The coalition government is, we hear, to review Britain's MOT test regime, the previous government having decided only two years ago to reject a government commission's proposal to save motorists money by complying only with the EU minimum requirement for a first test after four years, and biennial tests thereafter. It took two years for the no-change decision to be made after a delayed consultation.

Let's hope the right decision is reached quicker this time. Never mind that the European Commission Road Safety Programme announced this week wants to improve vehicles' active safety by mandating ESP and six other technologies for various types of vehicle; nor need we believe everything the independent garage trade may say about vehicle condition-related accidents increasing up to 150%: health and safety may be the nation's least favourite words in combination, but there's no point in having more mandatory safety equipment if it doesn't actually work, or if its effectiveness is compromised by duff tyres which are only inspected every two years.

Reducing MOT intensity to the EU Directive's minimum might save motorists £520 million a year in fees, as was calculated last time around. But the likely cost of at least a few more severe accidents, coupled with the cost of job losses and lost tax revenues from the garage sector, would cost a net increase of £270 million, according to the MOT Forum interest group that fought the last MOT cuts - as it thought, successfully. We ran these numbers in more detail in the 2008 edition of the Castrol Car Service & Repair Trend Tracker, and really didn't expect to have to revisit them again.

Toby Procter

Trend Tracker Limited

0870 421 4350

aftermarket report bodyshop market car finance electric vehicles car servicing