I am sure this has been asked before but cannot find anything.  My old car 
goes in for an MOT this morning, two weeks before actually due.  If it fails 
can I still drive the car on it's existing MOT until it's expiry or does the 
new one supersede the old one.

Thanks,  Bill.

"Bill"  gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

> I am sure this has been asked before but cannot find anything.  My old
> car goes in for an MOT this morning, two weeks before actually due.  If
> it fails can I still drive the car on it's existing MOT until it's
> expiry or does the new one supersede the old one.

The fail will not invalidate the old certificate.

However, if the car is unroadworthy, it's illegal to drive it - even 
before it fails a test.

In article , Bill says...
> 
> I am sure this has been asked before but cannot find anything.  My old car 
> goes in for an MOT this morning, two weeks before actually due.  If it fails 
> can I still drive the car on it's existing MOT until it's expiry or does the 
> new one supersede the old one.
> 
No because although it has a certificate still in force, it doesn't meet 
the minimum standards required to be roadworthy which is why it has 
failed. It was also not legal to drive on the road with the faults 
before it failed the test either. Technically, depending on the reason 
for the failure, you may have had an excuse for driving an unroadworthy 
vehicle prior to the test however now you are aware of the faults/the 
fact the vehicle doesn't meet the minimum requirements, there is no 
excuse should you be pulled into a roadside VOSA checkpoint or pulled up 
by the Police and the faults found. It will come to light that there is 
a fail issued on the MOT database.



-- 
Conor
www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk

I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 09:56:06 -0000, Conor  wrote:

> In article , Bill says...
>>
>> I am sure this has been asked before but cannot find anything.  My old  
>> car
>> goes in for an MOT this morning, two weeks before actually due.  If it  
>> fails
>> can I still drive the car on it's existing MOT until it's expiry or  
>> does the
>> new one supersede the old one.
>>
> No because although it has a certificate still in force, it doesn't meet
> the minimum standards required to be roadworthy which is why it has
> failed. It was also not legal to drive on the road with the faults
> before it failed the test either. Technically, depending on the reason
> for the failure, you may have had an excuse for driving an unroadworthy
> vehicle prior to the test however now you are aware of the faults/the
> fact the vehicle doesn't meet the minimum requirements, there is no
> excuse should you be pulled into a roadside VOSA checkpoint or pulled up
> by the Police and the faults found. It will come to light that there is
> a fail issued on the MOT database.
>
>
>

They're all may not be legal though, it depends on what it's failed on.

Conor wrote:
> In article , Bill says...
>> I am sure this has been asked before but cannot find anything.  My old car 
>> goes in for an MOT this morning, two weeks before actually due.  If it fails 
>> can I still drive the car on it's existing MOT until it's expiry or does the 
>> new one supersede the old one.
>>
> No because although it has a certificate still in force, it doesn't meet 
> the minimum standards required to be roadworthy which is why it has 
> failed. It was also not legal to drive on the road with the faults 
> before it failed the test either. Technically, depending on the reason 
> for the failure, you may have had an excuse for driving an unroadworthy 
> vehicle prior to the test however now you are aware of the faults/the 
> fact the vehicle doesn't meet the minimum requirements, there is no 
> excuse should you be pulled into a roadside VOSA checkpoint or pulled up 
> by the Police and the faults found. It will come to light that there is 
> a fail issued on the MOT database.
> 
> 
> 
I thought there were things that failed the MOT but would pass the 
'unroadworthy' test.

Such as rear seat belts being worn or torn. I'd like to see you get 
nicked if you didn't have any rear passengers!

Also there are many 'self repair'items that could be put right quickly :
bald tyre, duff bulb, out of spec numberplates - do people suggest that 
the current MOT is still supeceded by a new fail - if you repair these 
before driving?

In article <op.u2rh5mtihaghkf@lucy>, Duncan Wood says...

> They're all may not be legal though, it depends on what it's failed on.

Perhaps you'd care to tell me what fault its legal to drive with but 
fail an MOT on?

Actually, I can think of one possible, cracked numberplate but only if 
its readable OK.

-- 
Conor
www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk

I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.

In article , Paul says...

> I thought there were things that failed the MOT but would pass the 
> 'unroadworthy' test.
> 
> Such as rear seat belts being worn or torn. I'd like to see you get 
> nicked if you didn't have any rear passengers!
> 
You'd get pulled up in a VOSA roadside check for it.

