Seriously?

[BicycleBoy]

Originally Posted by Stephen Edwin

Is there really a current historic status premium being paid consistently across all sales?

Historic vehicle status will save you £££ a year in tax & MOT costs, every year. They're worth that much more, at least. Add in any extra insurance reductions, ULEZ exemptions et al and the price increase is almost baked in.

[Moomoo]

Originally Posted by BicycleBoy

Historic vehicle status will save you £££ a year in tax & MOT costs, every year. They're worth that much more, at least. Add in any extra insurance reductions, ULEZ exemptions et al and the price increase is almost baked in.

I concur, however, when I was looking for my 240, I bought newer because I am no linger able/willing to do the bodywork, heavy mechanical maintenance an older vehicle may need.
The eight years of £280 ved until tax exemption is one I'll have to take on the chin!
I'd still MOT a car even if exempt.

I can understand why 40 plus motors are dearer and wanted by some more able buyers!

[Stephen Edwin]

Originally Posted by BicycleBoy

Historic vehicle status will save you £££ a year in tax & MOT costs, every year. They're worth that much more, at least. Add in any extra insurance reductions, ULEZ exemptions et al and the price increase is almost baked in.

Originally Posted by Moomoo

I concur, however, when I was looking for my 240, I bought newer because I am no linger able/willing to do the bodywork, heavy mechanical maintenance an older vehicle may need.
The eight years of £280 ved until tax exemption is one I'll have to take on the chin!
I'd still MOT a car even if exempt.

I can understand why 40 plus motors are dearer and wanted by some more able buyers!

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 In the current political fiscal situation, the tax exemption might be withdrawn or reduced, maybe at a budget not too far ahead.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

.

[Laird Scooby]

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.

[kiloran]

I have a feeling the classic/tax exempt merry-go-round will end soon. Older cars are already being excluded from some city centres, and that's only going to increase. I'd imagine there's a bunch of classics which are unable to run E10 either, which pushes up running costs and offsets any tax/MOT savings. It's difficult to justify swanning around in my 940 at <30mpg which is why she's only likely to be used for long trips (50-odd miles today for example) and the daily will end up being an EV.

There are always distortions in the market - X/Y reg performance cars being a prime example, and also pre '17 low emission cars. This latter one is a very big deal - an extra £125-£155 per year for a typical town car.

[Moomoo]

Our Bolton buddy has pulled the “Gem”!

No longer available.

[XC90Mk1]

I think that it is unwise to have 40 plus year old cars on the road without an mot.

I would also assume that if you smashed it up there would be a loss adjuster looking all over it and if they see a holes floor pan etc would try to wriggle out of paying.

Don’t forget you require your vehicles to be road worthy and that simple, and often silly piece of paper the MOT comes on indemnifies you for 12 months.

You smash up a car and they tell you it’s not road worthy and good luck with the payout!

[Moomoo]

Originally Posted by XC90Mk1

I think that it is unwise to have 40 plus year old cars on the road without an mot.

I would also assume that if you smashed it up there would be a loss adjuster looking all over it and if they see a holes floor pan etc would try to wriggle out of paying.

Don’t forget you require your vehicles to be road worthy and that simple, and often silly piece of paper the MOT comes on indemnifies you for 12 months.

You smash up a car and they tell you it’s not road worthy and good luck with the payout!

100% agreed!👍👍

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by XC90Mk1

I think that it is unwise to have 40 plus year old cars on the road without an mot.

I would also assume that if you smashed it up there would be a loss adjuster looking all over it and if they see a holes floor pan etc would try to wriggle out of paying.

Don’t forget you require your vehicles to be road worthy and that simple, and often silly piece of paper the MOT comes on indemnifies you for 12 months.

You smash up a car and they tell you it’s not road worthy and good luck with the payout!

Originally Posted by Moomoo

100% agreed!👍👍

We think the govt are giving us something useful but in reality, they're giving us enough rope to hang ourselves.

Wait for a few fatalities in 40+ year old cars that haven't seen an MoT station since their 39th birthday and suddenly we'll be faced with 6 monthly MoTs on 40+ year old cars.
A better scenario would have been to relax things to a two-yearly MoT for 40+ YO cars, no stricter than the standard MoT but with allowance for the fact they'd be doing less than half the mileage of a daily driver. At least that way corrosion problems that might be missed because most home mechanics don't have a 4-post ramp inside a nice warm workshop would be found before they caused the trailing arms to part copmany with the chassis rails for example.

[Moomoo]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

We think the govt are giving us something useful but in reality, they're giving us enough rope to hang ourselves.

Wait for a few fatalities in 40+ year old cars that haven't seen an MoT station since their 39th birthday and suddenly we'll be faced with 6 monthly MoTs on 40+ year old cars.
A better scenario would have been to relax things to a two-yearly MoT for 40+ YO cars, no stricter than the standard MoT but with allowance for the fact they'd be doing less than half the mileage of a daily driver. At least that way corrosion problems that might be missed because most home mechanics don't have a 4-post ramp inside a nice warm workshop would be found before they caused the trailing arms to part copmany with the chassis rails for example.

It’s only emissions that need to be relaxed for older motors, my old Landy would not have passed, if checked. Everything else ,OK.
The same is true of most toff’s 41/2 litre Bentleys.

Not that that has any baring at all.🤭