I think the wording at the first test was something akin to "likely to deteriorate" but patently it hasn't as it continues to pass. If you knew Mrs chrisbee's driving you wouldn't have it replaced either! I don't consider it in any way detrimental to the safe operation of the car.colin-yorkshire said:Sorry Colin, you're wrong."" there you go"", :lol: :lol: :lol:
as for advisories well what can one say, if it needs doing on this test by next year it should fail, only had 2 advisories one for a tyre just on the legal limit and once for the front brake pads wear limit I assume either of these faults would have been a fail if not done ASAP, never mind after 12 months of running until the next MOT.
as for using a broken number plate for 4 years after being advised about it, "no comment"
The car under test,is tested as presented. If you find one bulb,that is an obligatory light, then you must fail the car. Not failing the car is bringing the MOT scheme into disrepute, and is disciplinary matter. You are not failing a car,when it has been presented with failure items. You can however,complete the test,fix the bulb and issue a PRS certificate. This is Pass,Repair at Station. The only item than can be corrected whilst the MOT is being conducted is headlight aim,which still is listed as a fail. Everything else must be done after the test is completed,ideally within 1 hour,and the tester cannot conduct any further tests until the previous test results have been submitted to DVSA. Failing minor items is not poor customer service. It just shows your doing your job correctly.
WoodlandsCamper said:
Grovelling apologies to all whose hearts are sinking.
However those who are enjoying this lively and stimulating debate: feel free to press the Thank you button. B) Cue the argument about whether this is a lively debate or a depressing excursion into pedantry. :evil:
Just wondering what will be on the list for a caravan MOT IF it ever comes to fruition. I know a lot are against that, but Im afraid Im one thats for the idea.
Here we go againtonybur said:
hmy:Legality or sensibility :huh:
My MOT station has looked after our cars for years.
If a bulb or wiper blade or something equally minor is not working it is fixed there and then. A pass issued. Everyone happy .
If I knew a garage tester was as pedantic as you describe I wouldn't use him B) ,
As I understand it, the MOT system is now an online system, and as Tony has stated there is now a time limit which is kickstarted when the tester logs on to the system to start the test.
If the tester starts to correct faults as they find them there is a danger the test time limit maybe exceeded.
With greater integration of the test equipment into the system it could start to notice if the same test is being run several times which suggests corrective actions are being applied as the test is being conducted. The service does look for stations were fail rates are lower than expected, and it can trigger an investigation.
I believe that most MOT test stations on sites where they have normal car servicing/repair facilities will tend to suggest to customers, lets do the test first, then correct any items that fail. That way the station keeps their MOT through put up and the number of fails within the expected range.
If the tester starts to correct faults as they find them there is a danger the test time limit maybe exceeded.
With greater integration of the test equipment into the system it could start to notice if the same test is being run several times which suggests corrective actions are being applied as the test is being conducted. The service does look for stations were fail rates are lower than expected, and it can trigger an investigation.
I believe that most MOT test stations on sites where they have normal car servicing/repair facilities will tend to suggest to customers, lets do the test first, then correct any items that fail. That way the station keeps their MOT through put up and the number of fails within the expected range.
So how long is the tester allowed.
Slow down boys before we go ott.
Most decent regular garages will do the whole test. Then they will change a bulb or wiper blade. Not during the actual test but at the end.
Hey presto a pass.
Thank goodness for common sense
Slow down boys before we go ott.
Most decent regular garages will do the whole test. Then they will change a bulb or wiper blade. Not during the actual test but at the end.
Hey presto a pass.
Thank goodness for common sense
Always book service and MOT together, service first then MOT
This year front calipers were seized, they got them free for MOT, they then phoned me and I booked them in next day to be replaced They were busy on day of MOT or would have done them that day. It was however an advisory on the MOT. Oh and pocket was over £500.00 lighter But better to be safe then sorry.
Think the moral is if you use a regular garage and the trust is there you will keep going back.
This year front calipers were seized, they got them free for MOT, they then phoned me and I booked them in next day to be replaced They were busy on day of MOT or would have done them that day. It was however an advisory on the MOT. Oh and pocket was over £500.00 lighter
But better to be safe then sorry.Think the moral is if you use a regular garage and the trust is there you will keep going back.
Dustydog said:So how long is the tester allowed.
Slow down boys before we go ott.
