Ministers are considering lifting the requirement that cars have an annual MOT test, despite warnings that it could lead to dozens more deaths on our roads.
Under new plans, drivers may be required to get their vehicles checked only once every two years. Transport Secretary Philip Hammond said the proposal, which would save motorists hundreds of pounds at a time of high petrol prices, was sensible because modern-day cars were a lot safer.
But the Government’s own analysis has found that relaxing the MOT rules could lead to an extra 30 deaths on the road every year. Garage owners will oppose the move because it will hit their profits, and the AA has spoken out against any change to the current annual requirement. Mr Hammond said: ‘Car technology has come a long way since the 1960s when our MOT regime was introduced.
‘That’s why we think it’s right to check whether we still have the right balance of MOT testing for modern vehicles.’ A MOT test – the abbreviation stands for Ministry of Transport – costs about £55. But many of them reveal unknown flaws which can send the total bill soaring. At present, cars which are at least three years old have to get an MOT test every year. Without an MOT, a motorist cannot legally drive or get his car insured.
Mr Hammond is to launch a consultation on three options for change. The most conservative would be to delay a new car’s first MOT until the end of its fourth year. It would then have annual MOTs.
A study by the Transport Research Laboratory, which says vehicle defects contribute to 3 per cent of accidents in Britain, has found that this change would lead to about two extra road deaths every year.
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”
Whilst I'm not for dropping the MOT test altogether, maybe moving the first test to four years and then having the test every two years until the car is 10 years old then moving it to an annual test as this is when serious safetly problems start to manifest more regularly.
Mine has just had it's first test at three years old and even the guy at the testing station says it's pointless running the test on a 3 year old car. he's been testing cars for 20 years and has NEVER failed a car on it's first test.
My home state reduced the State Inspection requirements from twice a year to once many years ago, and the impact was negligible (other than to mechanics).
The neighboring state (Ohio) has no state inspection, and the number of fatalities resulting from faulty equipment is no higher than in my state.
I believe the police in Ohio are allowed to stop and Cite cars with obvious mechanical problems (burned-out lights, etc).
As a general proposition, I would guess that most people driving cars that are not mechanically perfect are doing do out of a lack of funds. Fortunately, the most common safety-related failure (brakes) is usually preceded by multiple warning signs before the car actually will not stop.
Still, I feel a little bit safer knowing that a mechanic periodically checks out my front suspension to make sure a wheel won't fall off while I'm driving down the road.
It's similar to the speed limits in the UK, which were set for cars designed in the mid 60's
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”
It does seem odd that even though cars are far safer than they were back in the 1960's that road rules are STILL in place from that era.
In France they have introduced two speed limits on the motorways, one for dry weather and one for wet weather, where breaking distances are compromised. Something that should be adopted on UK Motorways?
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”
We haven't had inspections in Indiana for many years. I would go along with a graduated plan of inspection based on car age because I have seen some scary shite being driven.
They're a joke. I have seen deathtraps with fresh inspection stickers...I have been told flatly that it will be $100 for a guaranteed pass. He didn't need to see the car, just the cash. I have also been told flatly it will take a $50 bribe or he won't pass my car. It's an utter joke.
Here in Pa. I take my car to someone I trust and I stay with the vehicle to observe. My only concern, as I do trust this guy, is to take a look at the brakes, drums, rotors and shoes to see what shape they are in. My wife and daughter drive our car and I want to know they are safe.
I have seen way too many rolling wercks from Ohio as I live only about 30 miles from the border. Not only are the vehicles nasty but so are many of the drivers.
I expect to go straight to hell...........at least I won't have to spend time making new friends.
In fact, can anyone tell us which states have tests and which do not?
