dodgy MOT ! or ?

[Station]

I've had one car pass in my entire MOT history!

Nothing worse than a fail and then resubmitting it and then have it fail again.

[fordperv]

Yep I've seen advisories for heavy undersealing/ heavy wax oilling in the past.

Arse covering at it's finest. Yes of course it's lathered in wax/ underseal if it wasn't it would be red rust...

Yep i get this one every year, he arse covers but if i get stopped by vosa on the way out they will question how hes assessed the condition of the underside when its covered in rust proofing, i did chuckle at one year he put on mrs fps rs turbo advisory exhaust excessively loud, to be fair to him it is loud

[puddlethumper]

Having imported my old Plug from Portugal a few years ago I was interested in the Mot situation here. In Portugal the Mot centres are Government run and only do Mot's. No repairs.  Big hangar with three lanes, two for under 3.5t, one for over. 

Three people working each 3.5t lane. Its like a conveyer belt. First stop, check lights, horn, wipers, windscreen,  tyres, not just tread depth but size as well. If they are a different size to original, fail. Next stop , the RATTLER and underneath stuff.

I used to cringe when they rattled the hell out it. They used to stab around with a pointy thing underneath to see if it went through anywhere.    Next stop, breaks and last stop smoke test. 

The chance of a dodgy was practically nil. After the test the test paper then went to an office where an office bod would issue the certificate, or not.  All done in about 20 mins.

In Portugal you can't mod anything. If it wasn't as it came out of the factory you can't have it. If you want to put ally's on, you can get away with it , but for the Mot you have to put the originals back on.

Anyhoo. Having tried various test centres here for the first few years I found my twenty year old was being treated like a ten year old, and it failed every time. Mechanically I always  kept it up together and was surprised, after the stringency in Portugal, to immediately fail. 

Then I found an Mot place that was more " in tune " with older models. E.g. Last Mot, advisory, slight film on front shocker. No. Totally buggered, but they know I'll sort it because I was having a word about new springs and shocks all round. Dodgy Mot ? Maybe. Got new shocks within a couple of weeks. 

I always have a good look underneath and the tester knows to let me know if there is anything iffy. He also asks at the start if all the lights, indicators, wipers etc work and trusts me when I say everything does. 

If anyone lives within distance of Breakwell Testing DY5 1QA I would recommend. The owner has an Austin Cambridge and a Morris Oxford circa 1960. The Oxford looks a bit gasser style, Cambridge is all original with two tone red/white and there are always mods goin on with others. Mini van, A40 farina, n stuff.

Yakked enuff. Tara.

[New POD]

When I worked for Lucas Industries in the 90's at their Research Centre, my wife ran a particularly mediocre mini 850, which failed the Mot on sills, front valance, and brakes and a couple of ball joints.

On the way home, it also started running like a bag of nails, which I put down to head gasket failure due to me ragging the tits off it, in anger. 

This was put in the garage, and a week later a loverly 1100 clubman with 12 months MOT purchased, with a "miniman" sticker, and some receipts showing that it had been purchased some 2 years before having been "painstackingly restored".

 

Anyway some 6 months later my wife is now pregnant, and we decide that we can not afford 3 cars (one of which is almost scrap) so the 2 mini's must go.

I spend some time in the garage replacing sills and front valance and some of the braking parts (a tip here : if one wheel cylinder has failed seals, it stands to reason that all other seals are ready to fail, so replace them all), and the suspension.

Then I crack on with taking the head off to find it needs a replacement due to cracked valve seats, so a second hand one comes to us via the post man (he restores and breaks minis in the afternoons).

Because I can't get it started my mate David Sexton comes around with a pair of oven gloves, puts the plugs in the oven, gets it started, and then proceeds to tune it by ear - Now he has experience, because he used to work in engine development at "The Austin" and has grass track raced highly tuned A series. (His opinion on Vizard ? Mediocre)

Anyway at that point my wife tells us she's giving the 850 to her friend to learn to drive in, so I finish off the front end respray badly. It's almost 3 shades of yellow out. But hey.

Take the bloody thing to the same MOT tester, who flings the pass cert at me, with the words, "I don't know why you bothered, you should have scrapped it****" and "You best put the carbs back how they should be cause it'll not run well if it's that lean"

Apparently, the emissions were the lowest for an 850 mini running on leaded petrol that he'd ever tested.