Most decent regular garages will do the whole test. Then they will change a bulb or wiper blade. Not during the actual test but at the end.
Hey presto a pass.
Thank goodness for common sense
Dusty, you said:
Here we go again
Legality or sensibility
My MOT station has looked after our cars for years.
If a bulb or wiper blade or something equally minor is not working it is fixed there and then. A pass issued. Everyone happy .
If I knew a garage tester was as pedantic as you describe I wouldn't use him .
Now you're saying:
So how long is the tester allowed.
Slow down boys before we go ott.
Most decent regular garages will do the whole test. Then they will change a bulb or wiper blade. Not during the actual test but at the end.
Hey presto a pass.
Thank goodness for common sense
It seems to me both are exactly the same. i.e A PRS.
Parksy
Moderator
I always take my cars for their MOT a month before the current certificate expires. To do this you have to take the current certificate along and the new MOT will run consecutively as the previous years MOT expires. This allows any work to be done during the month while the is still MOT,d if a re-test is needed.
An MOT does not guarantee that your vehicle is safe to drive but it does declare that at the time of testing your vehicle met the criteria set by the regulator. Earlier comments about whether and insurer would pay out if you had an accident in a car that had failed a retest but was still under the old MOT certificate. In truth I really wouldn’t like to test that theory because I do not trust insurers to do anything other than take my money and find ways not to pay it back.
Like others on here use a trusted independent garage, get a service done before the MOT test and get them to put right anything that will warrant a fail. It puts a stamp in the box of the service record and ensures that I am never on the road without a valid MOT and therefore insurance.
Like others on here use a trusted independent garage, get a service done before the MOT test and get them to put right anything that will warrant a fail. It puts a stamp in the box of the service record and ensures that I am never on the road without a valid MOT and therefore insurance.
Your car should not fail for a blown bulb as you should be aware of that and get them to replace it before the MOT. I think most garages would replace these simple items and if enough do it then their pass rate will not be lower to the point where they get an investigation. The time taken to replace a bulb or wiper is not going to take enough time to ring alarm bells and frankly I doubt the government are interested in that. They are looking for rogue garages who pass unfit cars.
There must also be a higher pass rate for main dealers who will normally be looking at newer and better maintained cars than smaller garages who get the older cars looking for cheaper repairs.
There must also be a higher pass rate for main dealers who will normally be looking at newer and better maintained cars than smaller garages who get the older cars looking for cheaper repairs.
Raywood said:
I tend to agree with you on this one, except that if there is failed bulb (subject to test criteria) when the car is tested then it should of course fail.
However some bulbs take an inordinate amount of time and effort to replace,
"Most difficult headlight bulb changes in cars" and see how many notable cases of extraordinary times and costs to replace bulbs.
Its Failed its test .Full stop unfortunately . I'm sure the insurance company would try to worm out claim if something happened . Not to be confused with a police Vehicle Defect Rectification Notice which is for 14 days and is for minor defects .
In my day we had to show all rectification work on the pass book copy . This was inspected by area inspector to get the books correct, as a main dealer we wouldn't have any first time fails . I believe they are now instigating doing away with area inspectors as well now, and all training is becoming computer based . Sign of the times .ProfJohnL said:
No time limit and for small things you would PRS, so when you finish the MOT and log it off it will print a fail sheet and a pass
Has anyone been failed on their, towbar electrics, I know a local MOT station, that just asks, does your towbar lighting work.
I've failed towbar wiring. Both 13 pin for not working correctly and 7 pin for damage.
Also,as for the odd comment on not failing fail items. Let's say you have a taillight out. Does the mot tester do a pre examination, then an MOT on the off chance something is wrong? No, anyone with any commercial brains will test the car and then PRS any items that can be fixed in a few minutes. Otherwise you fail, start your next test,and you get one of the junior techs to do the minor repairs. As for "how long a test takes". There is no stipulated time for an MOT. As has been said,you may be testing a 3 year old low mileage car that doesn't tend to fail to the extent of a 20 year old Shogun. My test average is around 30 minutes. It's a Fact. If your MOT station is not adhering to the strict guidelines when MOTing your car they are breaking the law. When the man from DVSA pops in to have an official you've made a mistake type chats,he pulls out his warrant car,reads you your rights and makes you sign the pages of a statement. That's quite scary,trust me.
