Status
Not open for further replies.
2 points here.....
1) an MOT is only valid as of the moment it is issued.
I think that MOT documents state that " items may fail soon after an MOT due to the test" - ie shocks etc.
2) it is a dealers legal responsibility to sell something that is "of merchantable quality" & "fit for use".

That vehicle does not appear to conform to either if those legal requirements, in my opinion. Unfortunately my opinion dont count for Jack **** :eek:.

I am well aware of that i have done hundreds of MOTs. At time of test only applies. But it does not take the brain of Britain to see that there is a little wrong when a vehicle fails a test on certain items, is documented then passes later that day presumably with the faults corrected. But turns up three months later with exactly the same faults it failed on still apparent. All this ringer crap is just that, crap. Unless the tester is in on it. But all this happened BEFORE the dealer bought it it would appear. So his crime is saying he has had the vehicle checked over when he obviously has not. Or if he has selling it in that condition knowingly. He can't possibly wriggle out of that one either way.
 
Just returned to this.
Supposing................If a guy had a dodgy car he wanted to dispose off then maybe from London he browsed all the U.K. auctons for a like for like model.
One came up in Scotland with a good mot and history so he took a punt on it.
The necessary swaps made and a ringer sold for top dollar.....Just a thought..
 
:pop2::pop2:

Do you think spielberg or lucas will be after the film rights?

Tom cruise as the unfortunate rangie owner and say Rutger Hauer as the car salesman..:pound:
 
Just had an IM telling me to lay off. Must be getting close to something.

possiblyasillyman@mememe.com: How many do you want? I've a lot more than you think, but then it's not really any of your business.
allactionhero: You would not be a certain dodgy dealer or bent MOT tester would you?

Last message sent before the guy disappeared. Does anyone know him?

was that from a current member on here ?
 
Last edited:
was that from a current member on here ?

Don't know Sean just an IM on AOL said i should not put my thoughts on the internet if i did not know the facts. I listed the facts i know of ref MOT etc. The things i have commented on. He came back and said he had a lot more but it was none of my business. I posted that then he came back again and said i was a liar. He has to have some connection unless he is just a plankton looking for a arguement.

I have just been advised that plankton is spelt with a K i am so sorry for that typo. Now if your a member on here come out from beneath your stone otherwise **** off.
 
Last edited:
Only Tom would do it sorry j... I asked Bradd Pitt but he and Angeline Jolie only like the Defender forum :jaw:
 
Wonder if the two guests reading this are the MOT tester and the dealer? Three now maybe the solicitor joined in.
 
Lol, might make them think twice and give me my bloody money back.

****ing bank has taken out nearly a grand from my account, and said sorry an error with account numbers, should have been someone elses account.

3days before it goes back in. Great how the hell do I live then???

They are getting back to me!
 
Lol, might make them think twice and give me my bloody money back.

****ing bank has taken out nearly a grand from my account, and said sorry an error with account numbers, should have been someone elses account.

3days before it goes back in. Great how the hell do I live then???

They are getting back to me!

It took them 10 seconds to make the mistake tell them they have 30 to rectify it.
 
Don't get me started on f****** lawyers!!!

They are the most scandalous vested interest there is.

Who makes the laws? - Lawyers.

Who benefits from the laws? - Lawyers.

Too many MPs are failed lawyers.

Q. What do you call a busload of solicitors going over a cliff?

A. A good start.

A
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads