|
|
Oct 11, 2016 21:42:44 GMT
|
My campervan project has mot till next May. I had some welding done on the sills over the last 2 years. The last few month the rot has really got into the sills. I went along with a hammer and screw driver banging on the sills. In places it's solid, but on both sides there are some bits that fell out when I hit the screwdriver in.
Even though my camper has a good few months mot on, is it still legal to drive, or is it now unroadworthy?
As a side note I don't intend to drive it anymore till it's fixed. I'm just curious on how the laws work.
|
|
|
|
|
Wilk
Part of things
Posts: 528
|
|
Oct 11, 2016 21:49:24 GMT
|
I believe it's valid until it either expires with age or the point it's taken for a test and fails I'm same as you tho, if it's unsafe I'd sooner sort it than drive knowing it's not safe
|
|
If it can be fixed with a hammer, then it must be an electrical fault
|
|
|
|
Oct 11, 2016 21:52:43 GMT
|
I believe it's valid until it either expires with age or the point it's taken for a test and fails I'm same as you tho, if it's unsafe I'd sooner sort it than drive knowing it's not safe That's the way I look at it, it won't be getting used till it's fixed. The only time it will be driven is a mile down the road to the welder I know when I get some money to fix it.
|
|
|
|
steveg
Posted a lot
Posts: 1,565
|
|
Oct 11, 2016 22:06:17 GMT
|
I think you might have got away with driving it when you had a proper MOT certificate. Now the police or whoever can check on the computer as soon as it's failed that's it. You can only then drive it straight home or to a garage for repairs. I guess the last bit is because not all testing stations carry out repair work.
Sorry I didn't read your post properly. If it hasn't actually failed a test you are still allowed to drive it. But, if you got pulled over you might have problems. If you know it's bad it isn't worth risking things really.
|
|
Last Edit: Oct 11, 2016 22:10:26 GMT by steveg
|
|
1900sr
Part of things
I like Mantas me!
Posts: 875
|
|
Oct 11, 2016 22:07:37 GMT
|
If the vehicle has structural defects that make it unsafe (effectively something that would fail an MOT) then it would be illegal on the road. If you were stopped you wouldn't be done for no MOT as it has one, but you could be prosecuted for driving a vehicle in a dangerous condition.
|
|
|
|
Wilk
Part of things
Posts: 528
|
|
Oct 11, 2016 22:24:58 GMT
|
Agreed. You can still be done for driving a vehicle in an unroadworthy condition even if it still has a valid mot. Bald tyres are a good example
|
|
If it can be fixed with a hammer, then it must be an electrical fault
|
|
tofufi
South West
Posts: 1,454
|
|
|
I think you might have got away with driving it when you had a proper MOT certificate. Now the police or whoever can check on the computer as soon as it's failed that's it. You can only then drive it straight home or to a garage for repairs. I guess the last bit is because not all testing stations carry out repair work. I was under the impression the old MOT was still valid, but you shouldn't be driving the car without fixing the defects first. Have you got a link to a reputable source detailing the change? It's a vehicle owner's duty to ensure the car is roadworthy at all times, so the OP shouldn't be driving the car until it's fixed.
|
|
Last Edit: Oct 12, 2016 7:20:04 GMT by tofufi
|
|
steveg
Posted a lot
Posts: 1,565
|
|
|
I think you might have got away with driving it when you had a proper MOT certificate. Now the police or whoever can check on the computer as soon as it's failed that's it. You can only then drive it straight home or to a garage for repairs. I guess the last bit is because not all testing stations carry out repair work. I was under the impression the old MOT was still valid, but you shouldn't be driving the car without fixing the defects first. Have you got a link to a reputable source detailing the change? It's a vehicle owner's duty to ensure the car is roadworthy at all times, so the OP shouldn't be driving the car until it's fixed. I will have to go and re-read the MOT book but that's the only way it can work as far as I can see. As soon as it's tested, and fails, it is recorded online as a failure. A lot of people only know if there car is unroadworthy at testing time but if the op knows it isn't safe then it's up to him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
^^^^ it hasn't been presented for an Mot and failed the OP has just had a poke at the sills and made some holes. If you got stopped it would be a driving a defective vehicle type offence.
|
|
|
|
tofufi
South West
Posts: 1,454
|
|
|
|
|
Last Edit: Oct 12, 2016 9:04:37 GMT by tofufi
|
|
|
steveg
Posted a lot
Posts: 1,565
|
|
Oct 12, 2016 10:38:35 GMT
|
Interesting. Perhaps they have taken a slightly different view to what was originally the case as before getting the MOT done early was a waste of time just in case it failed. Depending on what it failed on makes a difference at least if you do get pulled over. A new tyre is obvious but a welded patch under the car is only going to be seen if the car is on a ramp.
Thanks for digging those examples out although I think if a car of mine was to fail on something I wouldn't want the hassle of having to prove whatever it was had been fixed.
What they have done seem fairly sensible for a change !