> Also there are many 'self repair'items that could be put right quickly :
> bald tyre, duff bulb, out of spec numberplates - do people suggest that 
> the current MOT is still supeceded by a new fail - if you repair these 
> before driving?

If you've repaired them, then the fault doesn't exist. I doubt the OP 
has any intention of doing though.


-- 
Conor
www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk

I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 10:20:42 -0000, Paul   
wrote:

> Conor wrote:
>> In article , Bill says...
>>> I am sure this has been asked before but cannot find anything.  My old  
>>> car goes in for an MOT this morning, two weeks before actually due.   
>>> If it fails can I still drive the car on it's existing MOT until it's  
>>> expiry or does the new one supersede the old one.
>>>
>> No because although it has a certificate still in force, it doesn't  
>> meet the minimum standards required to be roadworthy which is why it  
>> has failed. It was also not legal to drive on the road with the faults  
>> before it failed the test either. Technically, depending on the reason  
>> for the failure, you may have had an excuse for driving an unroadworthy  
>> vehicle prior to the test however now you are aware of the faults/the  
>> fact the vehicle doesn't meet the minimum requirements, there is no  
>> excuse should you be pulled into a roadside VOSA checkpoint or pulled  
>> up by the Police and the faults found. It will come to light that there  
>> is a fail issued on the MOT database.
>>
> I thought there were things that failed the MOT but would pass the  
> 'unroadworthy' test.
>
> Such as rear seat belts being worn or torn. I'd like to see you get  
> nicked if you didn't have any rear passengers!
>
> Also there are many 'self repair'items that could be put right quickly :
> bald tyre, duff bulb, out of spec numberplates - do people suggest that  
> the current MOT is still supeceded by a new fail - if you repair these  
> before driving?
>

It's irrelevant, the old one is still valid, anything that previously made  
the car unsafe will still be doing so. There's a separate box for this  
shouldn't be driven down the road.

"Duncan Wood"  gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying:

> It's irrelevant, the old one is still valid, anything that previously
> made the car unsafe will still be doing so. There's a separate box for
> this shouldn't be driven down the road.

So any fail that the tester doesn't flag as "dangerous" doesn't count 
towards "unroadworthy"?

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 10:27:17 -0000, Conor  wrote:

> In article <op.u2rh5mtihaghkf@lucy>, Duncan Wood says...
>
>> They're all may not be legal though, it depends on what it's failed on.
>
> Perhaps you'd care to tell me what fault its legal to drive with but
> fail an MOT on?
>
> Actually, I can think of one possible, cracked numberplate but only if
> its readable OK.
>

Headlamp alignment when driving during the day, emissions fails short of  
gross polluting, seatbelt fails for seats not in use, faulty abs warning  
light, temporary windscreen, spacesaver tyre fitted, there's plenty more.

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 10:31:37 -0000, Adrian  wrote:

> "Duncan Wood"  gurgled happily, sounding much like
> they were saying:
>
>> It's irrelevant, the old one is still valid, anything that previously
>> made the car unsafe will still be doing so. There's a separate box for
>> this shouldn't be driven down the road.
>
> So any fail that the tester doesn't flag as "dangerous" doesn't count
> towards "unroadworthy"?

No, the existence of said box is a clue.

Conor wrote:

> If you've repaired them, then the fault doesn't exist. I doubt the OP 
> has any intention of doing though.

Bizarre conclusion, why do you think that?
He's putting his car in for an MOT 2 weeks early. Stands to reason that 
he intends to get it sorted.

In article , Willy Eckerslyke 
says...
> 
> Conor wrote:
> 
> > If you've repaired them, then the fault doesn't exist. I doubt the OP 
> > has any intention of doing though.
> 
> Bizarre conclusion, why do you think that?
> He's putting his car in for an MOT 2 weeks early. Stands to reason that 
> he intends to get it sorted.

I think that because it could've failed so miserably that its not worth 
repairing so he's wondering if he can still run around in it whilst he 
finds another.

-- 
Conor
www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk

I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.

In article <op.u2rjpp2mhaghkf@lucy>, Duncan Wood says...

> No, the existence of said box is a clue.

But the fail certificate states the vehicle fails to meet the minimum 
standards for roadworthiness and/or emissions. It does not comply with 
the minimum requirements under the road traffic act or construction and 
use.