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”
15 states have mandatory scheduled safety inspections. States which do not may require an inspection to register a vehicle after transfer of title. From the same source, some interesting data on effectiveness:
The statistical models showed that states with mandatory vehicle inspections had 1.5 fewer fatal crashes per every billion vehicle miles traveled than states without inspection programs. The model estimated that without its inspection program, Pennsylvania would have about 169 more fatal crashes and 187 more fatalities per year. In 2008 there were 1,358 fatal car accidents in Pennsylvania, so the 169 lives saved by the inspection program represents about an 11 percent decrease in the number of fatal accidents. A cost-to-benefit analysis was also conducted as part of the study. Using the U.S. Department of Transportation’s official estimate of the value of life ($5.8 million/human life), it was estimated that the benefit of Pennsylvania’s programs was $1,084.6 million. The cost of the vehicle inspection program was calculated to be $621.3 million. Thus, the cost-to-benefit analysis shows a $463.3 million estimated benefit per year from mandatory vehicle safety inspections in Pennsylvania.
One could argue with the quantification of the value of a human life, but since only fatalities are included and not injuries, the actual benefit would be underestimated by the value of non-fatal injuries avoided.
"The dildo of consequence rarely comes lubed." -- Eileen Rose
Yet more proof that inspections are worthless: Liz took the bus (now tagged & titled as a motorhome) for its inspection today. They checked the registration, put on the sticker, and took the money. That's it. They did not check one single thing on the vehicle.
Gob wrote:Is there not a mandatory test in PA Miles?
In fact, can anyone tell us which states have tests and which do not?
Yes we have a mandatory annual vehicle inspection. I only know,for certain, the Ohio does not however I imagine there are more who, for whatever the reason, also do not.
I expect to go straight to hell...........at least I won't have to spend time making new friends.
In California we just have smog inspections - which are a complete waste because they are unfair.
For example, my dear old mother who was driving a 77 Chrysler Cordoba (she's the original owner) no more than 1500 miles per year, had her car deemed a "Gross Polluter" based on the year it was made and the model, not on its performance. So she had to pay more for an inspection and could only go to certain stations to get them.
And it always passed with no problems!
It is unfair because annual miles driven should be considered when they are determining how much pollution you are putting into the air. It is likely that the Cordoba put less pollution into the air annually than most new cars on the road.
She quit driving last year and donated the car to charity.
Gob wrote:Is there not a mandatory test in PA Miles?
In fact, can anyone tell us which states have tests and which do not?
Yes we have a mandatory annual vehicle inspection. I only know,for certain, the Ohio does not however I imagine there are more who, for whatever the reason, also do not.
Louisiana has yearly inspections, but they don't have to be done at a mechanic’s shop. I have mine done at an auto glass repair shop. The other place in the area is a tire repair facility.
I expected to be placed in an air force combat position such as security police, forward air control, pararescue or E.O.D. I would have liked dog handler. I had heard about the dog Nemo and was highly impressed. “SFB” is sad I didn’t end up in E.O.D.
NY has yearly safety inspections but no smog inspections anymore. If your check engine light is on, it will not pass. If your car is too old for a check engine light, they still only do a safety inspection.
Years ago, they made the inspector hook the car up to a dynamometer and run the car and measure the smog but no more.
And in NY there are "certified" NY Inspection Stations which could mean a mechanics shop, a tire dealer (Goodyear shops) or anyplace. I believe it is a person who gets certified and not a shop.
And as far as brakes, I have only had one time when my brakes failed to stop the car and I have had warped and cracked rotors, leaking brake cylinders, no pad only metal on the pads, etc. M 1964 Dodge dart only had a single cylinder master cyclinder and when a brake line went I lost all four brakes. Nowadays the master cyclinder has two cylinders serving two wheels each so if one line breaks, you still have two wheels brakes operating.
Joe Guy wrote:In California we just have smog inspections - which are a complete waste because they are unfair.
For example, my dear old mother who was driving a 77 Chrysler Cordoba (she's the original owner) no more than 1500 miles per year, had her car deemed a "Gross Polluter" based on the year it was made and the model, not on its performance. So she had to pay more for an inspection and could only go to certain stations to get them.
And it always passed with no problems!
It is unfair because annual miles driven should be considered when they are determining how much pollution you are putting into the air. It is likely that the Cordoba put less pollution into the air annually than most new cars on the road.
She quit driving last year and donated the car to charity.
Problem solved.
I would have loved to get my hands on a non-rotted Cordoba.
I would have loved to get my hands on a non-rotted Cordoba.