Also,as for the odd comment on not failing fail items. Let's say you have a taillight out. Does the mot tester do a pre examination, then an MOT on the off chance something is wrong? No, anyone with any commercial brains will test the car and then PRS any items that can be fixed in a few minutes. Otherwise you fail, start your next test,and you get one of the junior techs to do the minor repairs. As for "how long a test takes". There is no stipulated time for an MOT. As has been said,you may be testing a 3 year old low mileage car that doesn't tend to fail to the extent of a 20 year old Shogun. My test average is around 30 minutes. It's a Fact. If your MOT station is not adhering to the strict guidelines when MOTing your car they are breaking the law. When the man from DVSA pops in to have an official you've made a mistake type chats,he pulls out his warrant car,reads you your rights and makes you sign the pages of a statement. That's quite scary,trust me.
martindf3 said:
I've seen 1 inspector in 5 years. Used to be every 6 months
You now don't have to record equipment calibration
Training is going to be by third parties
The quality of the test has fallen massively
Absolute Joke if you ask me.
Hello Tony,
Well yes in some respects it is a joke, and perhaps not fit for purpose, but at the same time, it must have stopped countless thousands of cars from being driven in a totally unroadworthy state, so in that regard it has made a positive contribution to road safety. - so perhaps not so much of a joke?
If it produces a ind set that makes people do more about looking after their cars, then again its had a positive influence.
I'm frequently reminded of the day when Austin and Morris where still around, and if you are old enough to remember those times, then if you cast your mind back to the number of rust buckets that populated our roads, and compare that to todays cohort of cars and I think you will see the health of cars are generalluy much better to day than then.
The MOT may lack some finer points, but again when you consider the explosion of technology that has arisen in cars, and each manufacturer has their own flavour of the tech, it's little surprise that finding the lowest common denominator to describe a satisfactory function is quite difficult.
As a (perhaps a peculiar) member of the public, I rue the day the tests get less probing. I advocate the concept of having a MOT disk to replace the old tax disk, to provide a visible presence of the test, and to act as reminder to get your car MOT'ed before the cert expires.Similarly with an insurance disk, and Road Fund Tax cancelled and transferred to extra duty on fuel. Then you pay for what you use, if you have a frugal car, light right foot and short distanecs you benefit , but if you choose a gas guzzler, of cant keep your speed down, and love to travel then you pay a fairer proportion of tax.
BUt that's another debate.
Well yes in some respects it is a joke, and perhaps not fit for purpose, but at the same time, it must have stopped countless thousands of cars from being driven in a totally unroadworthy state, so in that regard it has made a positive contribution to road safety. - so perhaps not so much of a joke?
If it produces a ind set that makes people do more about looking after their cars, then again its had a positive influence.
I'm frequently reminded of the day when Austin and Morris where still around, and if you are old enough to remember those times, then if you cast your mind back to the number of rust buckets that populated our roads, and compare that to todays cohort of cars and I think you will see the health of cars are generalluy much better to day than then.
The MOT may lack some finer points, but again when you consider the explosion of technology that has arisen in cars, and each manufacturer has their own flavour of the tech, it's little surprise that finding the lowest common denominator to describe a satisfactory function is quite difficult.
As a (perhaps a peculiar) member of the public, I rue the day the tests get less probing. I advocate the concept of having a MOT disk to replace the old tax disk, to provide a visible presence of the test, and to act as reminder to get your car MOT'ed before the cert expires.Similarly with an insurance disk, and Road Fund Tax cancelled and transferred to extra duty on fuel. Then you pay for what you use, if you have a frugal car, light right foot and short distanecs you benefit , but if you choose a gas guzzler, of cant keep your speed down, and love to travel then you pay a fairer proportion of tax.
BUt that's another debate.
I agree with the Prof, in the want of something better, its all we have and better than nothing. I for one wouldnt want to be injured or worse by some clown that refuses to keep his vehicle in a roadworthy condition. It also contributes to the ANPR system that goes some way to defending us from the chavs that will neither tax, insure or MOT their car, and in many cases license themselves. Anything in the armoury against that has to be a good thing.
I think Prof, the MOT today, is no more than a very basic safety check. It's true,modern cars are not prone to rot in anything like cars of old. You do still see rotten sections but even then,subject to the application of correct test procedures, they will still pass. Cars will still pass with light bulbs not working, mirrors missing,windscreens cracked from side to side. It just the way there tested.
Facebook
Twitter