check out this web site.
if i have read correctly, it says under eu law at present, bikes dont have to have an mot.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/vosa/repository/MoT
look at issue 52 dec 2011 page 6

i'm not 100% sure how to confirm this or how long this directive has been in force.

i would have thought MAG would be able to shed light on this.

if it's true i wonder if we could get a refund for all the mot's we have had to pay for over the years.
or even money back from the courts people have paid in fines for having "no mot" and therefore no valid insurance if out on the roads.

also possible recompense for confiscated bikes seized for lack of "mot"

hope this is true
would love to see shit hit the fan in the way of mass compensation claims against the government

 

                                                                                                                                                                             

copied and pasted your link and it doesn't work. I think it's highly unlikely to be accurate somehow, and if is is I'm not sure I actually agree with it. There's enough dangerous people out on the roads without dangerous vehicles being added to it.
                                                                                                                                                                             

  I think that MOT testing is essential, as Simon said, it makes sure vehicles are road worthy and that can't be a bad thing.   Think back (if you're old enough) to the days when there were a lot of rusty old bangers on the road, it's uncommon to see them these days and when you do they stand out like sore thumbs.   My first thought, when I see one, is I wonder if that vehicle is insured? If the driver can't/won't afford the upkeep of a vehicle they are probably unlikely to have essentials such as MOT and insurance.   I don't want us to become a nation of suers (is that a word? lol) someone has to pay the money for compensation claims so somewhere along the line it will probably be those who do abide by the laws of the road.    I'd rather we were all responsible citizens and cared about others and how our actions affect others then maybe there'd be less accidents and less need for compensation.                                                                                                                                                                               

hi sandi and simon
i must say sorry for giving the wrong impression.

as an mot tester i see plenty of absolute "sheds" that should never be on the road.
but i  still have to "pass and advise" on lots of stuff because on the day of test it just about passes.
some people think that it means their car/bike is roadworthy for the next 12 months.
the mot is just the bare minimum that the ministry requires.
it does not mean its fit to use on the road.
some never fix any of the advisories and within a few weeks their car/bike is seriously dangerous. yet continue to use them till the next mot.

i receive a quarterly magazine from vosa called matters of testing.
it can be found on the vosa website.
the article i mentioned can be found on page 6 of the dec 2011 issue

as for compensation
it was just for people who did'nt realise that their mot had ran out and then being hit with a fine. when in fact under eu law they dont need one.
i think all vehicles should have an mot every 12 months or 12000 mls whichever comes first. but this will never happen.

i have no doubt that the majority of bikers want to ride a safely
there is no room for error on two wheels.

there are a few however who do ride dangerous bikes.
and this is where the mot  should sort them out.

but as i said it can just about pass and its back on the road for 12 months again.

personally i think that if if you have no road tax or mot (if needed)you should not be on the roads. and if you are out and do injure/kill someone you should be locked-up.

sorry for the rant. but a close friend of mine was killed by someone who drove a car that had passed an mot with 2 pages of advisories.
yet 6 weeks later with no repairs done that car killed him.

and guess what. she only got a 12 month suspended sentence.

ride safe everyone



                                                                                                                                                                             

As far as the EU is concerned, hopefully, these faceless,gravy train, talentless Liberals with XXX pensions will soon be looking for new jobs. Chances are , they'll fall right into one. As far as MOT's are concerned an MOT test is far to leanient in all aspects of safety. It is the MINIMUM LEGAL REQUIREMENT until twelve months later. Woeful.

well said karl m                                                                                                                                                                             

Can someone tell me do i NEED a mot yes or no. I'm a mechanic by trade for hgv but im quite good on bikes so my bike is definitely safe. Infact i took the block apart last month to inspect the pistons.

                                                                                                                                                                             

Thanks for the explanation Buxton but I still don't think, as Ho has pointed out, that it's clear as to weather an MOT is required or not. I'll go and have a look at the vosa link in a minute but I personally don't favour anyone's chances in court if they use this thread as a defence when riding without an MOT.
It should be noted that whilst vehicles over 3 years old are, as we assume, required to have a valid MOT certificate, this is based on the condition of the vehicle at the time of the test. The law also requires that a vehicle used on the public road would be capable of passing an MOT, so if 6 months after passing an MOT the vehicle becomes in a condition where it would not pass it would be illegal even though it has a current MOT certificate.                                                                                                                                                                             

You are right in what you are saying, however Tge argument has been put forward that the MoT test is not to ensure your vehicle is roadworthy but the ensure it meets variouse regulations ie emissions etc.

