT test proposal 4-1-1 #"
Philip Dunmore

Did the survey a few days ago. From memory, the report says majority of failures at three years are lighting defects (still fails). To back this up there is a table. The number of steering, suspension and brake defects added together is similar to lighting. Important to mention this in survey.

Re: New MOT test proposal 4-1-1 #

Posted by Antony Powell on January 31, 2017, 9:34 am, in reply to "Re: New MOT test proposal 4-1-1 #"

does anyone have a link to the actual proposals refered to in the survey .... wouldn't like to get my answers in the wrong order

Link: specialist seized injector and glow plug removal services

Re: New MOT test proposal 4-1-1 #

Posted by Dave Harney on January 31, 2017, 10:41 am, in reply to "Re: New MOT test proposal 4-1-1 #"

Is this what your looking for....

Link: Mot proposals

Re: New MOT test proposal 4-1-1 #

Posted by Antony Powell on January 31, 2017, 1:40 pm, in reply to "Re: New MOT test proposal 4-1-1 #"

that's the idea but there's no paragraph 4.3 in yours !!

Link: specialist seized injector and glow plug removal services

Re: New MOT test proposal 4-1-1 #

Posted by Graham Bullock on January 31, 2017, 10:29 pm, in reply to "Re: New MOT test proposal 4-1-1 #"
Graham Bullock

I saw it somewhere that 4.3 is a typo.

Another interesting view

http://www.motester.co.uk/mot-news/mot-news/4-1-1-mot-consultation-government-spin-and-alternative-facts

Graham

« Back to index

[ Automotive Discussion ]

Copyright © uk autotalk