Will DfT's Testing Review Ask the Right Questions?

It has been a clear two months since my last rant about the state of the MOT test and with road safety minister Mike Penning having recently confirmed that a wholesale review of the test will be carried out, it is about time for an update. While almost everybody in the UK industry agrees that moving to two year testing intervals – whether it is in line with the rest of Europe or not – some would argue that a review of the system is overdue. In addition technological advances such as the mandatory fitment of tyre pressure monitoring systems (TPMS – scheduled for 2012) and the widespread use of ESP have moved quicker than legislation or testing rules that examine if these safety critical systems continue to work correctly throughout the life of a car.

The problem is not the testers or indeed the customers that pay to check their vehicles are up to scratch. The problem is – in a nutshell – that the current testing regime has more holes in it than Swiss cheese. For example, did you know that a car with four tyres at 50 per cent inflation can pass an MOT as long as there are no holes in the tread or sidewall and that there is at least 1.6 mm of tread across two-thirds of the tyre? Despite the fact that this much under-inflation would do untold damage to the car’s handling and braking distances, there is nothing to say that this vehicle should fail. In fact Tyre & Accessories has even heard reports that some garages – not tyre specialists I hasten to add – have deliberately allowed for pressures to be lowered to enable vehicles to perform better in other parts of the test.

Regarding TPMS the current MOT rules don’t feature any requirement to test this system despite the fact that it is currently often fitted to cars with run-flat tyres. Yes these tyres can keep going when they are flat, but only for a certain distance (usually about 100 kilometres). If the TPMS system isn’t serviced regularly isn’t there a danger that drivers will be running on flat tyres without even knowing it?

An eMOTive Issue

Moving forward European commission directive 2010/48/EU of 5 July 2010, paragraph 5.2.3, would seem to mandate that tests such as our beloved MOT fail a car with an “air pressure monitoring system malfunctioning or obviously inoperative.” However, without instructions to actively test a TPMS system and in the absence of a car’s own warning light a faulty system would not be “obviously inoperative” and therefore could easily pass a test.

Responding to the news that government had committed to a wholesale review of the MoT, the Institute of Advanced Motorists welcomed the move, but the associateion also asks: Does the three-year UK MoT test unnecessarily “gold plate” the European minimum requirement for roadworthiness – at a cost to UK motorists of £465 million a year? Would the application of European minimum standards be enough to guarantee roadworthiness of UK cars? Is there any evidence that accidents due to vehicle failure are greater in countries that wait four years for a first compulsory roadworthiness test? Good questions that so far remained unanswered.

In addition, Neil Greig, IAM Director of Policy and Research said: “With MoT failure rates of around 21 per cent for three year old cars it is essential that the underlying reasons for so many relatively new cars failing are investigated before any changes are made to MoT test frequency.” This too is a great question.
Figures supplied to the IAM Trust by European motoring organisations show that in some countries where they apply the EU-minimum four years for the first roadworthiness test, the failure rate is lower than in the UK (21.6 per cent), eg France 5.61 per cent, Switzerland 17.5 per cent and Norway 19.9 per cent. However, the failure rate in Spain is higher than the UK, at 32 per cent.

In countries that also test for the first time at three years, failure rates are far lower than in the UK (Germany 4.8 per cent and Austria 10 per cent).

So, with three-year failure rates as they are and with apparent loopholes in the European wording, let’s hope the DfT’s “wholesale review” of the MOT asks the right questions.

Changes in the truck side of things

In the related but quite different arena of truck testing, the RMIF has welcome a pro-active move from VOSA to open up Testing Facilities to the Private sector, allowing non-VOSA employees to run Authorised Testing Facilities, received a positive reaction from the RMI’s Franchised Truck Dealers.
 
This statement from VOSA, along with plans to close two of its own sites before replacement ATF’s are open, is seen as a commitment that VOSA mean business and that the future direction is private sector facilities.
 
In 2010 the uptake to build and open new Authorised Testing Facilities (ATF’s) has been slow, with only seven being operative so far. However, many Designated Premises (DP’s) have upgraded to become ATF’s. Although investment costs, the recession and reduced confidence in the market potential, has slowed interest, many Truck dealers have held back due to uncertainty over the new coalition Government’s direction, which has now been firmly clarified.
 
The long term view of the RMI’s Truck division is that all HGV testing should be carried out in the private sector, allowing the technicians who maintain the vehicles to test them, as is the case with vehicles under 3.5t. Long term the role of VOSA should be ensuring private sector heavy vehicle testers apply the strict standards and compliance with the HGV test, as they do with Class 7 MOT and below.

Related News:

• Has the DfT Got an MOT Screw Loose?

• RMI Call For Participation in Online EU MOT Survey

• MOT Rule Change Could Risk Lives

• Should VOSA Call Time on Old Tyres?