What the box on the certificate actually says is "DANGEROUS", not "isn't 
legal to drive". The handbrake could be inoperative which isn't 
dangerous but you'd still find yourself in the shit at a roadside 
inspection.


-- 
Conor
www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk

I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.

In article <op.u2rjm9fnhaghkf@lucy>, Duncan Wood says...
> 
> On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 10:27:17 -0000, Conor  wrote:
> 
> > In article <op.u2rh5mtihaghkf@lucy>, Duncan Wood says...
> >
> >> They're all may not be legal though, it depends on what it's failed on.
> >
> > Perhaps you'd care to tell me what fault its legal to drive with but
> > fail an MOT on?
> >
> > Actually, I can think of one possible, cracked numberplate but only if
> > its readable OK> >
> 
> Headlamp alignment when driving during the day, 

If pulled into a roadside check, you'd fail it.
> emissions fails short of  
> gross polluting,
If pulled into a roadside check, you'd fail it.

> seatbelt fails for seats not in use,

If pulled into a roadside check, you'd fail it.
> faulty abs warning  
> light,
If pulled into a roadside check, you'd fail it.

> temporary windscreen,

Do such things exist?

> spacesaver tyre fitted,


-- 
Conor
www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk

I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.

Conor wrote:
> In article , Willy Eckerslyke 
> says...
>> Conor wrote:
>>
>>> If you've repaired them, then the fault doesn't exist. I doubt the OP 
>>> has any intention of doing though.
>> Bizarre conclusion, why do you think that?
>> He's putting his car in for an MOT 2 weeks early. Stands to reason that 
>> he intends to get it sorted.
> 
> I think that because it could've failed so miserably that its not worth 
> repairing so he's wondering if he can still run around in it whilst he 
> finds another.

Nah, if he thinks his car's that bad, he's not going to throw away fifty 
quid to have it confirmed. At worst, he just wants to use the car while 
fixing the faults one at a time, just like most of us would do.

"Bill"  wrote in message 
news:7l7j6kF3c8uugU1@mid.individual.net...
>I am sure this has been asked before but cannot find anything.  My old car 
>goes in for an MOT this morning, two weeks before actually due.  If it 
>fails can I still drive the car on it's existing MOT until it's expiry or 
>does the new one supersede the old one.
>
> Thanks,  Bill.


It was interesting reading the replies.  Thanks to those who responded.
I put it in early to see a: if it would pass and b: if it failed to give me
a little leeway to get it fixed if it was economically viable for an old
car. (K reg Rover Metro) Anyway, it doesn't matter now because it passed OK, 
and with no advisories!  The only thing he suggested was getting the 
suspension pumped up as it was a bit low.  He suggested a place that did it, 
and we left the test station and drove straight there and had it done.

Bill

>
>

Bill wrote:
> "Bill"  wrote in message
> news:7l7j6kF3c8uugU1@mid.individual.net...
>> I am sure this has been asked before but cannot find anything.  My
>> old car goes in for an MOT this morning, two weeks before actually
>> due.  If it fails can I still drive the car on it's existing MOT
>> until it's expiry or does the new one supersede the old one.
>>
>> Thanks,  Bill.
>
>
> It was interesting reading the replies.  Thanks to those who
> responded. I put it in early to see a: if it would pass and b: if it 
> failed to
> give me a little leeway to get it fixed if it was economically viable
> for an old car. (K reg Rover Metro) Anyway, it doesn't matter now
> because it passed OK, and with no advisories!  The only thing he
> suggested was getting the suspension pumped up as it was a bit low. He 
> suggested a place that did it, and we left the test station and
> drove straight there and had it done.
> Bill

 the old mot is not cancelled by the failure, so a casual anpr check or the 
need to produce your documents after a roadside stop would have been no 
problems.

But you may still have been driving an unroadworthy vehicle, same as you may 
be at this very moment!!  An MoT pass is only saying that the vehicle met 
certain standards at the time it was tested.

In article , Willy Eckerslyke 
says...

> Nah, if he thinks his car's that bad, he's not going to throw away fifty 
> quid to have it confirmed. 

Might not have known. Could be that its failed on all the brake pipes or 
needs a shedload of welding.

-- 
Conor
www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk

I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.

