Accy cyclist
Legendary Member
- Location
- The hills of Accrington
Of all the things you've come out with over the years: funny, weird, bizarre and strange, this takes the biscuit.
So if a 60 year old car is deemed roadworthy without having an annual test to look for faults and defects,how come for example a 3 year old car that's done maybe only 8,000 miles isn't deemed to be roadworthy unless it's MOT'd? I can accept the not paying 'road tax' as the car's probably had loads of 'road tax' spent on it over the decades,but to be exempt from an annual safety check I can't understand. I stand by my point about MOT's being a con if a car doesn't need one just because it's very old.but other cars do because they aren't very old.
			
				Last edited: 
			
		
	
								
								
									
	
		
			
		
		
	
	
	
		
			
		
		
	
								
							
							 
				 
 
		 
 
		
 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 Got to be a car nut to look after one.
 Got to be a car nut to look after one.
 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		