****Wife's friend scrapped it exactly one year later when it failed the MOT on brakes and suspension. So scrapped for service items on a mini.

 

The clubman, reached the 12 months, and we knew that an MOT would be difficult, so a bloke at work bought it for £120, took it for an MOT, which went to three pages. He turned it on it's side in his drive to weld it up, and then gave it to his wife.

About 18 months later, his wife opened the door in a supermarket car park and the door fell off, so he scrapped it.

 

My point ? MOT's are only half the story, but Alec Issigoniss was a twat.

[sierraman]

I've seen people buy cars with a 'full test' that were heaps of shit. It's no guarantee the fucker won't overheat on you or the clutch will give way on the way to work. As above it's a minimum standard.

 

The trouble is everybody takes it as a personal critique of your car, 'they've only failed it so they can get the work of welding a set of suspension hangers on!'

[michael1703]

All good points on this thread

 

My only grump

 

 

VOSA DOESN'T EXIST! HASN'T FOR NEARLY 3 YEARS

[twosmoke300]

Still "the ministry " to me !

[hpi_matrix]

This thread has reminded me of an old BMW I took for an "MOT" in Malaysia, it had been sitting for a number of years and wasn't in the best of shape.

 

There was a big queue when we arrived and they tested everything from HGV to bikes, I struggled to keep it running in the queue and in then end pushed it instead untill it was our turn, but it passed quite easily only failing on not having a 3rd brake light (which wasn't fitted as standard anyway ).

 

The main criteria seemed to be lights working and engine number had to match up. No rust, brake checks or bushes to worry about.

 

After passing I got about a weeks use out of it before the old cambelt skipped a tooth.

 

Anyway heres a pic of it outside the "MOT" centre:

 

[SiC]

VOSA DOESN'T EXIST! HASN'T FOR NEARLY 3 YEARS

And we don't have road tax, but everyone will still call it that!

 

Why did they change the name?

[Eddie Honda]

Still "the ministry " to me !

 

OT. Is your inbox full? *cough* calendar *cough*

[scaryoldcortina]

VOSA (vehicle examination) and DSA (driver examination) were merged to create DVSA.

 

I don't think there was a reason given tbh.

[Minimad5]

girl i know thinks MOTs check everything, as she pointed out to me when i told her to listen for timing chain rattle before buying a Corsa. Lol

[rml2345]

I like the MOT as a minimum standard is better than no standard at all. Our fave local garage who do our MOTs are firm but fair with their testing and often point out other non MOT critical stuff that could do with attention as well without pressure for them to do it. Anyone who buys a car on the strength of its MOT alone is seriously asking for trouble as it's only one indicator of condition. If it's a lop sided, smokey rotbox it doesn't suddenly become a viable means of transportation because it's got 12 months ticket.

[tommytwo]

Not so much dodgy MOT's as dodgy testers. Back in 2008, my car failed its MOT after 6 years of passing. First garage, I told them not to drop the hood down, as it would jam shut. Failed the test and I got home to discover that they had indeed dropped the hood and it was jammed shut. Took three days to get it open. So I decided to give that garage the elbow and go elsewhere.

 

Next garage, the tester drives it into the door post getting it into the testing bay, scrapping lots of paint of off the front bumper. Failed that test too, when the the expansion tank let go and on emissions. No apologies for the bumper damage.

 

After much work, I presented the car for testing, again at a different garage. This time it passed. Only because the tester noticed that because my car was one of the first to have a cat, there was a gap in the MOT database and it could be tested as a non cat car (up to 3.5% Co) This same garage failed it again three years later on emissions because the tester put the wrong number into the computer.(2 numbers were entered in reverse order) When I requested form VT17, they soon noticed their mistake and scrambled to put things right.

 

My next test is not due until January 2018. Looks like I will have to find yet another garage. Past 2 years, they have started doing work for me that I did not ask for and presenting me with the bill. I know I must look like an old fart with one foot in the grave and the other on a banana skin. But I still prefer to do things for myself, and I normally get them right first time.

 

End of rant!

[The Reverend Bluejeans]

When I worked for Lucas Industries in the 90's at their Research Centre, my wife ran a particularly mediocre mini 850, which failed the Mot on sills, front valance, and brakes and a couple of ball joints.

On the way home, it also started running like a bag of nails, which I put down to head gasket failure due to me ragging the tits off it, in anger. 

