Scrapping Annual Car Safety Tests Would Be Disastrous
Imagine a society where no car was checked to make sure it was safe and roadworthy. Where people could leave bald tyres on their cars until they burst, where rust was left to run riot, causing catastrophic mid-corner failures, and where windscreens can get cracked, smeared and otherwise obscured with no one to put the owners in their place until it’s too late.
That’s exactly what the UK government, backed by at least one major daily newspaper, is calling for: the abolition of the annual MOT test. The Ministry of Transport test has been Britain’s standardised annual used car safety check since 1960, covering an ever-increasing number of parts and systems along the way.
It makes sure that a driver can see out of the windscreen properly. It checks that the brake pedal isn’t wired to the reversing lights (I really did see that once), and that the headlights aren’t angled straight into oncoming traffic’s eyes. There are dozens of safety issues that the MOT test covers. Without it, the potential for all sorts of avoidable carnage is limitless.
Surely it’s better to pay the £25-£50ish fee and know that your car is basically safe. We all know that the MOT, and the EU and US equivalents, aren’t foolproof and don’t cover everything, but getting that certificate saying your car is in good health is still a vital – and always satisfying – part of car ownership.
It’s absolutely crucial that we keep the test. It’s the only barrier stopping society’s corner-cutters from stopping paying for essential maintenance. Many of us have mental libraries of anecdotes featuring friends, family, strangers who couldn’t give a monkey’s about stuff like tyres, brakes, lights, windscreen wipers, exhausts, suspension or anything else on a car, and only pay for repairs when they’re essentially forced to.
A friend of my brother’s turned up at his place once, where we were all getting together for a movie and a takeaway. She parked her Peugeot 206 on the drive and came inside. After a while she said to him: “Steve, you know a bit about cars, don’t you? Mine feels really funny, especially in the rain…”
Out he went. From the front door he could already see that both tyres on the closest side were almost flat. Same the other side. All four tyres were different brands and three were totally bald. The car had no MOT certificate because the dopey owner knew neither what it was nor that she was obliged to have one. She was lucky she hadn’t ended up in a wall, or injuring someone else. These people inspire a cold fury in me – and I’m sure the same goes for you.
Remove the annual checks, where those too ignorant or cheap to fix their cars of their own volition are legally forced to comply with roadworthiness standards, and how many dangerous faults will go unfixed? How many accidents waiting to happen will become accidents that have just happened? How many years down the line, and how many lives lost, will we reach before we realise what a ridiculous mistake scrapping the MOT test was?
Comments
Why on earth would you want to remove MOTs?
Yes it’s easier now for old classics and some beaters that people would love
But it’s bad for everyone else right?
Your argument seems to make sense until you realise that countries without annual safety tests don’t have disproportionally high accident figures compared to countries that do. When there is something wrong with someones car most mechanics will urge them to fix it anyway. Personally it just seems like a massive inconvenience to have to pay to get my car checked every year.
Less mot, more crashes, more speed cameras in dangerous zones
Scrapping the MOT test is like skydiving without checking your reserve chute, or going deep sea fishing without checking your oxygen tank - it’s just stupid.
That moment you realize Brits are so brainwashed by their authoritarian government that CAR ENTHUSIASTS get concerned when the government wants to give them MORE FREEDOM to modify their cars… amazing.
In all honesty, most canadian provinces wont require a safety check, fewer dont require an emmission either. For the most part, people do keep their cars in reasonable shape and wont drive them beyond their safe limits.
You do get the one person here and there that has a car that really shouldnt be on the road but our harsh winters usually sort those cars out by not letting them make it through the cold months.
Cars do require safety certificates when they tranfer hands in Ontario and these tests have gotten really strict as of late. In most cases, mechanics want to see brand new rotors, pads, tires and for the body to be in reasonable shape.
So it may not be all that bad and save you a little coin every year.
If the MOT was scrapped, my MX5 would suddenly become legal again. As much as everything in me wants to be back driving that car, I know that it’s not in a safe condition, and, as much as MOTs can deliver heartbreak, that’s more than worth it to know that not only my own, but every other car on the road is safe to be driven
Only problem I have with MOT in my country at least, is the fact that all it does is make modified cars not run on streets. Most people who own a car that cannot simply be legal bribe the authorization with as little as 20$.
But I’m all pro MOT. If it saves one life, it’s worth the hustle
Thank goodness we don’t have safety checks here in my part of Canada. I was able to drive a beautiful (rusted to the bone) SC400 (Soarer) as my first car. I can have modifications without having to take them off every year for checks. Best of all, the world is not falling apart because everyone drives dangerous grenades, as this article would suggest. But I admit an MOT test makes it easier to find older cars in good shape.
Sure, scrapping MOT tests would make modified (decat, dpf deletes, straight pipes) cars easier to own but it’s not worth losing the safety checks for. Plus, how would we know what a used cars life was like without MOT history?