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 12, 2016 11:34:36 GMT
|
A few months ago I asked the use after failure question of VOSA. I'll see if I can dig out the reply later by the gist was:
1. If you submit it early for a test, your old one is still valid in the event of a failure; but 2. Whilst your old mot is valid you could be prosecuted for a vehicle defect if caught driving it before the defect is repaired. 3. The purpose of allowing a month before your test is due to have a test done is not so that you have time to get it fixed but to allow testing stations to manage their workload.
In the past, I always took the view that if it failed and the old test was still valid, the carried on being used until it got fixed and retested. The only caveat to that being if it failed on something you could obviously get nicked for like bald tyres, or if the tester marked something down as dangerous. In the pre-computer days, this was fine because only you and the tester knew it had been for another test and failed. In the computer age, it's more clear cut. However, there are things I don't know:
1. Does the police ANPR system flag up cars with a valid MoT but a recent failed test, thus massively increasing your chances of getting nicked? 2. Has anyone ever been fined for driving a car with a defect in the above circumstances? 3. Has anyone ever had an insurance claim refused as a result of having an accident in the same circumstances?
|
|
Jaguar S-Type 3.0 SE
|
|
VIP
South East
Posts: 8,293
|
|
Oct 12, 2016 12:04:18 GMT
|
The answer to the original question is "Whenever a vehicle falls into a condition that would render it failing an MOT test if presented in that condition".
So the rust in question, if having sharp edges or being on or near the structural areas covered by the MOT, would mean the vehicle IS in Unroadworthy Condition and should not be used on a Public Road.
You could get a new MOT, do a massive burnout in the the Test Station car park until the cords were hanging out of the tyres, and in that instant your vehicle is classified as Unroadworthy and you risk relevant authorities if caught driving it on the road.
MOT Certificates are never invalidated, however your vehicle can be deemed Dangerous for Road Use and require a re-test before being allowed back onto the roadm and in that case the new Cert overwrites the old one, as would any test taken within the 11 months after your original test.
Regarding the database, if your vehicle failed a test with a valid Certificate still in place, the MOT expiry date would still remain and it would show as having a current MOT, however the latest entry in the MOT history would show a Fail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 12, 2016 16:01:16 GMT
|
Regarding insurance, An Mot has no bearing on insurance,and insurance companies cannot refuse to pay out due to lack of an Mot, ( this has been proven in court,where the insurance company lost, and of course you need insurance anyway to be able to drive to an Mot test centre ,,,,,,,)
Driving an 'unroadworthy' vehicle is a different ball game. There will be small print in your policy somewhere to the effect of .... "the vehicle must meet all relevant legislation" type stuff.
You will also be under scope of the 'Construction and Use' regs,these are what plod use to goid effect,and do will your insurer.
And KNOWINGLY driving a defective vehicle,well you're on your own there ........
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 13, 2016 13:03:38 GMT
|
hi, ive been a motorcycle courier in london for about 20 years on and off and i have to say that int he eyes of the law(the courts and the traffic police) that mot certificates mean very little.
most of my bikes after a period become ratbikes, completely legal with nice components etc though lacking the appearance of your typical shiney sports bike.
painting a bike matt black years ago will draw attention to the traffic police who will then issue you with a prohibtion notice for what they call a loose chain or something. not that they are mechanics or even bikers, but it is in their power to put you off the road and out of business because your appearence doesnt fit in with the majority of road users.
ive known the police to prohibit a bike that had a blown tail bulb even and on a motorbike how are you supposed to know when thats happened unless someone is kind enough to poinit it out to you...
ive had an mot on a bike one day and a prohibtion notice on it the very same day, not that anything was wrong with my bike but it was the traffic officers opinion that my bike looked unsafe.
i have had a bike on which i collected 8 prohibition notices on despite it being mot'd literally by the book with the book open out in front of the bike, measuring everything from play in bearings to the length that the mudguard extends beyond the front spindle.
an mot can become invalid the moment you leave the place of issue.
i received a fine on one bike from a court who added that i should never put this bike on the road again due to its 'dangerous condition' lol. not something that a court is allowed to tell you ever and ive been told the same by traffic police.
ps: if you want to find out if your camper is road legal, just pull up next to a traffic car and point out your sills to them and I'm sure that theyll happily issue you with a fine and have you cart your vehicle off on a flat bed as they wont allow you to drive it a inch if its not roadworthy.
i think prohibtion notices are the thing you might want to worry about if your sills are dangerously rotting.
what use to be a notice to repair your vehicle within a specified time is now a discontinued procedure and instead, especially in central london, its normal to have a notice slapped on it in which case youll have to have the vehicle re-mot'd.
