We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember The Natural Philosopher saying something like:
Exactly, and despite what Dennis and Co wish, the Law has a different set of conditions for 'unroadworthy' to them.
That happen to include failing an MOT test. There are plenty of other ways to be un-roadworthy.
snip
Nothing new there then. :-)
How does a seized centre rear seat belt make a car un-roadworthy? Or a blown airbag warning light? Or a number plate with incorrect spacing?
"PM" gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
ITYM ABS. Airbags aren't testable at all.
By preventing you from having a certificate to say its roadworthy. No certificate and its not roadworthy by definition. Roadworthy is not the same as safe in case people are missing the point. If you want to know if you will get done then don't ask me I am not a policeman, but I would do you if I were.
That would be the one :-)
The MOT certificate specifically states that it does NOT indicate the car is roadworthy.
So any foreign-registered car over here temporarily is, by definition, not roadworthy?
You can get done for not having a valid MOT certificate or for having an unroadworthy car. They are not one and the same thing.
It actually states "it does not mean that the vehicle [...] will continue to be roadworthy for the next year."
How could it? It indicates the car was deemed roadworthy by one inspector at one point in time. Any number of things could have gone wrong since then.
MBQ
The statement was not having one (on a UK registered car) means its un-roadworthy, having one was not mentioned.
We are talking about the UK here.
Or both.
"dennis@home" gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
You stupid, stupid, stupid little man.
What is your definition of unroadworthy?
They are still not one and the same thing.
Rules are for the guidance of wise men, and the obedience of fools.
Lets put it this way there are a lot of cars on the road that I think are un-roadworthy. I would up the brake test to about 80% to start with and introduce a shock absorber test. Fails for accident damage not being repaired. Then there would be compulsory testing of drivers every five years or more frequently if they have points or accidents. The list is too long to post here and it doesn't even get as far as naming geoff.
Not only would it be safer but there would be less congestion.
The rules say that you are one of the fools.
Where?
In message , "dennis@home" writes
Says it all, doesn't it
Dennis JUST DOESN'T GET IT
Wow, thanks for that.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.