Conor  wrote
>In article <op.u2rjm9fnhaghkf@lucy>, Duncan Wood says...
>
>> temporary windscreen,
>
>Do such things exist?
>
I remember them advertised, years & years ago - a plastic sheet with
bracing rods, that could be rolled up. Don't ask me how it was kept in
place ...

But - if I turned up for MOT with no windscreen whatsoever (on my Volvo,
say), would it be a fail?
-- 
Roger Hunt

Roger Hunt wrote:
> Conor  wrote
>> In article <op.u2rjm9fnhaghkf@lucy>, Duncan Wood says...
>>
>>> temporary windscreen,
>>
>> Do such things exist?
>>
> I remember them advertised, years & years ago - a plastic sheet with
> bracing rods, that could be rolled up. Don't ask me how it was kept in
> place ...
>
> But - if I turned up for MOT with no windscreen whatsoever (on my
> Volvo, say), would it be a fail?

The temp. screens were extra long and you closed the doors over the ends, I 
have got one in the garage, it saved my sister an unpleasant journey in the 
wet once, so they do work, even the wipers work after a fashion on them.  I 
expect it would crack up if I unrolled it now, but in the days before 
laminated screens were on everything they were very useful.

No, no screen is not a failure.  I used to get my kit car mot'd without a 
screen and put it back on immediately after (minor crack in the corner)

Mrcheerful  wrote
>Roger Hunt wrote:
>> Conor  wrote
>>> In article <op.u2rjm9fnhaghkf@lucy>, Duncan Wood says...
>>>
>>>> temporary windscreen,
>>>
>>> Do such things exist?
>>>
>> I remember them advertised, years & years ago - a plastic sheet with
>> bracing rods, that could be rolled up. Don't ask me how it was kept in
>> place ...
>>
>> But - if I turned up for MOT with no windscreen whatsoever (on my
>> Volvo, say), would it be a fail?
>
>The temp. screens were extra long and you closed the doors over the ends, I 
>have got one in the garage, it saved my sister an unpleasant journey in the 
>wet once, so they do work, even the wipers work after a fashion on them.  I 
>expect it would crack up if I unrolled it now, but in the days before 
>laminated screens were on everything they were very useful.
>
Aha! Very useful idea, clever fixing too.
>No, no screen is not a failure.  I used to get my kit car mot'd without a 
>screen and put it back on immediately after (minor crack in the corner) 
>
Did they still check any wiper operation!?! And washers!
-- 
Roger Hunt

Roger Hunt  gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying:

>>No, no screen is not a failure.  I used to get my kit car mot'd without
>>a screen and put it back on immediately after (minor crack in the
>>corner)

> Did they still check any wiper operation!?! And washers!

If the windscreen can be opened/folded, then wipers are unnecessary for 
the MOT.

Adrian wrote:
> Roger Hunt  gurgled happily, sounding much
> like they were saying:
>
>>> No, no screen is not a failure.  I used to get my kit car mot'd
>>> without a screen and put it back on immediately after (minor crack
>>> in the corner)
>
>> Did they still check any wiper operation!?! And washers!
>
> If the windscreen can be opened/folded, then wipers are unnecessary
> for the MOT.  and washers.

Adrian  wrote
>Roger Hunt  gurgled happily, sounding much like
>they were saying:
>
>>>No, no screen is not a failure.  I used to get my kit car mot'd without
>>>a screen and put it back on immediately after (minor crack in the
>>>corner)
>
>> Did they still check any wiper operation!?! And washers!
>
>If the windscreen can be opened/folded, then wipers are unnecessary for 
>the MOT.

The MOT appears to be pretty well thought out. Good for them.
-- 
Roger Hunt

Tony (UncleFista) wrote:
> "Mrcheerful"  wrote in message
> news:IsEHm.999$Ym4.459@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>> and washers.
>
> And screen demisters :)

there is no requirement for any ventilation systems or heaters in the mot. 
with or without windscreen. :)

"Bill"  wrote in message 
news:7l7j6kF3c8uugU1@mid.individual.net...
>I am sure this has been asked before but cannot find anything.  My old car 
>goes in for an MOT this morning, two weeks before actually due.  If it 
>fails can I still drive the car on it's existing MOT until it's expiry or 
>does the new one supersede the old one.
>
> Thanks,  Bill.
>
Do you understand what "expiry date" is?

