DfT Proposes Penalty Points and Car Seizure for Driving Without a Valid MOT

• The Department for Transport (DfT) is asking whether driving without a valid MOT should carry penalty points and allow police to seize the vehicle. Today it carries neither.
• The same consultation asks whether being in charge of a vehicle with a false, altered or incorrect number plate should also bring points and seizure.
• Nothing has changed in law yet. The consultation closed on 11.05.2026 and the DfT says it is analysing responses.

DfT Proposes Penalty Points and Car Seizure for Driving Without a Valid MOT

A driver caught without a valid MOT certificate today faces no penalty points and no loss of the car. The Department for Transport wants to know whether that should end. In its consultation on proposed changes to penalties for motoring offences, the DfT sets out two direct questions on the MOT: should the offence carry penalty points, and should police be able to seize the vehicle?

The consultation document says offences of this kind do not carry extra penalties, such as penalty points or vehicle seizure. Question 29 asks about points. Question 30 asks about seizure, and the document says seizure would mirror the approach already used for driving without insurance, with police keeping discretion over when to use it.

The consultation was published on GOV.UK on 7 January 2026. It opened at 11.30am that day and was extended to close at 11.59pm on 11.05.2026. The page now shows it as closed, with the DfT saying it is analysing feedback. No decision on any of the proposals has been published.

What Changes for Number Plates Under the Same Proposal

The MOT is not the only offence in the document. The DfT also asks about drivers and keepers of vehicles carrying incorrect, altered or false number plates. Under current rules, the consultation says, these offences carry no penalty points and no vehicle seizure.

Question 27 asks whether being in charge of a vehicle with an incorrect, altered or false plate should bring penalty points. Question 28 asks whether police should be able to seize the vehicle. The document lists so-called ghost plates within the scope of the exercise but does not define them separately.

For a driver with a damaged or faded plate, the practical risk sits in how any new rule would be worded. The consultation asks about incorrect and altered plates alongside false ones, so the final definition would decide who is caught. That detail has not been published.

Who Is Affected and What the Rules Say Now

Every car over the age at which an MOT is needed must hold a valid certificate to be driven on the road, which covers the large majority of vehicles on British roads. Any change to the penalty for lapsed tests would reach a broad group of drivers, from people who forget a renewal date to those who knowingly drive an untested car.

The consultation sets out how the neighbouring offences are treated, which shows where the MOT sits by comparison. Driving without insurance carries a fixed penalty of £300 and 6 penalty points if accepted. In court the penalty is an unlimited fine, 6 to 8 points and possible disqualification. Unlicensed driving carries a fine of up to £1,000, 3 to 6 points and possible disqualification.

The MOT, by contrast, sits outside that points system. The proposal would bring it closer to the insurance model, including the seizure power the document describes for uninsured driving.

The Wider Package of Penalty Changes

The MOT and plate questions form part of a long consultation that covers drink and drug driving, seat belts, failure to stop and report, unlicensed driving and uninsured driving. Several of the proposals are questions about whether penalties should rise, not set figures.

On seat belts, the document records the current £100 fixed penalty, with a maximum court fine of £500 and no points, and asks about 3 points for drivers and passengers who do not wear one. On failure to stop and report, it records the existing 5 to 10 points, 6 to 12 months of disqualification, a fine of up to £5,000 and up to 6 months in prison, and asks whether maximum penalties should rise.

On unlicensed and uninsured driving, Question 37 proposes extending the statutory time limit for prosecutions to 18 months in cases of death or serious injury. The limit stands at 6 months now. Question 38 asks whether the maximum for unlicensed driving should increase, and Question 39 asks whether minimum penalties for uninsured driving should go up.

What the Consultation Says About Enforcement Discretion

The DfT document does not ask for automatic seizure. On the MOT, it describes a power that would mirror the one used for uninsured vehicles, where police decide case by case. That distinction is central for drivers whose test lapsed by a few days against those who have driven untested for months, and the consultation leaves the detail of any guidance for later.

Seizure of an uninsured car already means the owner faces recovery and storage costs before getting the vehicle back. If the same approach were applied to the MOT, a lapsed certificate could add those costs to whatever fine and points a court imposes. The DfT has not published cost estimates for the MOT proposal, so no figure can be put on it.

The consultation also asks about the statutory time limit for prosecutions. At 6 months now, the limit leaves little room in cases where a serious collision involves an unlicensed or uninsured driver. Question 37 proposes 18 months for those serious cases only, which would not alter how an ordinary lapsed MOT is dealt with.

Road safety is the argument behind the package. The document groups the MOT with insurance and licensing as the basic requirements for using a car, and asks whether the penalties for missing them are in line with the risk. Drivers with a current certificate, valid insurance and correct plates would see no difference if the proposals went ahead.

What Drivers Should Do Now

Nothing in the consultation is law. Penalty points and seizure for a lapsed MOT would need the government to confirm the policy and then bring forward legislation, and no timetable has been given. Drivers are not facing the new penalties today.

The simplest step is to check the MOT expiry date on the GOV.UK vehicle checker and set a reminder. A test can be taken up to a month, less a day, before expiry and the new certificate keeps the original renewal date, so there is a window to book without losing time. Anyone with a number plate that is cracked, faded or non-standard in its lettering should replace it, as plates that do not meet the required format already count as an offence.

Drivers who want to influence the outcome have missed the formal window, as the consultation has closed. The DfT has said it will publish a response after analysing the feedback. When it does, the response will show which of these proposals the government intends to take forward and which it drops.

The cost of a lapsed MOT is already a practical one. A car without a certificate generally cannot be insured against a claim without risk, and a driver caught on the road can be prosecuted. Adding points and seizure would put the offence in a higher tier, which is the change the DfT is testing with this consultation.

For readers who want the detail, the full set of questions sits in the consultation document on GOV.UK. Questions 17 and 18 cover seat belts, 19 to 23 cover failure to stop, 27 to 30 cover plates and the MOT, and 37 to 39 cover unlicensed and uninsured driving.

This article will be updated if the DfT publishes its response. Until then the position is simple: the MOT offence has no points, no seizure power exists, and the government is asking whether both should be added.

Sources

• GOV.UK: Proposed changes to penalties for motoring offences
• UK Parliament Deposited Papers: Open consultation Proposed changes to penalities for motoring offences