This was put in the garage, and a week later a loverly 1100 clubman with 12 months MOT purchased, with a "miniman" sticker, and some receipts showing that it had been purchased some 2 years before having been "painstackingly restored".

 

Anyway some 6 months later my wife is now pregnant, and we decide that we can not afford 3 cars (one of which is almost scrap) so the 2 mini's must go.

I spend some time in the garage replacing sills and front valance and some of the braking parts (a tip here : if one wheel cylinder has failed seals, it stands to reason that all other seals are ready to fail, so replace them all), and the suspension.

Then I crack on with taking the head off to find it needs a replacement due to cracked valve seats, so a second hand one comes to us via the post man (he restores and breaks minis in the afternoons).

Because I can't get it started my mate David Sexton comes around with a pair of oven gloves, puts the plugs in the oven, gets it started, and then proceeds to tune it by ear - Now he has experience, because he used to work in engine development at "The Austin" and has grass track raced highly tuned A series. (His opinion on Vizard ? Mediocre)

Anyway at that point my wife tells us she's giving the 850 to her friend to learn to drive in, so I finish off the front end respray badly. It's almost 3 shades of yellow out. But hey.

Take the bloody thing to the same MOT tester, who flings the pass cert at me, with the words, "I don't know why you bothered, you should have scrapped it****" and "You best put the carbs back how they should be cause it'll not run well if it's that lean"

Apparently, the emissions were the lowest for an 850 mini running on leaded petrol that he'd ever tested.

****Wife's friend scrapped it exactly one year later when it failed the MOT on brakes and suspension. So scrapped for service items on a mini.

 

The clubman, reached the 12 months, and we knew that an MOT would be difficult, so a bloke at work bought it for £120, took it for an MOT, which went to three pages. He turned it on it's side in his drive to weld it up, and then gave it to his wife.

About 18 months later, his wife opened the door in a supermarket car park and the door fell off, so he scrapped it.

 

My point ? MOT's are only half the story, but Alec Issigoniss was a twat.

 

 

Indeed. Having cut my teeth on Minis, I look back now and realise what rubbish they are.

[The Reverend Bluejeans]

 

 

The test pass standard is extremely low and cars with dangerous defects to non testable items can get a pass.

 

 

 

Yes and no, IMHO.

 

Cracks in a laminated screen? So what?

 

An old car runs a bit rich of the HC's are a bit high? Ditto.

 

But who the fuck thinks that 1.6 mm is an acceptable tread depth? This is the stuff that really matters.

[sierraman]

Michelin do, they recently issued a statement saying their tyres were safe right up to the 1.6mm legal limit. Obviously stopping distances suffer inevitably and I'd much sooner replace a tyre at 2mm, particularly in the winter.

 

One that makes me laugh is when people go 'it's got all it's MOTs!' Never had a service but you've the reassurance of knowing the brake pads were ok back in 2008.

 

I'm all for having an annual MOT, I'd much sooner find out a brake pipe was rusted through that it present itself on the M1. I'd imagine these days a genuinely dodgy MOT would be difficult to find, who on earth is going to chance their livelihood on passing an MOT on some heap of shit. I don't doubt though a few rogues get through on emissions by sticking the gastester on something else, but the chances of passing something with bald tyres and ball joints hanging out the sockets would be unlikely.

[Magnificent Rustbucket]

Michelin do, they recently issued a statement saying their tyres were safe right up to the 1.6mm legal limit. Obviously stopping distances suffer inevitably and I'd much sooner replace a tyre at 2mm, particularly in the winter.

 

One that makes me laugh is when people go 'it's got all it's MOTs!' Never had a service but you've the reassurance of knowing the brake pads were ok back in 2008.

 

I'm all for having an annual MOT, I'd much sooner find out a brake pipe was rusted through that it present itself on the M1. I'd imagine these days a genuinely dodgy MOT would be difficult to find, who on earth is going to chance their livelihood on passing an MOT on some heap of shit. I don't doubt though a few rogues get through on emissions by sticking the gastester on something else, but the chances of passing something with bald tyres and ball joints hanging out the sockets would be unlikely.

 

 

I saw that too. IIRC, Michelin claim their tyres are safe down to 1.6 mm since the waterways in their tyres are designed to expand as the tyre wears - and new ones open up as the tyre wears down, compensating for the loss of depth. They claim that 'premature' replacement of their tyres is bad for the environment - and shouldn't be done! There is no way I would leave any tyre on that long though.

