When you put ‘off the road’ i thought you meant just parked somewhere hence the confusion. The Bmw I have here at home is sorned but I kept one for two years at my sons house 587 mile away and although it too was sorned I still got taken to court for no insurance even after I sent the summons issuer a copy of my traders policy, I fought it on the grounds I stated previously and won the case but it cost me more in travel expenses and lost wages than the fine would have been but it were a matter of principle and the major fact that I was not guilty of any crime ! An EU directive says that I have to notify the MID within 14 days of any vehicle in or coming under my control and failure to do so could incur a £5000 fine but I had taken it off the policy so that directive did not apply in my case.
raymundo:
When you put ‘off the road’ i thought you meant just parked somewhere hence the confusion. The Bmw I have here at home is sorned but I kept one for two years at my sons house 587 mile away and although it too was sorned I still got taken to court for no insurance even after I sent the summons issuer a copy of my traders policy, I fought it on the grounds I stated previously and won the case but it cost me more in travel expenses and lost wages than the fine would have been but it were a matter of principle and the major fact that I was not guilty of any crime ! An EU directive says that I have to notify the MID within 14 days of any vehicle in or coming under my control and failure to do so could incur a £5000 fine but I had taken it off the policy so that directive did not apply in my case.
Sounds all to familiar. They’re a bunch of mike hunts!
robroy:
Spoke to my boy about this, the garage he manages does MOTs.
He reckons rules keep changing since he was hands on, but as far as he knows, there is in effect nothing to stop you driving it as such by law, as technically it has a month to run, but if you do after being told by the examiner it has failed, the insurance is void, so that is when the illegality of driving it kicks in.
Nope.
The vehicle is illegal to use because it doesn’t meet the minimum roadworthiness standards, it has failed a basic roadworthiness inspection. Insurance is not void by not having a MOT.
Conor, you are wrong yet again. I copied from off the Gov.uk website and put it on here and it clearly states the vehivle can be taken away for repair and then agin to a pre booked MoT teting station, only time you couldn’t if it were considered dangerously unsafe. Suggest you read it …
Bking:
He produced the still valid MOT bit of paper but was informed that because the car had failed a DVSA test this was now invalid and he was being done for driving a vehicle with no MOT.
The MOT isn’t invalid, it runs for 12 months from the date of issue. You can however be charged with driving an unroadworthy vehicle no matter how long the MOT has left to run… two different offences.
All a test certificate shows that the vehicle was roadworthy at the time of the test not for the following 12 months, And I’m sure a new MoT failure would invalidate the previous pass cert …
So much misinformation, it’s difficult to know where to start.
First point. An MoT test certificate remains valid until the expiry date given when it was issued (which may be up to 13 months after issue). Submitting the vehicle for another test in advance of this date does not affect this.
Second point. There are no penalty points for not having a valid MoT certificate, and the maximum fine is £1000, not £2500. Anything The Sun prints should be taken with a huge handful of salt (unless it’s the breast measurements of one of their models, in which case it may well be correct). Anyone quoting The Sun in support of any argument deserves to be ridiculed. And then ridiculed some more.
Third point. Having no MoT does not invalidate those parts of your insurance cover which are legally required (i.e. 3rd Party liabilites). Same applies regarding mechanical defects (or driving while drunk for that matter). These things may well affect cover for your own damage (if the policy is a Comprehensive one), but they cannot refuse a 3rd Party claim on these grounds. Because of this, the offence of Driving Without Insurance is not committed just because your car has no MoT or is unroadworthy (or because you are drunk or driving like a ■■■■).
Fourth point. The offence for which you can be fined £2500 and get three penalty points (as reported in The Sun) is the Con & Use offence of using a vehicle in a dangerous condition. This has nothing at all to do with the presence of a valid MoT certificate or how recently an MoT test was carried out. These are the defects for which an MoT tester would not only issue a failure notice but would also note as being “Dangerous” faults. The MoT failure notice would clearly state this.
Gembo…and Raymondo are both correct on the two points…be aware.
raymundo:
All a test certificate shows that the vehicle was roadworthy at the time of the test not for the following 12 months,
Correct.
raymundo:
And I’m sure a new MoT failure would invalidate the previous pass cert …
Nooo! It’s valid for 12 months “You can take your vehicle away if your MOT certificate is still valid.” taken from the Government website! A fail doesn’t invalidate a current MOT.