Currently, both the age and the categories of vehicles requiring the MoT test in GB go further than the EU Directive on roadworthiness test 2009/40/EC, which only subjects post-1960 registered vehicles to a compulsory roadworthiness test and does not require motorcycles of any age to do a statutory roadworthiness test.

And I for one think it's right that we have unroadworthy vehicles removed via this test every year.

An MOT on bike, car, taxi, bus, wagon, any class of vehicle, DOES NOT mean it fully meets all legal requirements. Chances are, if you stay on top of bike servicing, whether you have a local garage or do it yourself, all good. Always have an MOT, regardless of year. It does no harm and it's cheap as chips. Please let's not mention EU on this post anymore. Infact, any post. By talking about it, it lives but not for much longer. We may start hearing U.K again. Don't start me.

I ride a dangerous bike and it doesnt need an MOT until its three years old, in fact i would go further and say there are a fair few dangerous ones out there straight from the shop, thank feck!!!! Would not enjoy riding a safe bike really - if there is such a thing.

No such thing as a dangerous bike, only a dangerous rider. Both have limitations. At least we never mentioned EU.
                                                                                                                                                                             

No dangerous bikes out there ?

Would beg to differ like cars or any other vehicle not maintained correctly it is lethal ok yes idiot drivers/riders are also a danger to others, but you cannot say its only the rider

                                                                                                                                                                             

There are No dangerous bikes on the road. At what point does a bike become dangerous to ride? If so, is it not down to the rider to put problems right before using on the road?                                                                                                                                                                             

  There are No dangerous bikes on the road That's a statement I'd need proof of to believe.   My definition of a dangerous bike:   Any part of the bike that is likely to drop off, or not work as it should, and therefore likely to cause, or be involved in, an accident.   A bike isn't dangerous because it can reach speeds well over the limit, in that case it is the biker who is dangerous, those kinds of speed should be left to the race track not public roads.   If, as stated, an M.O.T test requires only the bare minimum criteria then it must be another money-making racket for the government.                                                                                                                                                                                        

I agree with your definition of a bike that could be dangerous. But it only becomes a danger when a person puts it on a public highway. It is the users responsability to make sure it confirms to the minimum legal requirements(which isn't much). There are to many people out there on our roads that take vehicle matainence far to lightly. As an MOT tester I am appalled, daily, by the condition of some vehicles. Which brings me back to the point that there are no dangerous bikes ON THE ROAD only dangerous riders.

I posted this on the V5 doc forum. It may be part of this and there could be some confusion, in that an MOT test is required but the certificate itself is not necessary.   Paperless that is the way things are going. I read somewhere, I think MCN web site, that it has been proposed to do away with insurance certificates, paper part driving licences and MOT certificates. This apparently is to embrass the computer age. All these details are held on central data bases making cetificates not worth the paper they are written on. Number plate recognition tells all about a vehicle and the keeper.   I may be wrong here but that is what I read.   I do like to have the paper work, if only for quick reference when it istime to renew.                                                                                                                                                                             

You are correct in what you say. All paperwork regarding vehicle ownership and useage will soon be all on database only. Next on the list are toilet issues. Wiping of bits will need to be logged.                                                                                                                                                                             

As an ex mot tester nmyself and stil in the trade I was fuming that New yrs eve a private hire/taxi came in for brake work...the pads and discs were on the metal and had been for a while, he wanted us to just fit pads....we refused..so begrudgingly he had discs fitted too, but demanded a discount....as taxi drivers alwys do. BUT..all four tyres were illegal or bordering illegal, one had a big bulge in the sidewall,he would not have them changed, he left the premises at 4pm to begin his busy New yrs Eve schedule... Since then he has returned to have his handbrake adjusted..still on the same tyres! WHY does he risk his passengers lives so and why hasnt the message I left at the local cop shop New yrs eve been acted upon! makes me soo angry...I could throw the phne down!!!                                                                                                                                                                             

my apologies the last post a little off topic but goes to show MOTs/enforcment has a long way to go to be effective...