Status
Not open for further replies.
the hooded claw said:
Well this has gone round FULL CIRCLE now & THE ONLY reason it degenerated into this MOT **** was YOU ASKED who the MOT station was ......& You STILL aint answered MY question .................WHY DID YOU NEED TO KNOW!!!!???? (Coz as you quite rightly say it is TOTALLY IRELEVENT to Jay's predicament)


Also I SAID the very same thing back 9 pages ago
Click to expand...



Well, pardon me for asking!

It wasn't I who raised the MoT subject, was it?
I confess to asking WHICH of the MoT stations in Carluke was involved.

Now my recollection is that I asked this question long after some pretty nasty if not malicious utterings had been made about dodgy MoTs.

It was also long after Jay had been told time and time again he doesn't need to worry about any part of this except the one big question.

(here we go again!)

YES or NO, was that car fit for purpose when the dealer sold it?

If the answer is NO, then James goes for the dealer, and the dealer ONLY.

That's it fellows.

CharlesY

PS
Oh yes, WHY did I want to know? Because there are several MoT places in Carluke, and I'm nosey, that's why! I don't want to be involved in dodgy MoT stations and I am pretty sure I am not.
 
three conclusions from this fred.
1.JAY GET THE MOTA REFUNDED!
2.You cant trust the members of LZ
3.there is a very nast whiff of a clique going on within the site.If yer face dont fit.....
 
Oh yes, WHY did I want to know? Because there are several MoT places in Carluke, and I'm nosey, that's why! I don't want to be involved in dodgy MoT stations
Click to expand...

Which leads quite nicely to .....if you were ONLY being "nosey" why put Jay in contact with the MOT station then ???
 
goonarmy said:
three conclusions from this fred.
1.JAY GET THE MOTA REFUNDED!
2.You cant trust the members of LZ
3.there is a very nast whiff of a clique going on within the site.If yer face dont fit.....
Click to expand...



Sure, point one, DEFINITELY!!!

Points 2 and 3 ??

Oh that's a bit harsh isn't it?

I have never once been let down for help on this forum. When I first joined I did so because I was in deep doo-doo with my TD5 Disco.

People here went to a lot of bother to help me out, and I appreciate their help very much.

We all know stuff that other people don't know, and the value of a forum like this is our amazing ability to SHARE knowledge, experience, and bad jokes.

CharlesY
 
the hooded claw said:
Which leads quite nicely to .....if you were ONLY being "nosey" why put Jay in contact with the MOT station then ???
Click to expand...


Because

1. I was pretty confident there was nothing wrong with the MoT in July,
and
2. I was pretty confident the garage would be able to help Jay trace the movements of the car at least some of the time between July and November.
3. I was hopeful that Mr Mills would be able to explain to Jay how the MoT system works, and why it isn't a guarantee of anything, especially not after 5 months of mystery.

From Jay's description of the problems, it seems possible or even likely that the RR has suffered a very hard time during that period of about 5 months.

But a bent back axle? Does Jay really mean that? Or is that the bent Panhard Rod, which is lying across the car just behind the rear axle?

And all that stuff about alignment? What? And here we are AGAIN, diverting from the ONLY issue that matters, which is ......

you know it already ... a hundred times

CharlesY
 
robp38 said:
Bored now !!!!!
Click to expand...


Surely you're not bored reading good stuff like this ...

YES or NO, was that car fit for purpose when the dealer sold it?

If the answer is NO, then James goes for the dealer, and the dealer ONLY.

YES or NO, was that car fit for purpose when the dealer sold it?

If the answer is NO, then James goes for the dealer, and the dealer ONLY.

YES or NO, was that car fit for purpose when the dealer sold it?

If the answer is NO, then James goes for the dealer, and the dealer ONLY.

YES or NO, was that car fit for purpose when the dealer sold it?

If the answer is NO, then James goes for the dealer, and the dealer ONLY.
 
aw ffs.........

suicide.gif
 
juiceyv8 said:
Time to go home yet.?
Click to expand...


I was about to go to bed, but if you want reminded of my advice to Jay ...
Naaahhh..... I can't do it!






YES I CAN!!!


YES or NO, was that car fit for purpose when the dealer sold it?

If the answer is NO, then James goes for the dealer, and the dealer ONLY.

YES or NO, was that car fit for purpose when the dealer sold it?

If the answer is NO, then James goes for the dealer, and the dealer ONLY.

YES or NO, was that car fit for purpose when the dealer sold it?

If the answer is NO, then James goes for the dealer, and the dealer ONLY.

YES or NO, was that car fit for purpose when the dealer sold it?

If the answer is NO, then James goes for the dealer, and the dealer ONLY.
progress.gif
 
CharlesY said:
NO. The MoT question has already been ruled out by VOSA, so you can all forget that line of argument.

QUESTION: YES or NO - was that car FIT FOR PURPOSE WHEN JAMES BOUGHT IT?

NOTHING else is relevant to James's case, and Jame's case is the ONLY case we are dealing with.

The test in English Law is "proximate cause" - Google it and read the definition VERY CAREFULLY. Far too many events happened or could have happened between July and November, for any of the blame to fall on the MoT station EVEN IF it was a doubtful MoT, which I reckon it was not.

ONCE AGAIN, Yes or NO, was that car fit for purpose when it was sold to James?

CharlesY
Click to expand...

I can't find the exact post but didn't the car fail it's MOT on dodgy brake pipes, only to pass a few hours later with appear to be the same brake pipes?

If so then that in itself means the testers certificate should be revoked!
 
We only have Mr Mills word that he was on holiday/didn't do the MOT, the motor was traded in a couple of weeks after the MOT.

If I, or my garage was involved in dodgy practices and I had been alerted to this thread then I would say and do almost anything to try and wriggle out of it.
 
I agree, Jay should be chasing the dealer for a refund. But it doesn't alter the fact something fishy has gone on between the P38 being presented for it's first MOT and Jay acquiring it. Because of this I can understand why it's got so many people backs up. And given the evidence that the P38 was presented for MOT, failed on a few things then was presented a couple of hours later and passed with no advisories has got to raise questions, even with VOSA!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
Suspension issues, driving me mad
Replies
1
Views
560
Graculus
Graculus
S
Newbie urgent help supercharged 55 reg problems
Replies
2
Views
546
Grrrrrr
Grrrrrr
NiallRussell
need help, can you diagnose this...
Replies
4
Views
272
NiallRussell
NiallRussell
seldom
L320 rear bushes
Replies
8
Views
443
Mark Piercy
Mark Piercy
seldom
Cracked Wheels
Replies
8
Views
285
gold rover
gold rover