"Adrian"  wrote in message 
news:7l7jruF3bpeclU1@mid.individual.net...
> "Bill"  gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
> saying:
>
>> I am sure this has been asked before but cannot find anything.  My old
>> car goes in for an MOT this morning, two weeks before actually due.  If
>> it fails can I still drive the car on it's existing MOT until it's
>> expiry or does the new one supersede the old one.
>
> The fail will not invalidate the old certificate.
>
> However, if the car is unroadworthy, it's illegal to drive it - even
> before it fails a test.

The MOT is only an indication of the car being roadworthy at the exact time
it was inspected.

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 11:07:29 -0000, Conor  wrote:

> In article <op.u2rjm9fnhaghkf@lucy>, Duncan Wood says...
>>
>> On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 10:27:17 -0000, Conor  wrote:
>>
>> > In article <op.u2rh5mtihaghkf@lucy>, Duncan Wood says...
>> >
>> >> They're all may not be legal though, it depends on what it's failed  
>> on.
>> >
>> > Perhaps you'd care to tell me what fault its legal to drive with but
>> > fail an MOT on?
>> >
>> > Actually, I can think of one possible, cracked numberplate but only if
>> > its readable OK> >
>>
>> Headlamp alignment when driving during the day,
>
> If pulled into a roadside check, you'd fail it.
>> emissions fails short of
>> gross polluting,
> If pulled into a roadside check, you'd fail it.
>
>> seatbelt fails for seats not in use,
>
> If pulled into a roadside check, you'd fail it.
>> faulty abs warning
>> light,
> If pulled into a roadside check, you'd fail it.
>

All that happens if you fail any of the above is you get a seven day  
wonder.

>> temporary windscreen,
>
> Do such things exist?
>

Yes.

>> spacesaver tyre fitted,
>
>

Conor wrote:
> In article , Willy Eckerslyke 
> says...
> 
>> Nah, if he thinks his car's that bad, he's not going to throw away fifty 
>> quid to have it confirmed. 
> 
> Might not have known. Could be that its failed on all the brake pipes or 
> needs a shedload of welding.
> 
Pah - just bought a van off Ebay - failed on MOST of its brakepipes 
being 'corroded'. Took it for an MOT station near me where it failed on 
ONE. Took it to the garage next door where they wirebrushed the 
'corrosion' off and it passed....

Has anyone EVER seen a car brakepipe (corroded rather than damaged, and 
within recent MOT) split?

In article , Paul says...

> Has anyone EVER seen a car brakepipe (corroded rather than damaged, and 
> within recent MOT) split?

Yes and more than once. One actually even passed the MOT visual 
inspection but then subsequently failed on the brake tester. I believe 
I've posted about it before.

-- 
Conor
www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk

I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.

In article <hcngo5$egj$1@news.albasani.net>, roger20nospam@ntlworld.com 
says...> 
> "Bill"  wrote in message 
> news:7l7j6kF3c8uugU1@mid.individual.net...
> >I am sure this has been asked before but cannot find anything.  My old car 
> >goes in for an MOT this morning, two weeks before actually due.  If it 
> >fails can I still drive the car on it's existing MOT until it's expiry or 
> >does the new one supersede the old one.
> >
> > Thanks,  Bill.
> >
> Do you understand what "expiry date" is?

I think you'll find that under recent(?) changes your vehicle is deemed 
not to have a valid MOT as soon as it has been recorded as a fail 
irresepective of the exisiting certificate's expiry date.

-- 
jeremy

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:41:01 +0000, Jeremy wrote:

[...]

> I think you'll find that under recent(?) changes your vehicle is deemed
> not to have a valid MOT as soon as it has been recorded as a fail
> irresepective of the exisiting certificate's expiry date.

Are you able to cite references please?

Chris

-- 
Remove prejudice to reply.

On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 12:41:01 -0000, Jeremy 
wrote:

>In article <hcngo5$egj$1@news.albasani.net>, roger20nospam@ntlworld.com 
>says...> 
>> "Bill"  wrote in message 
>> news:7l7j6kF3c8uugU1@mid.individual.net...
>> >I am sure this has been asked before but cannot find anything.  My old car 
>> >goes in for an MOT this morning, two weeks before actually due.  If it 
>> >fails can I still drive the car on it's existing MOT until it's expiry or 
>> >does the new one supersede the old one.
>> >
>> > Thanks,  Bill.
>> >
>> Do you understand what "expiry date" is?
>
>I think you'll find that under recent(?) changes your vehicle is deemed 
>not to have a valid MOT as soon as it has been recorded as a fail 
>irresepective of the exisiting certificate's expiry date.

