Testing Times

My car passed its MOT Test on Tuesday.

It wouldn't have done so today.

The test wasn't due to expire until April 8th.  It's a good job I always put it in early because the rules changed yesterday.

Thanks for warning us about that, Ministry of Transport!!

There has been bugger-all publicity about this from what I have seen and heard.  A letter with the road-tax reminder wouldn't have gone amiss.

Even the press haven't been that bothered - The Telegraph were the only one I spotted who had a story on it.  They quote the AA's patrolman of the year who tells us, “If you’ve been happily ignoring a warning light because it’s not part of the MOT, these changes mean your car could now be on the MOT scrap heap or you’ll need to fork out on expensive repairs.”

Basically, the test is a lot tougher now including airbags, onboard sensors and other items that reflect how cars themselves have advanced technologically over the years.

On a personal note, I found out last Autumn that the rules were going to change although I didn't know when that change was going to happen.

Like Penny from The Big Bang Theory, my wife has been driving around for ages with this sight in front of her:

At the time, her MOT tester told us that we wouldn't fail for that light but it would be a failure 12 months down the line.

When Penny's car broke down and Sheldon pointed out that he'd warned her about the check engine light months before, her reply was quite logical:

"The light was just fine, it is still blinking away.  It's the stupid engine that stopped working."


My car has the opposite problem - a light that doesn't come on when it should.  The interior courtesy lights don't come on when you open the front, passenger door.

Doesn't sound like a big deal does it?

But it also means that the dashboard warning light that the door is open also doesn't come on.

Still, I have a year to get it sorted.

Independent Suspension (of Belief)

After my recent rants about Telegraph & Mail readers, I think I've found another group who are worse - Independent readers. Now the Independent isn't a right-wing rag - it's relatively neutral with Liberal overtones so you'd expect its readers to be calmer and more rational.

No such luck!

Maybe its middle-of-the-roadness means that supporters of both ends of the political spectrum will read it - and then end up arguing with each other.

This week's topic for discussion is 20mph zones. They started with this story backed up by a survey commissioned by The Independent about how people agree with these zones. Unfortunately, any survey that has been commissioned by an organisation will generally ask questions in a way to back up whatever results that organisation wants to hear so I suspect The Independent want more of these 20mph zones.

Anyway, whatever the case, the readers arguments soon break down to nothing constructive with anti-zoners coming up with "Perhaps we should bring back the original 4mph limit? Complete with the man holding a flag, walking ahead of the car?" followed by pro-zoners coming up with "Or maybe we should all drive flat-out with no limits whatsoever?" Look, if you can't add anything constructive to an argument, don't add anything at all - I wonder if that's why nobody ever comments on my postings? :)

That was Monday, and also on Monday we were given a bit more evidence of The Independent's view when this appeared. It is a very short "comment" article by someone who I presume is an Independent writer called Jonathan Brown. It has the title "The 20mph limit makes streets safer, so why not enforce it?" which may be debatable (ask the ABD - I'm coming to them shortly) followed by the subtitle "As a cyclist and father of two young children I am all in favour of putting people above cars" which implies that anyone not in favour of these zones puts cars above people - a ludicrous statement that makes me not want to bother with the rest of his article - and I speak as a cyclist and father of two youngish children - aren't all children "young" anyway? - that's the definition of being a child?

Well I did read it - it didn't take long and what I learned was that he'd been driving past "signs every few hundred yards" while "driving through the area at least three or four times a week" without being aware of them! No wonder he's in favour of slowing down, what chance to pedestrians have when he's behind the wheel?

The article also told me that "compliance is entirely optional" - I was always taught that a red circle sign was compulsorially to be obeyed - this is good news that I don't need to worry about these pesky 20 zones - makes you wonder why they're there really, doesn't it?

Tuesday saw another article, this time giving the other side of the story. It was entitled "Drivers predicted to lash out at 20mph slowdown zones" It leads with the statement "Motoring organisations hit back at the spread of 20mph speed zones which they claim could make exasperated motorists drive badly." Note the use of the plural there - motoring organisations. So which motoring organisations are we talking about here? - The AA and RAC are the obvious ones - or the IAM?

No, the ABD.

Who?

The ABD - I told you I'd get to them. Keith Peat, spokesman for Alliance of British Drivers and former traffic policeman said: “20mph zones will be counterproductive and create more accidents. What you’ll get is drivers driving to the speedometer. It’s safer that drivers drive to what they’re seeing outside the car and not to what their speed needle is saying.”

Sounds fair enough - and he is a former traffic policeman so he ought to know what he's on about?

Until you actually think about it - we've already been told that these zones are not being enforced - and it's not that difficult to knock it down a gear or two and drive slower while still judging your speed reasonably accurately.

Then look further at the ABD. If you look at the IAM's news page, you get a series of sensible, campaigning, safety-related articles. If you look at the ABD's news page, you get a list of Twitter links to articles where people are angry about parking abuses or that the Russians can clear a road quicker than us or just gloating that the Scottish Police didn't sell any seized cars. This seems to be a bad link on their site, they need to re-point their news index - but it does indicate that the ABD are the Daily Mail readers of the car world. Their Press Releases section is a mixture of the sensible and the scaremongering.

So where does that leave us in the 20mph Zone debate?

Where I live was designated a 20mph Zone a couple of years back. There were signs put up but they were not the red circle type and they were put up too high to be easily noticeable to your average motorist travelling at 30. There was also no publicity that I saw in the local press. I went out to take a photo of one of these signs today and it was gone - as were all of the others in the vicinity. They must have been removed as quietly as they were put up - and nobody seems to have noticed.

20mph Zones do not seem to be the answer to anything but the debate does need to happen - between sensible and informed people - and not in The Independent.

How to Drive (...Telegraph Readers Mad).

Part 2 of what promises to be an amusing series of articles appeared in The Telegraph motoring section today.

Ed Cummins, a 25-Year-old Telegraph journalist is learning to drive.

He writes about it in an amusing way - at least I find it amusing.

Some others do not.

Part 1 is here and part 2 is here.

I don't think he is being particularly honest about his lessons - he is playing it for mild comedy - which is fine by me - but some Telegraph readers don't seem to appreciate it - it's probably the same lot who complain about Alexei Sayle writing for The Telegraph. As I've mentioned before, I love the fact they get wound up.

The first comment, by someone calling himself cpf99, is actually very constructive making some good points about how Ed could have made more of modern teaching techniques and he also makes the obvious point that Ed is probably getting a freebie here in return for plugging The AA Driving School.

After that, though, it's the usual Telegraph-reader-who-doesn't-get-the-joke fodder and one deluded person called steveleeoflondon who wants us to believe that "When I was 10 I watched my dad carefully all the way to our holiday destination and worked out what the pedals did and how the gears work etc. When we got to the other end I asked him if I could try driving on the half mile long private road which formed part of our destination. I jumped in, adjusted the seat then drove using all the (4) gears, stopped, did a three point turn and drove it back and parked it. Easy."

He'll probably tell you he went on be World Rally Champ and taught Lewis Hamilton how to drive.

That's Telegraph readers for you.