Car-Insurance-UK-Supermarket.co.uk
compare online quotes the easy way
|
||||
|
||||
Reducing MOT frequency is unsafe say 62% of drivers8 June 2011 by Emma Jamieson It has been muted that the Government is consulting on whether to reduce the frequency of the MOT test to help motorists to reduce their costs. In support of the change is that cars are now mechanically more sound than in the past, reducing the need for testing. The proposal would be that the first MOT test occurs when the car is four years old and the next at six years, with annual testing thereafter. However, an AA poll has found that 62% of drivers do not support changing the MOT frequency as they believe that to do so would increase the numbers of hazardous vehicles on our roads. Even looking at the delay of the first MOT from year three to year four in isolation, 41% thought that this alone would increase the numbers of defective cars on the roads. 94% thought that the MOT test was important to road safety, 71% seeing it as very important. Only 4% liked the idea of reducing the MOT test frequency while only 13% thought the change would save them money. The AA had already found in their other motoring costs research that 10% were cutting back on their maintenance and servicing to save money, while a large motorists survey conducted by Admiral Insurance put this figure at 15%. That this sizeable proportion have elected to conduct no or limited routine maintenance would suggest that this may be a bad time to reduce the frequency of vehicle testing. Furthermore, MOT failures peaked at 41% in 2010, a figure that had not be seen since the recession of the early 1990s. A fifth of failures related to non-functioning indicators or other light bulbs. A fifth of people do not conduct maintenance checks on their cars. Almost two-fifths don't check their tyre treads, and as many as a half are willing to drive on bald tyres. This is despite the hefty penalties for illegal tyre tread depth and that bald tyres often contribute to road crashes and deaths. The Transport Research Laboratory (TRL), in a report published in April 2011, found that a reduction in the MOT would be likely to increase the numbers of accidents and road deaths but to what degree is, as yet, unclear as their research relied on modelling assumptions that were open to error. It does not require research, of course, to know that if you perform less safety checks on vehicles that you will have a higher number of unsafe vehicles on the roads and more accidents and deaths will result. If motorists aren't in support of a reduction in MOT testing, as this study would suggest, then the case is made for maintaining the status quo. Certainly, it would be hard to justify a decision that would increase road deaths, even if by a small amount, in the absence of support for that change from the public. This is a Government idea that, perhaps, should be quietly shelved. While you can take steps to reduce your own risk on the road and this includes effective car maintenance and servicing, car insurance should always be bought from the perspective of the kind of cover you would like in an accident. Car insurance resources that have proved popular here are shown below. |
||||
|