ive had a prohibtion issued when i once refused to move off a yellow line that i legally had 20 minutes on. it does happen lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 13, 2016 19:03:24 GMT
|
I was hoping to get the van fixed in the new year, but I've just got lucky and today I found out I have been paid out by work for all the holiday pay that I wasn't correctly paid over the last year. I can now get my van welded up and back on the road. It's only a mile to the welder and round here there is more chance of getting 6 numbers on the lottery than seeing a police car. Also it's just the outer sill that's rotting in a few places, I don't think there's anything really dangerous about it, I could be wrong though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 13, 2016 19:13:01 GMT
|
I seems as so Stinkynails is living in his own little dream word, for starters police can not issue them just because it looks unsafe they have to be mechanically trained and state the exact reason for it nor can a vehicle receive one for length of mudguard as they are not a legal requirement
Also police can issue a ticket given you 14 days to effect repairs and having a PG9 does not mean it will be towed it just means you can't use it until fixed, you can repair it there and then and it doesn't have to be retested it is the item that has been noted that has to be checked. being in London doesn't mean the rules are any different to elsewhere in the UK.
If you did receive 8 prohibitions on one bike then there was obviously 8 different occasions there was a fault that police picked up on, the fact you had 'mot'd literally by the book with the book open out in front of the bike'(?) means that the faults were with other items that are not tested or you modified the bike post test. or you are known to the police and keep giving them a reason to pull you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 13, 2016 19:39:36 GMT
|
I think that it's all about whether it's a potential safety issue, e.g.
If the emissions have gone to pot since the last MOT test was conducted that isn't a safety issue and the vehicle would still be roadworthy, (I believe).
If the handbrake cable had snapped since the last MOT test or the brake lights had failed, etc. then there are obvious implications for safety to the driver or to other road users so the vehicle would be unroadworthy even if it still had MOT cover. The corroded sills probably contribute to the structural integrity of the vehicle, i.e. they could make the difference between it breaking in half following a collision. Holed bodywork is also deemed dangerous as it has the potential to inflict more serious injuries in low speed collisions with pedestrians.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 13, 2016 21:14:54 GMT
|
a prohibition order requires that you not use the vehicle until you have been issued a new MOT certificate and rectified the faults outlined by the police in the prohibtion notice. so unless you are fotunate enough to pick up a notice right outside an MOT station you will indeed be calling for transport.
when its happened to me i have once been within pushing distance of a workshop and was followed most of the way to it.
i have once been given a prohibtion notice for have low brake pads and even had pads in my courier bag which i offered to fit, but was instead given a prohibtion so i can promise you that i am not living in a dream world.
yes dolly there is a book that sets all MOT standards, they are not made up on the whim of the examiner and ive seen the size of the book on that one occassion where it was brought out to determine how exact the tolerances were on my bike at the time.
as stated aleady, ive been with another courier while he was having a prohibition put on his bike for havingn a blown tail light.
the fact is that once a traffic police officer 'qualified' to issue prohibition notices says that your vehicle is defective and issues you the notice you have no recourse and youll only find that youll be putting your point across to a judge who doesnt know the difference between an artic and a tricycle. ...at your expense.
speaking from experience and that this has been a complete reality for myself and others close to me who work as riders and drivers in central london i can promise you that this is the way it is.
if you leave an MOT station with a shiny new certificate and get a nail in your tyre before you leave the kerb, then your MOT is invalid.
if you leave the MOT station with a slight oil leak and a policeman doesnt like the look of it and says it is a danger and issues you with a prohibition notice, then your MOT is invalid and you will have to have your vehicle recovered and re MOT'd.
ha ha! a mud guard isnt a legal requirement? i can say whether that is true or not but if you have one in place then i can tell you it has to extend beyond the front spindle by x cms.
its not an mot requirement to have a windscreen either but youll get screwed if you turn up with a chip in the wrong place and try tell that to the examiner....even funnier, try explaining that to a traffic officer lol.
prohibtion i promise you
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 13, 2016 21:15:41 GMT
|
I seems as so Stinkynails is living in his own little dream word, for starters police can not issue them just because it looks unsafe they have to be mechanically trained and state the exact reason for it nor can a vehicle receive one for length of mudguard as they are not a legal requirement Also police can issue a ticket given you 14 days to effect repairs and having a PG9 does not mean it will be towed it just means you can't use it until fixed, you can repair it there and then and it doesn't have to be retested it is the item that has been noted that has to be checked. being in London doesn't mean the rules are any different to elsewhere in the UK. If you did receive 8 prohibitions on one bike then there was obviously 8 different occasions there was a fault that police picked up on, the fact you had 'mot'd literally by the book with the book open out in front of the bike'(?) means that the faults were with other items that are not tested or you modified the bike post test. or you are known to the police and keep giving them a reason to pull you. I got given a prohibition notice on a 6 month old motorbike, for 'leaking suspension' (coated in chain lube, was winter) and 'worn drivetrain' (was a supermoto, ran a lot of slack standard due to long travel suspension). This was done by two traffic coppers who stopped for tea at a burger van whilst i was eating my lunch. Had to get it recovered of site, then presented for a mot before allowed back on road. And it flew through mot. Was 6 months old ffs.
|
|
|
|
|