# Advance MOT



## Glandwr (Jun 12, 2006)

Hi its probably under my nose I know but I've just spent a long time searching the forums and direct gov mot and can't find the answer. 

How far in advance can you mot your motor and have continuity of certificates? I'm sure I read somewhere on this site that you can now do it so many days/weeks in advance of the old one running out. 

Be useful for me to know Thank you Dick


----------



## camper69 (Aug 30, 2007)

Its one month.

Derek


----------



## olley (May 1, 2005)

Hi Dick I believe its 28 days.

Olley


----------



## asprn (Feb 10, 2006)

olley said:


> Hi Dick I believe its 28 days.


Not quite correct, technically. It's one calendar month.  You still win a small prize though.

Dougie.


----------



## Motorhomersimpson (May 9, 2005)

Hi Dick,

as far I can remember it's 1 month in advance, so this then gives you a 13 month MOT.

However, if you are going away and need it done you can MOT a vehicle any time whilst the current MOT is running, it's just if you do MOT it, say with 5 weeks remaining, it will then start from the actual date you take it in.

I hope that sense, it does to me but I'm writing it  

MHS...Rob


----------



## Motorhomersimpson (May 9, 2005)

asprn said:


> Not quite correct, technically. It's one calendar month.  You still win a small prize though.
> 
> Dougie.


Hey! ... I said a month do I get a big prize then 

Crossed posts, I posted then saw the answer from Olley which wasn't on a postcard :lol:

MHS...Rob


----------



## camper69 (Aug 30, 2007)

I was there first. Its my prize :lol: :lol: 

Derek


----------



## asprn (Feb 10, 2006)

Motorhomersimpson said:


> Hey! ... I said a month do I get a big prize then


Nope, 'cos you said, "I hope that sense", which of course doughnut.



camper69 said:


> I was there first. Its my prize :lol: :lol:


Yes, you win the big one.

:roll: 

Dougie.


----------



## Motorhomersimpson (May 9, 2005)

camper69 said:


> I was there first. Its my prize :lol: :lol:
> 
> Derek


Damn ... how did you get in there as well .... I must look further up the threads in future, or learn to type faster :lol: ... Well done Derek 

MHS...Rob


----------



## Motorhomersimpson (May 9, 2005)

asprn said:


> Nope, 'cos you said, "I hope that sense", which of course doughnut.Dougie.


Hi Dougie,

my signature says it all :wink: :lol:

Typo of the month there! Maybe even the year 

MHS...Rob


----------



## crimpleken (Jan 13, 2009)

*Advance M.O.T.*

It is written on the old certificate.
Crimpleken


----------



## olley (May 1, 2005)

Small prize is fine Dougie, I will PM the address to send it to. :lol: 

Olley


----------



## Jezport (Jun 19, 2008)

I was told 28 days by a main dealer :?


----------



## asprn (Feb 10, 2006)

Jezport said:


> I was told 28 days by a main dealer :?


Only goes to show then. 

Dougie.


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

Motorhomersimpson said:


> Hi Dick,
> 
> as far I can remember it's 1 month in advance, so this then gives you a 13 month MOT.
> 
> ...


I thought that you still got a 13 month cistificate regardless of when you tested it provided there was at least one month remaining on it.

Kev.

do i get a prize


----------



## Glandwr (Jun 12, 2006)

Thanks to all and particularly to Dougie for looking after what should have been my obligation, the prizes. However you all have points (and you know what points mean as Humphrey Lyttleton was fond of saying).

There does seem to be conflict of opinion here though, and Kev has really played a wild card.

If I explain the reason I need to know you will appreciate the importance. 

Now I need to negotiate on a car with a private buyer tonight (I have already driven hundreds of miles in it in my sleep last night and want it ASAP - it’s a top range BMW 3 series).

MOT is up Aug 13th one of my offers will be based on him arranging the MOT (being greedy I also want the extra month)

According to Dougie I shall have to wait until a week today (13th), or until the 17th according to the 28 day school. If Kev is right I could turn up with the readies Monday night and still have a 13mt MOT. 

Help me please, those that know about boy’s toys will know that I can’t wait to get it.

Dick

edit: sorry that should read private seller


----------



## richardjames (Feb 1, 2006)

I got caught out by this one this year - my MOT was due 1st May - booked van in for 1st April (saturday) - turned up and the system would not accept it - the next day yes so I assume from this that it is thirty days! 8O


----------



## duxdeluxe (Sep 2, 2007)

I'm not sure but I think that it only applies to renewals - the first MOT is 12 months only, but I could be wrong


----------



## asprn (Feb 10, 2006)

Glandwr said:


> According to Dougie I shall have to wait until a week today (13th), or until the 17th according to the 28 day school


You can get your MoT done up to one calendar month before the current one expires. The new one will expire 12 months after the existing one does so you will have in effect a 13 month MoT certificate.

The computerised system will only allow forward dating in your case from 14th July. On 13th July, it will not allow forward dating at all.

Dougie.


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

Hmm, Dougie is probably correct, but I think my way would be a fairer way of doing things.

Kev.


----------



## asprn (Feb 10, 2006)

Kev_n_Liz said:


> Hmm, Dougie is probably correct, but I think my way would be a fairer way of doing things


The extra month allowed in the circumstances I've outlined above, is a concession. Doing it your way would provide for 13-month MoTs as standard for any vehicle which was tested and which held a current MoT. That's why that could never be a concession.

Dougie.


----------



## Glandwr (Jun 12, 2006)

Students of human nature would have realised that I could'nt wait. Deal done, MOT booked for tues, pick up tues evening. But I have learnt something thanks again


----------



## asprn (Feb 10, 2006)

Glandwr said:


> Students of human nature would have realised that I could'nt wait. Deal done, MOT booked for tues, pick up tues evening. But I have learnt something thanks again


Quite right.  Knowledge is power.

Dougie.


----------



## 107558 (Oct 10, 2007)

If you get the MOT done early (whether within the calendar month or not) and it fails, can you still run the vehicle until the current MOT expires?


----------



## asprn (Feb 10, 2006)

JQL said:


> If you get the MOT done early (whether within the calendar month or not) and it fails, can you still run the vehicle until the current MOT expires?


You can, but you will be using the vehicle with the defect(s) disclosed on the new failure certificate, and consequently run the risk of being prosecuted for them.

Dougie.


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

asprn said:


> The extra month allowed in the circumstances I've outlined above, is a concession. Doing it your way ("Kev n Liz" for clarity) would provide for 13-month MoTs as standard for any vehicle which was tested and which held a current MoT. That's why that could never be a concession.
> 
> Dougie.


There would therefore be no need for a concession if they just allowed you to take it in whenever, I don't see a problem with it being that way, and the MOT trade would be a little busier.

Kev.


----------



## asprn (Feb 10, 2006)

Kev_n_Liz said:


> There would therefore be no need for a concession if they just allowed you to take it in whenever, I don't see a problem with it being that way


They do just allow you to take it in whenever, and you get a full 12-month MoT as a result. Why should you expect a 13-month MoT as the norm? The line has been drawn at 12 months, and in my opinion, rightly so, for road safety reasons.

Taking your argument to its conclusion, why not suggest a 2-yearly MoT as per the German arrangement? Then when you MoT your vehicle at any stage during the 2 years, you walk out with a full 24-month MoT. It's not an argument I support in the slightest, but it is an argument. Concessions are just that - concessions. What you're suggesting simply highlights the risk in offering any concession - giving an inch etc.

Dougie.


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

Dougie,

I didn't realise I was in any argument, my position is fine as it is, and I don't need you or anyone else to tell me what is or is not a good idea, it was simply a suggestion.

If it is OK to have a 13 month MOT certificate when you test a vehicle with one month remaining, then I don't see a problem with doing it at any time during the MOT's 12 month period, if you don't like that as a suggestion, I shall not sleep for a whole second.

I never suggested a 2 year test at any point, and would not do so.

Kev.


----------



## asprn (Feb 10, 2006)

Kev_n_Liz said:


> I didn't realise I was in any argument


You're not, at least not with me. You appear to have misconstrued my use of the word "argument". Its prime use is "point", and to argue a point does not need to be confrontational, although unfortunately it often does. Nothing confrontational in my meaning whatsoever.



Kev_n_Liz said:


> my position is fine as it is, and I don't need you or anyone else to tell me what is or is not a good idea, it was simply a suggestion


Indeed, and I was countering that suggestion with an opinion. That's what I understand debate to be. I actually think though I probably _can_ tell you what I think is a good idea, or indeed what I think is a bad idea, as this is a discussion forum. In the same vein, you can do so too - as indeed you did with your suggestion. The important thing - again in my opinion - is to do so in a spirit of discussion, which is what I though we were doing.



Kev_n_Liz said:


> If it is OK to have a 13 month MOT certificate when you test a vehicle with one month remaining, then I don't see a problem with doing it at any time during the MOT's 12 month period


I fully understand the point you made, and - as I've said - I countered it with my own opinion (which you appear not to like either).



Kev_n_Liz said:


> if you don't like that as a suggestion, I shall not sleep for a whole second


I couldn't care less either. 



Kev_n_Liz said:


> I never suggested a 2 year test at any point, and would not do so


Erm - indeed. That was me who suggested it as a possible "taking your argument to its conclusion". As I thought I made clear, I also do not hold with a 2-year MoT, but there's nothing to stop us discussing it.

Where's the fire? 8O

Dougie.


----------



## b16duv (Feb 14, 2006)

Can't you have an MOT test at any time on a vehicle, though if it fails, that supercedes any previous pass certificate?

David


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

Yes, you can take any vehicle at any time to have an MOT, (if they're open) although it is wise to book it first and with HGV you can only have a test if it is booked in advance.

I believe but stand to be corrected by the forum, that you do not need to be taxed to go your MOT, but you must go straight to and from the testing station, not via 
Tesco, I think this applies to the insurance too but less certain of that, I think you move the vehicle on the testing station insurance, which is why you MUST book it in.

Kev.


----------



## skiboycey (May 21, 2009)

The interesting thing regarding a couple of previous posts on here about the German (and French) system of having MOT's that last 2 years is whether there's any evidence that those countries suffer from higher rates of accidents attributed to preventable mechanical failure or not compared to the UK's rather irritating one-year system which obliges us all to return to the UK at great expense to get a piece of paper if we happen to be travelling when the date falls.

If they do suffer from higher mechanically attributable accidents then why don't their safety lobbies get their governments to change the period to 12 months. If they don't then why does the UK have a 12 month period? I would guess this would be due to powerful lobbying from the motor trade and garage owners as it provides them with a great deal of business.

I can't believe countries like Germany or France would let this go on if there were more accidents so I'd assume we all have to go through this annoying yearly inconvenience purely to make garage owners and the motor trade more money and not for the advertised safety benefits no matter how anecdotally obvious this may seem on first impressions.

The power of reductionist logic... 

Cheers, Mark


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

Mark,

I take your points and agree there is need for information re 2 year testing, not sure it's a good idea, but not entirely against it, locally Taxis have a six week test as do HGV trucks, not an MOT admitted but still a roadworthyness check.

The problem of having to come back to have a test done is simply avoided by having it done before you go (a lot cheaper than returning) you do not mention if you are meaning the initial test at 3 years or the standard 12 month test, so I go for the latter as it is more common.

As I suggested earlier a 13 month certificate would be useful in this situation, if of course you had more than 1 month remaining.

Kev.


----------



## skiboycey (May 21, 2009)

Following the logic of allowing new vehicles 3 years free from an MOT one might think that there would then be a stepped testing proceedure. Perhaps an MOT every 2 years till ten years of age then one a year after that.

Again if it's good enough for the Germans and French I don't see why the UK needs it to be any more. Lobbying from the industry seems the obvious answer as there are almost no safety benefits otherwise other countries who are perfectly capable of reading their accident statistics would follow the UK's lead.

I happen to spend years abroad not months. I'm never in one country long enough to re-register even if that were possible in many countries which it is not with a camper due to type approval and other plainly illegal counter single-market obstructions put in place by various member states of the EU.

This means coming to the UK once a year is extraordinarily annoying and I suspect many full-timers find it the same. On my previous vans I just didn't bother and got a local MOT but I could stand a total loss on them in the event of an insurance claim. I can't on the new one as it's too expensive so I'll now have to toe the line and blow thousands of tonnes of carbon dioxide into the air just to come to the UK to get a stupid piece of paper when a Spanish or French MOT is just as valid for safety but not accepted by our beloved government (again I suspect due to lobbying from UK garages and trade).

Cheers, Mark.


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

skiboycey said:


> This means coming to the UK once a year is extraordinarily annoying and I suspect many full-timers find it the same. On my previous vans I just didn't bother and got a local MOT but I could stand a total loss on them in the event of an insurance claim. I can't on the new one as it's too expensive so I'll now have to toe the line and blow thousands of tonnes of carbon dioxide into the air just to come to the UK to get a stupid piece of paper when a Spanish or French MOT is just as valid for safety but not accepted by our beloved government (again I suspect due to lobbying from UK garages and trade).
> 
> Cheers, Mark.


Sorry Mark, not very up on this side of things, but obviously if you're away all the time, there should be a mechanism where the MOT of any country in the EU should be valid for all member nations insurance/police purposes otherwise what is the point of it all.

Maybe we all need to contact our local and MEP's to see if anything can be done, I seem to remember that if you ask a question they're bound to answer it.

so let's start asking, any suggestions as to the wording to get the best result.

I know there are not too many serious full timers as a percentage of us, but we might all fancy it one day, and some sort of joined up action now might make it more possible.

Kev.


----------

