Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Edwin
Thank you both. I don't entirely disagree at all ... 
I've got other stuff on my mind but as best I can think, my basic thoughts re historic status remains:
1. In the current political fiscal situation, the tax exemption might be withdrawn or reduced, maybe at a budget not too far ahead.
2. Insurance premiums for historic status if there is no mot might increase depending on claims data. Some insurers now charge higher premiums to very low mleage drivers ...
3. Self inspection is no commendation. Including for the owner's own safety. How many expert owners overlook or forget to check tyre miss-match and measure tread check for damage, corrosion, lights, play or wear in suspension ..... &c &c &c?
4. Buyers and any significant other with a veto, might well be influenced by such matters as above.
For myself, I would buy a historic status car, if, the car ticked the boxes for me, but, I would be very cautious in absence of a searchable history of independent inspections. And reluctant to pay a premium, 'cos re all things including the continuation of historic status .... prediction is difficult especially concerning the future ... init.
Stephen
. |
It wouldn't be the first time tax exemption had been restricted, witness one of Tony B. Liars first deeds on gaining power in 1998, stopped the rolling 25 (as it was then) year exemption and then only cars that were 25 years or older at the time could claim it, in other words cars from 1973 or older.
When the Conservatives regained power, they reintroduced a rolling exemption but increased the age to 40 years. Given the classic car industry brings £billions of revenue to the country each year, you'd think the govt (whoever they may be) would be more sympathetic to encouraging the use of older cars that have already paid back their carbon footprint from manufacture and if there happens to be an EMP blast, most will keep running unlike the new BEVs (and many "moderns") that will simply die due to the complex electronic controls.
Insurers are a law unto themselves so who knows what they will do with premiums? They are a necessary evil that need regulating properly so they can't charge stupidly large premiums for no good reason.
Self inspection/certification for MoT purposes is fallible. Very few home mechanics have a 4-post ramp to be able to properly inspect the underside (where most structural corrosion happens), a brake roller tester or a headlamp beam setter to correctly align the headlamps. There's also the matter of interpretation. Some may consider surface rust to be the only corrosion in a panel eg floorpan within 30cm of a seat belt mount but it might be easily proved on a proper ramp with a CAT (Corrosion Assessment Tool) that it is in fact crumbly in a much larger area and the surface rust is only where it's damaged the coating (paint, underseal etc) causing it to flake off.
For that reason i would always (and have) urged even the most fastidious self-certifiers to have an MoT periodically just for their own peace of mind.
As for predicting the future, "Who controls the present, controls the past. Who controls the past, controls the future" (Eric Arthur Blair, c 1947) so we're all stumped as it depends which govt happens to be in power and whether they've read 1984 and happen to be a classic car enthusiast or not.