APK exemption classics, letters from the RDW and insurance cover

Auto Motor Klassiek » Articles » APK exemption classics, letters from the RDW and insurance cover
Purchasing classics there

From 1 January, vehicles with a date of first admission of 50 years or older are no longer subject to APK. Minister Van Nieuwenhuizen (Infrastructure and Water Management) has abolished the mandatory periodic inspection for these old-timers. The argument is that it thereby eases the burden on the owners of these historic vehicles. The Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management confirms the definitive exemption in a news report. Many owners are happy with that. In the meantime, questions arise about the insurance coverage of APK-exempt vehicles. 

Owners / holders of vehicles aged 50 or older will receive an APK exemption letter from the RDW from 1-1-2021. The first owners of vehicles in this category have now received the letter. Several owners will be given in the coming period post of the RDW. The number of vehicles with an APK exemption is increasing every day, because the moment a vehicle turns 50 is leading. The exemption limit is therefore flexible and is constantly shifting. That is why the RDW checks the register every day in order to be able to send exemption letters in a targeted manner.

Almost 94.000 exempt cars

Incidentally, according to the RDW, taxis, public transport cars and ADR vehicles (dangerous goods) remain subject to MOT, regardless of the age of the vehicle, due to their function. Motorcycles are exempt from MOT. Incidentally, the FEHAC calculated that as of January 1, 2021, almost 94.000 cars will be exempt from the APK requirement as a result of the final confirmation of the APK exemption for vehicles aged 50 and older.

No reminder

As of the date the vehicle is 50 years old, the vehicle owners will not receive any APK reminder Lake. This also does not happen if the owners have decided to subject the vehicle to a voluntary inspection.

Insurance

The question is, of course, how insurers look at the vehicles, for which no inspection is necessary. Joost Kam from Advice Insured! tells the following about this. “The expiry of the inspection obligation is a legal measure, and therefore insurers have no choice but to follow the measure. Owners will simply be able to keep the cars under cover. It is possible that insurers will become stricter and will take a closer look at the state of repair in the event of an accident.

Austerity and pricing policy

In any case, a number of companies are already moderating the conditions of old-timer insurance. ” When asked whether insurers will use price differences between inspected and non-inspected vehicles, Kam replies: “A classic car insurance is often a service product of an insurer. And if you look at the retrenchment and pricing, you see that a number of underwriters really want to limit or revise their risks. A rearrangement of premium in combination with risk could well be, although there are no signs yet that dual pricing is also being implemented at one or more insurers. ”

“Good housekeeping”

“Basically, the vehicle does not need to have a valid inspection. A valuation is leading, but good housekeeping is definitely a condition ”, says Simone Choudri from Youngtimerpolis.nl. “There really is a discussion if there is demonstrably negligent maintenance. And that is also the case if an accident is caused by a defect that could have been prevented with an inspection. However well a classic has been maintained. Fortunately, most owners take excellent care of their classics. ”

"Inspection remains a snapshot"

Simone Choudri continues. “As far as damage to a car with a valid inspection is concerned, the following applies: approved is approved, and then an expert can do little about it. Joost Kam from Advice Insured! agrees. “That's right, although an inspection remains a snapshot. Good maintenance therefore remains important. ” In any case, it is indisputable that it is important to review the policy conditions and to request information about this from the insurer or advisor.

 

 

REGISTER FOR FREE AND WE'LL SEND YOU OUR NEWSLETTER EVERY DAY WITH THE LATEST STORIES ABOUT CLASSIC CARS AND MOTORCYCLES

Select other newsletters if necessary

We won't send you spam! Read our privacy policy for more information.

If you like the article, please share it...

29 comments

  1. I would be in favor of a minimum safety check where a car is safe in good weather on a Sunday ride. An inspection that is in line with the intended incidental recreational use.

    Insurers still come across nicely in this article. But as soon as they have to pay a few hundred thousand because someone is in hospital, they do go out for an investigation. Then you get a yes-no discussion.

