NCT proposals, what was your vote?

carchaeologist

So,after all is said and done now since 12am, here is a pop quiz.
Cutting it down to the bare facts, what was your choice/preference?
Pre 1960 exempt.
Pre 1980 exempt
Rolling 30th anniversary.
Rolling 40th anniversary.

What was your preference?

One answer of the four, with a brief explanation if needs be.

I personally went with the rolling 30 year, with the hope, despite feeling that it surely won't happen, but that the 'Powers that be' would see the sense in a rolling(40 year we would hope for at the least, being the probably most sensible in real day to day terms)cut off. Locking it down to a certain year, particularly pre 1960 cars will be stupid and give no hope to older cars in years to come.

macplaxton

All of the above.

Only problem with fixed dates is that those falling the wrong side of the cut-off can sometimes end up magically becoming older...

(I know it's 3am, but you could of added a poll to the thread)

hi5

30 year rolling.

alastair

Tbh, I can't remember! Either the 30 or 40 year old rolling exemption.

corktina

30 year rolling being the most advantageous, isn't everyone going to vote for that one?

Kenny Logins

I wish it was a vote, but I suspect it's just going through the motions so they can decide for them selves with no comeback.

Justjens

40 year rolling and if they bring in voluntary testing you qualify for free road tax

Redrocket

how about make a poll that people can vote on?

carchaeologist

Redrocket wrote: »

how about make a poll that people can vote on?

I forgot about this option when I originally posted.

macplaxton

Will it not let you edit it (advanced) and add one?

Type 17

I proposed a 40 year rolling exemption, with a less stringent, visual inspection-style test between 30 & 40 years, but I fear that Kenny Logins may be correct:

Kenny Logins wrote: »

I wish it was a vote, but I suspect it's just going through the motions so they can decide for themselves with no comeback.

hoodie6029

Pre-1960 exempt.
Most cars post 1960 could be used daily so should be tested.
It would also reduce (hopefully) the plate swapping going on - mid 80's mercs on 1970's plates to avoid tax and NCT.

w124man

Pre 1960 exempt.

It simply makes sense!

hi5

I don't see how a set date makes any sense, what happened in 1960 to make it special?
Classic cars earn their status based on their relevance to modern cars, a thirty year old car will always be thirty years behind in technology.
When the government brought out the scrappage scheme it was 10 years or older, Insurance recognise 20 years or older, classic tax is 30 years or older, all rolling dates.
'Rolling' makes sense as advances in technology also 'roll'.
I never understood the pre '73 thing and now the pre '60 thing in the UK.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

Voted for 40 year rolling.
Makes the most sense.

Would prefer 30 year rolling but that's not likely to happen.

Sam Russell

30 year rolling, with voluntary testing earning free road tax.

The problem with testing is that if a vintage car fails, the repair parts may be difficult to source, and the availability of repairs may be time consuming. Thus, a failed car may be subject to a new full test if it falls out of the 28 day timeframe. This would start an unending cycle of failures, and the car would have to be scrapped. The retest time needs to be indeffinite, and most items should be advisories on the basis that if it needs doing - it will be done.

Also, the basic idea of an anniversary date is a nonsense. It was introduced to prevent the slippage of tests. However, since the annual test has been introduced for cars over 10 years, the test can end up being only valid for a few months. There should be a minimum validity of 12 months for all tests, with upto 3 months early giving a max validity of 27 months or 15 months.

There is inadequate capacity in the system. It needs more centres or a second company operating in the sector.

okistag

based on the options - 30 year rolling with voluntary testing earning free road tax.-

Why 1946 - 1984 = Classic status

Classic / Vintage motor tax cuts in at 30 years old !! All should be treated the same. Simple as that..

As for Retro period 1984 - 1999 which is not catered for at all there should be a concession for these, other wise many will be lost and the scene will over years fade into the past sadly.

Also it is all far and fine to say vehicles should be tested this I have no issue with, but I do have a issue with them being tested using specs and equipment for modern cars which can not and do not suit any classic vehicles or even some early retro stuff.

The biggest question is how are these vehicles going to be tested ?? and on what.

Grimreaper666

As i've said before a weekend tax for large engined cars would be great i think! A reduced road tax on a car over three litres where you could use your car from Friday evening to Sunday night or Monday night over a long weekend. It would make a lot of money for the state in revenue from fuel and road taxes and tax on parts etc. and save lots of beautiful cars from being abandoned and sent to the crusher.

macplaxton

Grimreaper666 wrote: »

a weekend tax

Not everyone works Mon-Fri and has the weekends off though

unfit2006

macplaxton wrote: »

Not everyone works Mon-Fri and has the weekends off though

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhfpBW-nUWk

antodeco

I went for 30 day rolling.

However, I did also suggest two additional points:

If NCT'd and its over 30 years, there is a reduction in tax/insurance.

If they bring in NCT, it should be based on safety features: ie: Tyres/Wheels; Brakes; lights and seat belts. Stuff that actually matters for safety.

okistag

As far as tax is concern, it should be added to fuel. More use or big engines will pay more than tthan lower mileage smaller engines. Vehicles. Of course that would for vehicles.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

okistag wrote: »

As far as tax is concern, it should be added to fuel. More use or big engines will pay more than tthan lower mileage smaller engines. Vehicles. Of course that would for vehicles.

It already is.
€1 approx per litre is tax.

Sam Russell

Of course it would be a lot. To cover the current rate of Motor Tax, and additional 50c to €1 per litre would be needed - much more on diesel vehicles.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

Sam Russell wrote: »

Of course it would be a lot. To cover the current rate of Motor Tax, and additional 50c to €1 per litre would be needed - much more on diesel vehicles.

Way off topic here but as an owner of a vintage gas guzzler (we're talking 5-6 mpg) with vintage tax and then a couple of other more modern more economical terms, i'm not sure which side of the coin I'd come on taxing the fuel only. (we are already taxed >50% of teh purchase price on fuel as it is)

carchaeologist

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

Way off topic here but as an owner of a vintage gas guzzler (we're talking 5-6 mpg) with vintage tax and then a couple of other more modern more economical terms, i'm not sure which side of the coin I'd come on taxing the fuel only. (we are already taxed >50% of teh purchase price on fuel as it is)

What car will do 5-6 mpg?

Cleveland Hot Pocket

carchaeologist wrote: »

What car will do 5-6 mpg?

A lot of the old full size american sedans.
Like the Chrysler Newport in my sig.

Testacalda

I read that 7 days before the deadline for submisions, the RSA only had 300 responses. I thought that was surprisingly small amount, given the amount of conversation and giving out going on regarding the proposals.

hi5

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

A lot of the old full size american sedans.
Like the Chrysler Newport in my sig.

I'd say you need a good tune up or even rebuild, you should be averaging about 10 mpg(imp).

http://www.automobile-catalog.com/performance/1968/506030/chrysler_newport_custom_4-door_sedan_440_tnt_v-8_torqueflite.html