The prospect of MOT checks being biennial has caused quite a stir, with several camps expressing concerns - including higher insurance costs and compromised road safety.
Commenting on the plan – which is said to be among possible initiatives being considered in the hopes of addressing the cost-of-living crisis in the UK – Consumer Intelligence insurance head Karen Houseago was quoted by The Telegraph as stating: “Fewer MOT checks mean that cars will not be as safe, leading to more breaking down on the road and more accidents.
“That will drive the cost of car insurance up. This idea cannot be positive for consumers in the long-term. It just introduces more dangerous roads and higher costs.”
Meanwhile, aside from the analytics business, breakdown cover specialists the RAC and the AA have also expressed their reservations.
“Though well intended,” Sky News cited a spokesperson for the AA as saying, “moving the yearly £55 spend on an MOT to every two years could make costs worse for drivers with higher repair bills, make our roads more dangerous, and would put jobs in the garage industry at risk.”
Similarly, the RAC’s Nicholas Lyes, as reported by The Telegraph, believes there would be a dramatic increase in the number of unroadworthy vehicles if the proposal pushed through.
