Problem is, any tightening up of regulation (and it's happening thanks to europe) would also turn into a "jobs for the boys" opportunity and before you know it you wouldn't be allowed to open your own bonnet unless you're a "registered automotive technician" who has done a week of training and pays a couple of hundred quid a year to some regulatory body.
I don't see any problems with the status quo, tbh. If a car's dangerous it won't get an MOT. If it isn't, why should I have to wade through red tape to maintain it myself (or even build it - try registering a kit car in France)?
Kevin
True.... But its 12 mionths between MOT's. What other method is there to examine vehicles in the inetrim??
Don't get me wrong, I am not disagreeing with an officer requiring an inspection on a vehicle he suspects to be modified. Construction and use regs cover our cars at all times and if they are suspected to have been breached then it's only right for the matter to be investigated.
If modifications / maintenance required some sort of approval it wouldn't stop unscrupulous people doing them, and it wouldn't get them picked up any quicker than at a yearly MOT. It would, however, stand in the way of most of us who like to do quality work on our own cars and make motoring yet more expensive for little if any benefit.
Gliding has just come under European regulation, meaning I now need to seek out a licensed technician to do any job on a glider that's more involved than inflating a tyre. The previous system wasn't broken. Who would entrust their life to something they'd bodged or knew they were not skilled enough to attempt? If anything it's likely to encourage non-reporting of minor problems because of the hassle involved.
Kevin