BBC airs aftermarket’s fears over gov’s 4-1-1 MOT proposals

Independent Automotive Aftermarket Federation warns BBC listeners about the dangers of an MOT extension

BBC airs aftermarket’s fears over gov’s 4-1-1 MOT proposals
With the proposals to extend the frequency of MOTs currently at the consultation stage, the IAAF is highlighting the dangers involved and the risks that threaten driver safety.

The Independent automotive aftermarket federation’s (IAAF) chief executive, Wendy Williamson has told BBC Radio 4 that proposals to extend the MOT test from three years to four for newer vehicles are fraught with danger.

In an interview for the BBC Radio 4’s You and Yours programme, she said: “It’s a consultation that’s not wanted, it hasn’t been asked for.

“Over 20 per cent of vehicles fail the first MOT.

“If that’s moved to four years, then inevitably, those failures are going to rise.”

The government is promoting the move in a positive light, claiming motorists could save up to £100m a year, but the IAAF is arguing that this could lead to an increase in road accidents and fatalities as there will be no formal inspection of a vehicle’s road worthiness for a further 12 months.

By extending the test frequency there will be more non-roadworthy vehicles on the road for a further year with no official mileage or emissions recorded until after four years.

MOT11Related: Gov officially proposes four-year MOT exemption

The IAAF is working alongside other industry bodies to combat the unwelcome legislation and protect the safety of all road users and the future of the automotive aftermarket.

Wendy said: “In recent years, the MOT testing frequency has been subject to much debate.

“The IAAF’s stance has always been that DVSA’s regulation of the MOT process and current testing frequency of 3-1-1 helps to make the UK’s roads the safest in Europe and we will fight any detrimental changes vigorously.”

Listen to the interview on BBC iPlayer Radio here or follow the ‘more details’ link below for further information about the IAAF.

Anyone can reply to the government’s proposals through the official survey, or by emailing [email protected].

Have you replied to the official proposal yet? Leave your comments below and keep your concerns coming in.

34 Comments

  1. I have already lodged my opposition to the extension to 4 years for 1st MOT on the grounds of safety and likelihood of more unroadworthy vehicles being on the road. You only have to drive a very short way at night to realise that there is simply not nearly enough enforcement of vehicle safety as it is even now (vehicles with only one headlamp operating – or worse!), let alone if the 1st MOT was extended by another year.

    Reply
  2. I have already lodged my opposition to the extension to 4 years for 1st MOT on the grounds of safety and likelihood of more unroadworthy vehicles being on the road. You only have to drive a very short way at night to realise that there is simply not nearly enough enforcement of vehicle safety as it is even now (vehicles with only one headlamp operating – or worse!), let alone if the 1st MOT was extended by another year.

    Reply
  3. Clocking cars will also go up, that won;t benefit the public will it??!!

    Reply
  4. Clocking cars will also go up, that won;t benefit the public will it??!!

    Reply
  5. If the government are happy that vehicles can go a further year without a minimum safety check which is all the MOT test is why are they saying it would save drivers up to £100, surely the maximum they would save is up to the full retail cost of a MOT which I believe is £54.65 for a Class 4??????

    Reply
    • What it says is that motorists could save up to £100 million a year. That’s all the motorists added together not just each individual. (Don’t agree with the proposal though at all).

      Reply
  6. If the government are happy that vehicles can go a further year without a minimum safety check which is all the MOT test is why are they saying it would save drivers up to £100, surely the maximum they would save is up to the full retail cost of a MOT which I believe is £54.65 for a Class 4??????

    Reply
    • What it says is that motorists could save up to £100 million a year. That’s all the motorists added together not just each individual. (Don’t agree with the proposal though at all).

      Reply
  7. Hmm, so £100 million saved over 34 million PLG vehicles? so roughly £2.95 per car? (not including LCV?HGV/Bus/Taxi etc as they obviously have a different test regime anyway due to their arduous usage)
    They tried the same thing a few years ago, and it failed in a spectacular way

    Reply
  8. Hmm, so £100 million saved over 34 million PLG vehicles? so roughly £2.95 per car? (not including LCV?HGV/Bus/Taxi etc as they obviously have a different test regime anyway due to their arduous usage)
    They tried the same thing a few years ago, and it failed in a spectacular way

    Reply
  9. Should be 2 years instead of 3, never mind 4!
    The mileage that modern cars clock up and long service intervals, bloody dangerous when you come to service them!

    Reply
  10. Should be 2 years instead of 3, never mind 4!
    The mileage that modern cars clock up and long service intervals, bloody dangerous when you come to service them!

    Reply
  11. MOT Test should be every Year from 12 months old as some cars can cover 20,000 miles plus now before even its first service is carried out,most drivers don’t even carry out basic checks now and only take to garage if it doesn’t sound right,drive right or engine management light comes on.

    Reply
  12. MOT Test should be every Year from 12 months old as some cars can cover 20,000 miles plus now before even its first service is carried out,most drivers don’t even carry out basic checks now and only take to garage if it doesn’t sound right,drive right or engine management light comes on.

    Reply
  13. I’d love to see how they came about the 100 million saving. None of the repair costs are going to become less. If anything the extended use of a defective vehicle is likely to increase repair costs and negate any saving from the lack of mot cost. Add that the 3yr warranty will have expired and no formal inspection undertaken the sale value of the car is likely to reduce. Where will this money be saved ?