[fordperv]

Yes and no, IMHO.

 

Cracks in a laminated screen? So what?

 

An old car runs a bit rich of the HC's are a bit high? Ditto.

 

But who the fuck thinks that 1.6 mm is an acceptable tread depth? This is the stuff that really matters.

The tester i use says it infuriates him looking at a car which has a baby seat in knowing he cant fail the nearly illegal tyres that have cracks knowing that the silly twat will carry on driving it like that until the tyres resemble racing slicks

[hairymel]

 I'd imagine these days a genuinely dodgy MOT would be difficult to find, who on earth is going to chance their livelihood on passing an MOT on some heap of shit. I don't doubt though a few rogues get through on emissions by sticking the gastester on something else, but the chances of passing something with bald tyres and ball joints hanging out the sockets would be unlikely.

 

going rate round here is £100 apparently. needs to see (a pic) of the v5 not the actual vehicle, so no problems with bald joints

 

i personally am confused on two points -

 

1 why the fuck would you (ie the tester*) risk so much for another £50 or so?

 

2 why the fuck would you drive about in a car that is unable to meet the fairly lax safety standards of a real test?

[scdan4]

Not so very long ago now I used to know a man who would do mot's return of post. (Which was a remarkably handy thing to know as a skint student.) This went on for a good few years until sadly his business burned to the ground. 

 

He was an old boy, and I think he'd had enough. The fire was a bit serendipidous. He had a lot of old old stuff in his sheds that was insured and lost.

 

 

In the lot more recent past, my tame motorbike shop didn't put my motorbikes in their bay for 10+ years. I was asked if it's ok, registration and miles. I did have to actually go there with the machine though, and I had the good manners to make sure it was all ok just in case the vosa man swaggered down the alley.

[DodgeRover]

DVSA VOSA the man from the ministry whatever have been known to wait parked up noting what vehicles go in and come out.

It's also worth knowing that should the ministry man arrive as or after your vehicle is being inspected they can't keep you waiting past the end of your allocated time slot - as long as you tell them you have to be elsewhere.

[oldford]

The tester i use says it infuriates him looking at a car which has a baby seat in knowing he cant fail the nearly illegal tyres that have cracks knowing that the silly twat will carry on driving it like that until the tyres resemble racing slicks

I tested a car with a baby seat in the back, the seats were split folded and the part behind the seat wasn't latched in.

[New POD]

I saw that too. IIRC, Michelin claim their tyres are safe down to 1.6 mm since the waterways in their tyres are designed to expand as the tyre wears - and new ones open up as the tyre wears down, compensating for the loss of depth. They claim that 'premature' replacement of their tyres is bad for the environment - and shouldn't be done! There is no way I would leave any tyre on that long though.

 

I'd definitely be taking them to the wear limits then - 1.55 mm for me if I ever buy Michelins.  !!!!

[Sir Snipes]

I like the MOT as a minimum standard is better than no standard at all. Our fave local garage who do our MOTs are firm but fair with their testing and often point out other non MOT critical stuff that could do with attention as well without pressure for them to do it. Anyone who buys a car on the strength of its MOT alone is seriously asking for trouble as it's only one indicator of condition. If it's a lop sided, smokey rotbox it doesn't suddenly become a viable means of transportation because it's got 12 months ticket.

 

No but it does give you a whole year to do with whatever issues the car has....

[The Reverend Bluejeans]

going rate round here is £100 apparently. needs to see (a pic) of the v5 not the actual vehicle, so no problems with bald joints

 

i personally am confused on two points -

 

1 why the fuck would you (ie the tester*) risk so much for another £50 or so?

 

2 why the fuck would you drive about in a car that is unable to meet the fairly lax safety standards of a real test?

 

 

It's to do with getting number plates from cars that were scrapped years ago but still have a V5. The car doesn't exist so cannot be unsafe to drive. DVLA very rarely check a car these days.

[hairymel]

It's to do with getting number plates from cars that were scrapped years ago but still have a V5. The car doesn't exist so cannot be unsafe to drive. DVLA very rarely check a car these days.

 

sadly all of the dodgy mots i am aware of (probably half a dozen in the last year or so) have been for cars on the road