What recent changes ???

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:42:11 -0000, Usenet Nutter  
 wrote:

> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 12:41:01 -0000, Jeremy 
> wrote:
>
>> In article <hcngo5$egj$1@news.albasani.net>, roger20nospam@ntlworld.com
>> says...>
>>> "Bill"  wrote in message
>>> news:7l7j6kF3c8uugU1@mid.individual.net...
>>> >I am sure this has been asked before but cannot find anything.  My  
>>> old car
>>> >goes in for an MOT this morning, two weeks before actually due.  If it
>>> >fails can I still drive the car on it's existing MOT until it's  
>>> expiry or
>>> >does the new one supersede the old one.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,  Bill.
>>> >
>>> Do you understand what "expiry date" is?
>>
>> I think you'll find that under recent(?) changes your vehicle is deemed
>> not to have a valid MOT as soon as it has been recorded as a fail
>> irresepective of the exisiting certificate's expiry date.
>
> What recent changes ???

The ones where all the laws morphed at the same time as Roger?

-- 
Duncan Wood

"Paul"  wrote in message 
news:7l9gebF3bjp3tU1@mid.individual.net...
> Conor wrote:
>> In article , Willy Eckerslyke says...
>>
>>> Nah, if he thinks his car's that bad, he's not going to throw away fifty 
>>> quid to have it confirmed.
>>
>> Might not have known. Could be that its failed on all the brake pipes or 
>> needs a shedload of welding.
>>
> Pah - just bought a van off Ebay - failed on MOST of its brakepipes being 
> 'corroded'. Took it for an MOT station near me where it failed on ONE. 
> Took it to the garage next door where they wirebrushed the 'corrosion' off 
> and it passed....
>
> Has anyone EVER seen a car brakepipe (corroded rather than damaged, and 
> within recent MOT) split?

Ive had a few over the years burst whilst doing brake roller tests during an 
mot, its normaly the ones that you cant see that run either through chassis 
or behind the fuel tank.

In article <9HVHm.77514$zt3.32188@newsfe03.ams2>, 
cawhelan@prejudicentlworld.com says...> 
> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:41:01 +0000, Jeremy wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > I think you'll find that under recent(?) changes your vehicle is deemed
> > not to have a valid MOT as soon as it has been recorded as a fail
> > irresepective of the exisiting certificate's expiry date.
> 
> Are you able to cite references please?
> 

Nope. 

Seems I was wrong - or more particularly the garage mis-informed me.... 
I e-mailed VOSA and got the following reply:

=======================
Dear Jeremy, 

Thank you for your email enquiry dated (03/11/2009), concerning the 
above. 

An MOT is  valid until midnight on the date of expiry of the current 
certificate - even if the vehicle fails an MOT prior to that date. 
Please note however that the vehicle should also  be kept in a 
roadworthy condition and meet legal requirements at all times in order 
to be driven on the public highway. 
Once midnight on the date of expiry is reached, you are only legally 
able to drive the vehicle directly to/from  a pre-booked MOT test. 
If the vehicle fails the test you are also able to drive it to a place 
of repair and back to an MOT garage for re-test. 

I hope this information has assisted you with your enquiry, but if you 
have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact us again. 

Kind Regards, 

Tina 
======================



-- 
jeremy

Conor to note:

>=======================
>Dear Jeremy, 
>
>Thank you for your email enquiry dated (03/11/2009), concerning the 
>above. 
>
>An MOT is  valid until midnight on the date of expiry of the current 
>certificate - even if the vehicle fails an MOT prior to that date. 
>Please note however that the vehicle should also  be kept in a 
>roadworthy condition and meet legal requirements at all times in order 
>to be driven on the public highway. 
>Once midnight on the date of expiry is reached, you are only legally 
>able to drive the vehicle directly to/from  a pre-booked MOT test. 
>If the vehicle fails the test you are also able to drive it to a place 
>of repair and back to an MOT garage for re-test. 
>
>I hope this information has assisted you with your enquiry, but if you 
>have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact us again. 
>
>Kind Regards, 
>
>Tina 
>======================