MOT's - is the system flawed?

Earlier this year, I put the 'Fender in for an MOT - it failed on:

Rear Shocks
No Rear Reflectors
No Tell-Tale warning light for Hazards
2 Corroded brake lines

**NO ADVISORIES**

As I have been busy, I didn't have time to do the work as quick as I'd have liked, but all the work was done and today I put it back through - using the same MOT Place as before and it was tested by the very same chap as before.

It passed, but with the following advisories:

Slight play rear wheel bearings
Rust on chassis outside of prescribed area
Missing Bump Stop

Obviously I'm happy it passed but also pi$$ed off that we now seem to have no continuity in the standard of testing.

Why didn't the items found today get found in March? The vehicle has not moved off the drive since it failed, so I can't understand how the WB's suddenly become loose / slight play - were they not checked the last time?

Rust on Chassis, again, isn't something that happens in under 12 weeks, so why identify it now and not before?

As the system is now computerised, it must show what the previous test through up, so why does it change? Would I get a different list of items if I were to MOT it at another garage?

All we should ask for is continuity in my view.


But at least it passed!

someones idea of play may be different to others

rust can get worse in 12 weeks or a bit of paint may have come off that was covering it up.....remember they're only allowed a small wire brush and toffee hammer from memory

Dr_evil said:

someones idea of play may be different to others

Click to expand...

True, but the same bloke who tested it the last time tested it this time, that is kinda my point!

JohnM70 said:

True, but the same bloke who tested it the last time tested it this time, that is kinda my point!

Click to expand...

I often get advisories on my landy just so it doesn't look like an older vehicle has flown straight through the MOT and therefore looks dodgy.

In most cases I tend to do the advisories just to bugger em up the following year.

I've had rear shock bushes on mine for the last 2 years.

The year before last I had 'rusty tow hitch' so I painted it before last years MOT.

The year before that was corroded brake pipes, shock bushes and track rod end so I changed all but the bushes cos their's nothing wrong with em and new ones look the same.

They can genuinely say corrosion on the rear cross member this time although I have just painted it.

Dont expect anything as its driven by a million factors , and very little of it has anything to do with carrying out a logical , and repeatable roadworthiness inspection , the supervision is dominated by computer statistics analysis , and the implementation has been affected by commercial factors some in more dominance than others . JMHE

The tester is only human, some forget to put things down or maybe just think its now worth advising at the time

This a subject that really annoys me.
Although i've been SE for a long while i still remember the tricks that garages play, not just the ones i worked for.
A common one is wiper blades, a MOT is down to the discretion of the tester and even a slight smear on the glass can be a failure.
Also MOT'd customers car at a new place not too long ago and they told me on the phone that it had failed on the handbrake efficiency but new shoes will cure it, they told me that they have taken the drums off and the shoes are low not knowing the role i have.
When i picked it up to take back and do the work i noticed that they hadn't even removed the wheels let alone the drums.
Got handed the failure sheet and on it it had as an advisory for handbrake on the limit but still a pass but failed on a binding O/S/R.
Got it back and stripped it down and the shoes were fine not worn at all, although the one was binding slightly but they told me the shoes were well worn.
I maintain all the machinery on various farm's, be it the equipment or vehicles and once had a battered old 90 that needed a MOT, knew it was going to fail not on rot as i regularly hot wash down all the trucks and trailers but it needed alot of work but my policy is to MOT them first and then repair what needs it, anyway got to a local station that has been their since the dawn of time and we have used for years, the old boy who MOT'd the truck hardly looked at it and it passed!
It smoked like a **** but he just stuffed a rag around the probe or something and managed to get it through.
Afterwards i took to the workshop and fixed it any way as the Land Rovers and all the the trucks i see and its a lot get worked hard and sometimes can tow 4 odd ton around and there all my responsibility.
Also a question i have raised before is how legitimate an MOT is, those of you old enough will remember the old days where a vehicle was checked to make sure it was SAFE to be on the road, how does emissions come into this, if a vehicle fails emissions test how can that make it an unsafe vehicle and deemed unroad worthy.
Sorry for the long post but it gives all mechanics and garages a bad name, they take advantage of the fact that you NEED that ticket for another years motoring and they know it also if they think you dont know what about cars then they give people a list of **** they dont need and the average Joe Bloggs just panics and thinks that it is really serious and coughs up the high price.

