MOT CHANGES
With testers bracing themselves for a major overhaul in the MOT from May 20, Rob Hawkins and Rob Marshall join forces to guide you through the changes.
Emotions always run high, when any changes to the MOT test are proposed. Conspiracy theories race around automotive internet forums, claiming that the authorities are seeking to force older cars off the road, with the consensus being: if the MOT works fine, why change it?
With technological changes in modern vehicles galloping-on at an ever-increasing pace, annual roadworthiness inspections struggle to keep up. Additionally, because car manufacturers tried to overcome the Euro V emissions standards using often questionable means, there is an obligation to ensure that these vehicles particularly are functioning as efficiently as possible in the real world.
While Britain’s Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) instigates changes to the MOT, it is bound by European legislation. The latest set of changes has been prompted mainly by the need to comply with the EU Roadworthiness Package on periodic roadworthiness tests (2014/45/EU). As the UK was a member of the EU when the directive was finalised in 2014 and will continue to be so in May, it must implement the changes into British law. To do otherwise would result in not only fines for the UK Government (which is paid ultimately by us taxpayers), but it also means that the EU could refuse to allow British cars to be driven on European roads. Understandably, the DVSA will not comment on any future relationships that the MOT test will have with EU directives made postbrexit, or during the transition period.
The changes
After May 20, the most obvious difference in the MOT will be thrust into your hand The receipt-style Pass (VT20) and Fail (VT30) certificates have changed and will now list any defects under four new categories. A Pass is fairly straightforward to understand and may be accompanied by Advisories, although we understand that the tester will be given less freedom to type these in manually. Instead, a pre-worded entry may be provided and you might have to quiz the tester for further elaboration.
A more serious Minor fault will not cause an MOT fail, but either a Major, or Dangerous, defect will do so. The DVSA told CM that it wants to make sure that the information provided to motorists at the MOT is as clear as possible, but Simon Williams, a spokesperson for the RAC, says that, while the changes seem very sensible, at least on the surface, the organisation fears that many motorists could end up being confused. Only time will tell.
While it has always been illegal to drive a car on the road with a dangerous mechanical defect, the latest change sees the law being enforced more stringently. Should a defect be categorised as Dangerous, you are advised strongly not to drive the car to another location for repair, not even back home.
Advising CM on the issue, the DVSA confirmed that the criminal offence of driving vehicles with dangerous defects has not changed and emphasises that the system will “help motorists do the right thing – ie, not drive away from a garage.” Eric Smith, Kwik Fit’s MOT scheme manager, concurs that the new MOT terminology is more in line with the wording of the Road Traffic Act, in that a test failure on a Dangerous fault means that vehicle should not be taken onto the open road.
When we asked what a motorist should do if a car fails on a Dangerous defect at a testing station that does not carry out repairs (such as ones operated by a local authority), the DVSA says that the vehicle should be recovered by a suitable company. Legally, this would mean that the car could only be moved from the premises on a recovery truck, quite possibly with all four wheels raised from the ground – something that is not an inexpensive undertaking.
A difference of opinion
In many cases, the difference between a Major, or Dangerous, fault is clear-cut in the MOT Inspection manual. In the case of parking brakes, for example, should the efficiency be below the minimum requirement, a Major fault is recorded, but if it has less than 50% of the required value, it is regarded as Dangerous. An excessively corroded brake pipe would be a Major failure, unless its wall thickness has been reduced by one third or more, then a Dangerous fault would be recorded. Obviously, this is hard to judge – which the DVSA acknowledges – and would depend greatly on tester experience and judgement. It is worth noting that the DVSA has stated to the trade press that it would uphold any tester judgements, provided that they have followed the procedure set out in the MOT Inspection manual.