    To prevent that, it is advisable to have an MOT report drawn up annually at a garage. Then you can choose what to do and what not to do. Suppose you never have passengers in the back seat and the lock on that door is broken, you can leave it as it is. Or a hole in your exhaust where you take the risk of a fine for granted. Or a rear fog light. I only drive in good weather and close to home. Suppose the weather would suddenly change and suddenly a thick fog comes out of nowhere that lingers for days, then I am out of luck. The car will then have to park and continue walking. That chance is so small that I take it for granted. But MOT makes these kinds of choices impossible. So too rigid.

    But anything that matters during an accident, you better let it be made better. Certainly anything that can cause harm to others. With such a report you have no or less chance of a discussion with the insurance lawyers ...

    Premium discount with report? You can count on a price increase without ...

  2. Have also received the letter, but I think the car must be MOT inspected when it comes on the public road.
    Basically exemption from suspension.

  3. What a negative that Michel is. The (mostly) young scum he's talking about drives neat, priceless, young cars. Come to a petrol station, a city….

  4. In fact, nothing changes, except for an amendment to an error in the legislation from 2009. When the cars older than 50 years were exempted, 50 years was cars with year of construction older than 1960. It is now normal to include 1960 as a fixed date in the law corrected.
    I also have a few copies that sometimes stand still for a few years in the garage (after a major service or sometimes a long wait for parts). Just shaking up for an APK or suspending it annually is not convenient.
    Those who think they can benefit by abusing this legislation will in practice not survive long on the public road.

  5. A nice ride with your 'barn find':
    Forget about welding for a few years
    Plug the rust holes with newspapers
    Tectyl about it
    Brake a little earlier because you know he is pulling left or right .. good housekeeping!
    And every year a new batch that is allowed to hit the road again.
    It is precisely all those seventies cars that will be rediscovered for the next 15 years that were rejected in the eighties.
    Just take a look at Wrak op de Weg on youtube
    Then you know why!
    As far as I am concerned, an MOT every four years

  6. It's about time! It's ridiculous that it took the Netherlands 6 years to implement an EU directive.
    But yes, what do you want? It is completely against the spirit of the times. A time in which motorists are mainly seen as traffic jerks, who have to be heavily loaded and checked.
    The APK regulations are too much of a straightjacket, especially for old-timers. If a defect is found during an APK inspection, the car is in principle no longer allowed on the road and must first be repaired. This leaves no room for hobbyists to fix this themselves.

  7. I am happy with this arrangement for the following. At my previous inspection I had a rejection on my rear brake. Before I had the parts and had carried out some additional repairs (rust on the body), I was legally no longer allowed on the road for a test drive, etc. and I should have suspended my car, may only go to the garage for the new MOT .
    With the current scheme I can occasionally go to the MOT (having an APK master check your car is fine) and you can carry out the repair or have it carried out in peace.

  8. In Bels everything is different, even more bureaucratic.
    And so-called cheaper too? A country without a government for years, varying rules. Immigrants with 14 children simply receive about 8 grand child benefit. Do revolt there in Bels;) !!

  9. I sincerely hope that this is a European measure, here in Belgium they go just the other way (of course) instead of every 5 years, they have made it 2 years, and…. Complete inspection (same as current cars ), and believe me, we have a lot of trouble with it

    • Get well soon…
      I think this is stipulated in EU Directive 2014/45. Each EU country had until 2018 to implement it. So it took the Netherlands almost 3 years too long ……

      In Belgium, even more misery is coming with the introduction of the low emission zone in Wallonia.
      Or will there be an exemption for classic cars?

      • Jopie, it's a guideline. The member states are expected to transpose this directive into national legislation and regulations, but it is not an obligation.
        Had it been a Regulation, it would have been compelling from Brussels. Point 13 of the Directive states that it should be left to Member States to determine the period for periodic roadworthiness tests.

        Personally, I am not in favor of abolishing the MOT requirement for cars older than 50 years, they could have adjusted the requirements, but I believe that an inspection should continue on essential parts.
        At the latest; I am not in favor of the Dutch MOT system, so inspection by a garage.

