Classic Tax
- Thread starter Monya1112
- Start date
Tax is always whole months. When you pay your tax it's always from the 1st of the month. So if you taxed it today (11th May) you still pay for the whole of may.
A year 2000 is not old enough to be tax exempt.
A year 2000 is not old enough to be tax exempt.
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2016
- Points
- 144
- Location
- Spaldingski, Lincs
- Model of Z
- 3 litre Z3 pretending to be Italian exotica. Two previous E89 Z4s.
Only 15 more years to go. It will fly by.
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2023
- Points
- 66
Nor is it old enough to take to 'classic' shows...
I drove my 1998 Z3 into one by mistake at my local Tesco last Wednesday night, it's a 'classic' coffee evening thingie they do one Wednesday per month, and they tried to hi-jack me and direct me into their area of car park. I think, as I wasn't the youngest there by many years, they were amazed when I told them it was by no means old enough and I'd come back in 13 years or so.
I get the opposite comments - as the Z3 is quite unusual in France, people think it is a new type of BMW!
Thank you Duncodin,
My husband said the same lol
I thought it becomes a classic when it is 25 years old?Nor is it old enough to take to 'classic' shows...
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2016
- Points
- 253
- Location
- Maybole , South Ayrshire
- Model of Z
- Z3 Individual Dakar / Orinoco Individual
Agreed Mike tax and mot exemption is now a rolling 40 yr old.
Stephen
Stephen
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2016
- Points
- 144
- Location
- Spaldingski, Lincs
- Model of Z
- 3 litre Z3 pretending to be Italian exotica. Two previous E89 Z4s.
I don't quite understand the logic in allowing 40 year old plus cars to be MOT exempt (tax yes...as they have paid their dues).
Surely the whole point of an MOT is to make sure a car is safe to drive on the road? Therefore it stands to reason that a car is more likely to have major faults, structural issues, rust, etc the older it gets, which make it less safe to drive.
If I were in charge, I think I would start the MOT test at 4 or 5 years and it had to be tested every year until it was 30, then tested every 6 months until it is scrapped. Makes much more sense to me.
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2016
- Points
- 253
- Location
- Maybole , South Ayrshire
- Model of Z
- Z3 Individual Dakar / Orinoco Individual
Get when your saying @Pond and a lot of the insurance companies are of similar views.
A lot will request either a mot or engineers report on a proper classic to make sure you haven’t went on ebay bought a 50 yr old rot box and are now happily tootling around in it.
I have a 1966 hillman super minx in tomorrow for an mot for that very reason
The car is mint i have mot'd it before but insurance will only honour the agreed value if it gets annual test.
Stephen.
A lot will request either a mot or engineers report on a proper classic to make sure you haven’t went on ebay bought a 50 yr old rot box and are now happily tootling around in it.
I have a 1966 hillman super minx in tomorrow for an mot for that very reason
The car is mint i have mot'd it before but insurance will only honour the agreed value if it gets annual test.
Stephen.
It does need a tester with an understanding of how older cars work though with the ability to make his/her own mind up rather than just ticking boxes on the computer.
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2016
- Points
- 253
- Location
- Maybole , South Ayrshire
- Model of Z
- Z3 Individual Dakar / Orinoco Individual
This is also true.
Like i have a full ATL mot ramp but the Hillman will get a standard 2 man mot tomorrow and i will not be attacking it with the shaker plates that i put modern cars on as even though its in nice condition it may not appreciate it.
Stephen.
. . and I think that's the decision the govt had to make. Testing 50 year old cars can be a different kettle of fish and the youth of today aren't paid, or even learn, how to work on their own initiative. Just cheaper to let old cars avoid MOT rather than design a testing system that knows the the ins and outs of a MK2 Jag.
The theory is that people who own classic cars will look after them properly. But that's load of rot. Literally.
I'm quite lazy. I think I'd cut.corners if given the option.
Anyone see that Car SOS Porsche 356 episode. Loverly car. Huge sheets of GRP holding the floor together. Mega bodge jobs over many years needing to be undone. I kinda like that show because it shows the grp and pop riveting antics that so called classic enthusiasts get up to when left to their own devices.
We do need some kind of test for classics but I don't know how it will work.
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2016
- Points
- 144
- Location
- Spaldingski, Lincs
- Model of Z
- 3 litre Z3 pretending to be Italian exotica. Two previous E89 Z4s.
It would work the same as any modern car IMO. The ONLY real point of an MOT test is to ensure a car is safe to use the roads (to protect others primarily). All of the 'tests' during an MOT for a 39 year old car, can be used on a car of any age. OK there will be slight differences with things like brake force, etc, but those can easily be changed for cars of specific ages.
I really don't see it being very complicated.
At the end of the day ANY test is better than none.
Agreed. They could be changed. But where is this documented? Does somebody need to write up a document giving the brake force of cars of specific ages? It's not just the age. Also the make and model. 1978 Mercedes W116 had ABS. BMW didn't get ABS till almost a decade later.
Even more modern cars. How many Z3's have failed MOT and gone to SpursFan just because the MOT tester didn't know that the outer sills are not structural. There could (should?) be a document that pops up explaining that to the tester when he/she brings up the make model on his computer.
We live in an age where people are not taught to to know stuff. They are taught to fill out tick boxes on a form. The reason is that the 'person' can't be held responsible for anything. He/She just needs to say 'well, I filled in the form and Computer Said No (or Yes as the case may be). Nobody, except us older folks, actually wants to decide anything using their own brain.
I have (had?) a 'C' issue with my prostate. Went to see the (very) highly paid specialist and he gave me my gleason score, likelihood of successful op, life expectancy with/without treatment etc. I asked him what the score meant and how he'd arrived at his findings. He turned his computer monitor round to show me and said "We put the test results into this form and it gives us the score and what to do about it".
He'd already asked me what I did for a living - software engineer I said - so I think he was bragging about his new fangle computer app that, to be honest, looked more like something I knocked up 40+ years ago on my ZX81. Of course I just smiled and nodded. Didn't want to offend him because he's the guy holding the knife.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2023
- Points
- 66
I don't agree with MOT exemption at all, even though it gets me off testing four cars every year. I look at some of the wrecks being sold online as "Tax and MOT-exempt" which some seem to think means instant 'get in and drive' even though they've been off the road for years. They must have an MOT first before they can be exempt afterwards! I think we do need a second pair of eyes sometimes.
I also don't agree with lowering the 'historic' rate of tax to 20 years even though the Z3 costs me £345 per year; one argument recently was that the Classic Car movement generates £18,000,000 per year through parts and support so the more classics, the more money. I'm sure the 'normal' road-going industry generates more than that.
Iv had lots of 40+yr old cars and logic says its wrong, however, as a classic owner, i probably take care of my vehicles far more that a newer car, and that stands with ever person i know who owns classic cars.