The MOT test has become nothing more than an opportunity for garages to create some income for themselves. Most people just take their word for it and pay up, it's easy money. If you find a garage that doesn't rip you off recommend them to everyone you know the good guys need all the help they can get these days.

Whilst it SHOULDN'T make a difference, it does, I take mine to an MOT only place, they do do bits of work, but not really interested, they MOT for a fair few non MOT garages/mechanics round me, always seem to be honest and never had a fail on owt daft and he'll happily take me down in the pit after the test to show me what needs doing.
Anything borderline is usually passed and pointed out as needing attention soon, infact I was complimented on the condition of my fender last year, lets see what he says this week :/

For a vehicle to fail an MOT it has got to be in a bad state, the level a vehicle needs to be at to pass is low very low, and there are some things that would pass that you would not believe.

I put a question up on another thread (blue side lights) regarding rear side lights on a discovery 300. I'll put on here aswell.

Discovery 300 has 4 rear side lights if they are all working but on has the lens missing (white light showing to rear) PAS FAIL or PASS AND ADVISE

No, they don't know the advisories from the last test.

Many items are just going to be a matter of opinion. Wheel bearings always have a bit of play, and with the leverage of a big wheel can seem quite a bit; they will list it on the advisory to cover themselves. They can't tap every inch of a chassis for rust, just do the known trouble spots and a random selection everywhere else, so they could miss it once, then find it the next day.

I have used the same garage for quite a few years because he is very thorough, and lets me watch every detail of the tests. He knows he is not going to get any significant work out of the result.

There are still plenty of places to get a dodgy MOT, even with the computerised online system - just do the emission and brake tests on another vehicle.

oldskool said:

For a vehicle to fail an MOT it has got to be in a bad state, the level a vehicle needs to be at to pass is low very low, and there are some things that would pass that you would not believe.

I put a question up on another thread (blue side lights) regarding rear side lights on a discovery 300. I'll put on here aswell.

Discovery 300 has 4 rear side lights if they are all working but on has the lens missing (white light showing to rear) PAS FAIL or PASS AND ADVISE

Click to expand...

White light showing on the side or rear is a fail
having 4 rear side lights you could remove the bulbs and lens of the faulty ones as long as the other 2 are legal , position ,reflector build in etc

Iann said:

White light showing on the side or rear is a fail
having 4 rear side lights you could remove the bulbs and lens of the faulty ones as long as the other 2 are legal , position ,reflector build in etc

Click to expand...

No its not an mot fail its a pass and advise,

For the MOT all you need is TWO red lights one on each side and roughly the same level, any other lights that come on with the side lights are auxiliary/additional lights and are not testable items.

It might be illegal, but not a MOT fail.

What colour do directional indicators have to be.

oldskool said:

It might be illegal, but not a MOT fail.

Click to expand...

annoyingly when it comes to HIDs which ARE dangerous to other road users

oldskool said:

What colour do directional indicators have to be.

Click to expand...

prolly a trick question, but amber??

or have to light up amber...

ha, I was right

"d. that every direction indicator emits amber light (except vehicles first used before 1 September 1965)"

timtheenchanteruk said:

ha, I was right

"d. that every direction indicator emits amber light (except vehicles first used before 1 September 1965)"

Click to expand...

Correct

timtheenchanteruk said:

annoyingly when it comes to HIDs which ARE dangerous to other road users




prolly a trick question, but amber??

Click to expand...

after market HIDs only illegal if they are over certain lumin (i think its 1500) as you probably can't tell at time of test you have to give the presenter the benefit of the daught and pass.

Nuvver one for ya no. plate light showing white light to rear?

oldskool said:

after market HIDs only illegal if they are over certain lumin (i think its 1500) as you probably can't tell at time of test you have to give the presenter the benefit of the daught and pass.

Click to expand...

what about the wash & self leveller, not part of the MOT IIRC, but should be there is used on the roads (bit like window tints, not tested @ MOT but you can be done for em if too dark)