    Reply
  14. I’d love to see how they came about the 100 million saving. None of the repair costs are going to become less. If anything the extended use of a defective vehicle is likely to increase repair costs and negate any saving from the lack of mot cost. Add that the 3yr warranty will have expired and no formal inspection undertaken the sale value of the car is likely to reduce. Where will this money be saved ?

    Reply
  15. As an Mot tester we see lots of dangerous cars on the road. Unfortunately when your three year old car goes back to the dealers for its mot and service, the service is always done first with the warranty work. This means that your car passes it test first time. This would mean to me the governments findings are wrong. Unfortunately they don’t see the big picture. Just wait till deaths increase on our roads. All Mot testers do is keep the roads safe.

    Reply
  16. As an Mot tester we see lots of dangerous cars on the road. Unfortunately when your three year old car goes back to the dealers for its mot and service, the service is always done first with the warranty work. This means that your car passes it test first time. This would mean to me the governments findings are wrong. Unfortunately they don’t see the big picture. Just wait till deaths increase on our roads. All Mot testers do is keep the roads safe.

    Reply
  17. It is clear to understand that the gov. is trying to blindfold motorists when in reality that the risk of an extension carries fatalities,accidents and miseries.Motorists do not know where the water and oil levels are and how will they keep their vehicles safe.Infact the MOT test should be carried out two years maximum for new cars.

    Reply
  18. It is clear to understand that the gov. is trying to blindfold motorists when in reality that the risk of an extension carries fatalities,accidents and miseries.Motorists do not know where the water and oil levels are and how will they keep their vehicles safe.Infact the MOT test should be carried out two years maximum for new cars.

    Reply
  19. Just over £1 a week saving ,and the so called 100 million saving will affect the motor industry how many first time mot vehicles have there first service away from the main agents plenty.

    Reply
  20. Just over £1 a week saving ,and the so called 100 million saving will affect the motor industry how many first time mot vehicles have there first service away from the main agents plenty.

    Reply
  21. mot test should be every year from new.
    cars cover vast distances every year.
    abandon road tax .
    that will save money for the motorist .

    Reply
  22. mot test should be every year from new.
    cars cover vast distances every year.
    abandon road tax .
    that will save money for the motorist .

    Reply
  23. The Government are are overlooking current and future technology for “Driverless Vehicles” .
    If this extension to first examination goes ahead to 4-1-1, we will have driverless vehicles on public roads a year out of manufactures warranty with no safety inspection at all.

    Very frightening thought indeed

    Reply
  24. The Government are are overlooking current and future technology for “Driverless Vehicles” .
    If this extension to first examination goes ahead to 4-1-1, we will have driverless vehicles on public roads a year out of manufactures warranty with no safety inspection at all.

    Very frightening thought indeed

    Reply
  25. 4-1-1 will kill more on roads without a doubt , we see the state of these cars so why not take Our advise every year from new would be a better recommendation . as for the road tax ! in France tax is on the fuel you do not pay an annual fee for road tax in France and look at there roads put ours to shame , i think its fair the more you use the roads the more fuel you use their for the more tax you will pay to repair the roads SIMPLE IT WORKS.

    Reply
  26. 4-1-1 will kill more on roads without a doubt , we see the state of these cars so why not take Our advise every year from new would be a better recommendation . as for the road tax ! in France tax is on the fuel you do not pay an annual fee for road tax in France and look at there roads put ours to shame , i think its fair the more you use the roads the more fuel you use their for the more tax you will pay to repair the roads SIMPLE IT WORKS.

    Reply
  27. The information Great Minster House is using to qualify this change, is skewed. Most vehicles are prepared for sale in the aftermarket at clearing houses and main dealerships prior to being MOTd. So the real condition of three year old vehicles is never seen by the politicians making this change. Don’t mess with this.

    Reply
  28. The information Great Minster House is using to qualify this change, is skewed. Most vehicles are prepared for sale in the aftermarket at clearing houses and main dealerships prior to being MOTd. So the real condition of three year old vehicles is never seen by the politicians making this change. Don’t mess with this.

    Reply
  29. Longer service and longer Mot test intervals = More accidents and related problems putting a greater strain on the NHS.
    Perhaps politicians should look at the bigger picture and not just points scoring for themselves.
    Extending the intervals may also cause a recession in the aftermarket,smaller garages closing and then the general public will only be left with main dealers who will be able to charge more — result the motorist in the street will be paying more for the joy of motoring.

    Reply
  30. Longer service and longer Mot test intervals = More accidents and related problems putting a greater strain on the NHS.
    Perhaps politicians should look at the bigger picture and not just points scoring for themselves.
    Extending the intervals may also cause a recession in the aftermarket,smaller garages closing and then the general public will only be left with main dealers who will be able to charge more — result the motorist in the street will be paying more for the joy of motoring.

    Reply
  31. 3 years is to long for 1st mot. It Should be 2 year due to motorists not servicing cars today. People take it for cars are made better so dont need service etc’

    Reply
  32. 3 years is to long for 1st mot. It Should be 2 year due to motorists not servicing cars today. People take it for cars are made better so dont need service etc’

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Have your say!

24 0

Lost Password

Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.

Sign Up