    • JP
      was I talking about scum? Only sketched the (beautiful & free) street scene of those years. Something that could reappear here and there… people buy a beautiful classic, something that is or can be a sensitive device in maintenance and rust.
      If there are defects and little money is lurking postponement ...
      Self-inspected cars for a number of years, so I know how far you can go… and how far people would go without regulations.
      Anyway, they are now the real survivors and they are generally in the hands of enthusiasts.
      I think it's a nice change of rules:
      enthusiasts are less bound by rules.

      Please support Peter's response

  10. Wow what a nagging, you are just responsible for driving a proper vehicle! You're not going to drive a faulty car!
    If you can't do it yourself, have it checked! For cars from before 1960 it is also assumed that the owner will take good care of them! Should have been running for 10 years, so now they are back up to 50 years old!

  11. MOT is certainly no guarantee that everything is safe and to the required standards. Every inspection is done by a person! Just look at the stories in Autoweek of the weekly inspection.

  12. Some time ago I gave a response to this concerning transitional arrangement. Not allowed to drive for 3 months, but pay insurance and subject to MOT. There was no response. So the insurance policies should not be bothering us collectors who barely make miles with the vehicles.

  13. It's also a bit of scare tactics, the exemption. The MOT is a snapshot (without guarantee!) And also a subject of fraud for ill-intentioned people. So as an insurance company you can never assume a valid MOT if there is a debt question. An example were the so-called MOT tires that were immediately replaced by the worn slippers after the inspection.
    I plan to have my spare cars occasionally voluntarily viewed by a specialist through an outside look. For me it is not about some play on a steering knuckle or loss of a drop of oil, but about real risks to safety.
    Perhaps an idea for the insurers: premium discount with a report.

  14. The abolition of MOT requirement seems wonderful, but why not MOT for oldtimers?
    Clear brakes, tires and lighting for everyone is the minimum that must be good to be allowed on the road
    Incomprehensible that a Fehac and Rdw just drop that and now place the responsibility with the hobbyist. I myself have four Oldtimers registered and a few more suspended.
    How do I know whether or not I can hit the road with an old-timer?

  15. Insurance coverage is no problem at all; if a car meets the legal requirements, the insurer cannot but provide cover. If insurers start imposing additional requirements or simplify their terms and conditions, fortunately, another insurer will always fail to do so and expand the coverage or add new providers. Having the best terms and conditions is also a marketing tool, so take a good look at what providers there are and look not only at the price but also at the policy terms and conditions, before taking out the insurance. Always have your car appraised and insured against the appraisal value.

  16. The insurers may require the car from me
    Well maintained.

    As an MOT judge, I can imagine that there is no longer any MOT for these cars
    Despite good maintenance, it is sometimes difficult to get these cars approved.
    The current requirements are just too heavy in some cases.

    I do think that the cars should be well maintained !!

  17. Possible problems with insurance for vehicles of 50 years and older raised in this article are beyond reality. In the first place, there are already a large number of vehicles that drive around without MOT requirement and without increased risk of accident. The latter spoke just before the now amended measure. Secondly, only a limited number of kilometers can be driven with these policies. This article gives the insurer “arguments” to increase the premium without proper investigation.

  18. 50 years MOT is free for the owner of an oldtimer no problem, his oldtimer came through effortlessly anyway, BUT new oldtimer buyer, watch out, for the trade, if you have plans to buy a car older than 50 years let it MOT approval before the purchase, costs little but can save a lot of problems, there are always dealers who are not so careful, already advertise with permanent MOT free,

  19. A parallel with marine insurance
    For years I was insured with my yacht at party O. and the policy terms and conditions stated that my ship must be on the slope 1x / 5 years for a yard turn. I transferred to F. and there was no such requirement in the conditions. Inquiries taught me that the concept of “good housekeeping” was “vague”. If I were to claim damage in due course that could be the result of negligence during maintenance, no payment would be made.
    So pay attention to what is in the policy and be well informed in this area.

Give a reaction

The email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

Maximum file size of upload: 8 MB. You can upload: afbeelding. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop files here