MOT every two years?

[-Oy-]

What do you think of the proposal to make MOTs only every two years?

[Scrumpy]

It could be beneficial to those who find it difficult to pay the fee each year..
But having an MOT each year spots any problems that could result in greater costs.
Also a garage might find something wrong to make up for loss of the yearly fees.

[-Oy-]

I've thought for a long time that it should be based on mileage as well as time. We need to keep unsafe vehicles off the road. Which is safer - a 3 year old Fiesta with 20k miles on or a 2 year old delivery van with 60k?

Garages that mainly do MOTs would be hit hard though!

[Raven]

Have to make damn sure of a yearly service then.

[Michael Rolls]

I suppose it all depends on how well looked after an individual vehicle is - remember when the test was first introduced it was for vehicles over ten years old? Modern cars are a lot more reliable than those around then, but you can't legislate for stupidity, so on balance I would prefer to see it stay yearly
Mike

[klondike]

The 2009 Peugout 308 diesel I had never failed an MOT despite being quite high mileage. The garage did mention that the brake disks were getting worn but it never even made an advisory on the MOT itself.

It is still the responsibility of the owner/driver to ensure the vehicle is roadworthy regardless of it having an MOT which only says it was OK on the day it was tested. Checking the lights and tyres and noting anything odd about braking and steering is something that should be done anyway.

[Michael Rolls]

absolutely

[Diasi]

What do you think of the proposal to make MOTs only every two years?

The MOT was introduced in 1960 in the era when car engines had to be de-coked regularly, they had drum brakes, the gearbox oil had to be changed nearly as often as the engine oil etc.

Today I doubt that a driver any younger than their 50's would even know what a de-coke was.

Every two years is more than adequately safe for a modern car MOT.