Using an unroadworthy vehicle is a totally different offence, it’s this that’s causing the confusion.
True you can take the vehicle away … to have any defects rectified but not to take your aged mum to the seaside on a jolley !! 
So many people posting facts that they want to be correct ! If you take a vehicle to get an MoT and it fails but the old cert still have time left how the hell can the car still have a valid MoT when it’s just failed one ■■ Surely the later one would be the one to go by ?
raymundo:
True you can take the vehicle away … to have any defects rectified but not to take your aged mum to the seaside on a jolley !!
You can use it for whatever you like while the old certificate remains valid (which it does until the expiry date stated on it). If there are defects (such as a bald tyre or duff headlamp) you could be prosecuted for those - but that would apply regardless of its MoT test status.
If the vehicle has no current MoT certificate then yes, you can only take it to/from a pre-booked test or from the test centre to a repairer (and back again), but if it has a current certificate (i.e. you took it for test while the old certificate was still valid) then this restriction does not apply.
raymundo:
So many people posting facts that they want to be correct ! If you take a vehicle to get an MoT and it fails but the old cert still have time left how the hell can the car still have a valid MoT when it’s just failed one ■■ Surely the later one would be the one to go by ?
I’m not “posting facts that I want to be correct” - I am simply stating what the legal position is. You may or may not understand or accept it, but that’s what it is.
Any ministry men on here who can clarify this one way or the other ■■ As I find it hard to believe that you can get a motor tested one day and it passes but then a few days later take it in for another which it fails but you can still drive it on the old certificate for another 11 months or so? Why would it not show up on the database within a few days as a fail cos all tests are all logged with DVSA ■■
Seems like even the ministry cant make their minds up …
lot of speculation exists around the topic online, with a number of sites claiming that drivers are within their rights to continue using a car with an in-date MOT certificate, even a tester has since deemed it unroadworthy.
But now the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) has updated its guidelines, saying: “You must not drive the vehicle on the road if it fails the test, even if the MOT hasn’t run out.”
It adds that the only exceptions are to drive to have the defects fixed, or to a pre-booked MOT appointment.
If you’re caught driving a car in a dangerous condition, you could face a fine of up to £2,500, a driving ban and three penalty points.
Update: February 2016
Since running this story, the DVSA has updated its website again – to say the complete opposite of what it originally said.
It now states: “You can take your vehicle away if your MOT certificate is still valid.”
Beware, though – if you do drive your car away it is technically unroadworthy. If you were to be caught driving a dangerous vehicle, you could be prosecuted – and you definitely can’t plead ignorance if you have an MoT fail sheet informing you of this.
In conclusion I don’t believe any of this thread because it was started by Bking stating and I quote …
‘Mate of mine decided to get his car MOTd a month early’’
has he got any mates ■■ 
raymundo:
In conclusion I don’t believe any of this thread because it was started by Bking stating and I quote …
‘Mate of mine decided to get his car MOTd a month early’’has he got any mates ■■
This thread is very confusing; firstly (as previously mentioned) I find it hard to believe that Bking has any mates that he’s not alienated and received a kicking from, and secondly when Roymondo and Raymundo start debating with each other if you don’t read the posters name carefully you get to thinking that it’s one man having his own personal meltdown!
the maoster:
This thread is very confusing; firstly (as previously mentioned) I find it hard to believe that Bking has any mates that he’s not alienated and received a kicking from, and secondly when Roymondo and Raymundo start debating with each other if you don’t read the posters name carefully you get to thinking that it’s one man having his own personal meltdown!
+1
raymundo:
In conclusion I don’t believe any of this thread because it was started by Bking stating and I quote …
‘Mate of mine decided to get his car MOTd a month early’’has he got any mates ■■
Yes none of them have the prima donna attitude of a “truck driver” fortunately.
The reason you get the tug is because when a vehicle is MOTd the test has to be logged onto the DVSA data base and a fail over rides any previous mot.
A “voulantary” mot check does not have to go onto the data base so does not come up on plods spy machine in his panda.