MOT tests...

[AlabamaShrimp]

So the red Fiesta has been for its test today, a few days late as I forgot.

 

Knew it would fail, it always fails. It's like they ha e to fail it on something no matter how small.

 

This year its sulking about the windscreen being damaged. Yeah it is, it's damaged in exactly the same places it's been damaged in for the last 5 years I've had it and the same garage has tested it.

Why this year have they decided, even though nothings changed, to fail it?

 

And of course he says it's rusty near a rear seat belt anchor point. Not seen it yet but if it's anything like the last one they said that on its bollocks too.

 

Years ago the test wasn't that expensive a d you could just get it retested somewhere else that you knew weren't knob heads now they just seem to want to find fault.

 

Can things be disputed? Once it's 'on the computer' is that it?

 

I understand why we have the test as it's the only time some cars get checked but sometimes it feels like a total waste of time, money and effort.

[Dave_Q]

Yes, things can be disputed, but it depends on the nature of the dispute.

 

"My car failed when there was nothing wrong with it"

 

will get a different response to:

 

"My car has damage to the windscreen greater than 10mm in diameter in Zone A, previous testers always passed it, but this one didn't."

 

 

The MOT manual is online and in plain(ish) English, for windscreen damage the sizes allowed are clearly stated. 

http://www.motuk.com/mot_manual/6-1.asp#Menu_Top

 

4. In Zone 'A'

a. damage not contained within a 10mm diameter circle, or
b. a windscreen sticker or other obstruction encroaching more than 10mm
c. a combination of minor damage areas which seriously restricts the driver's view

In the remainder of the swept area:
d. damage not contained within a 40mm diameter circle, or
e. a windscreen sticker or other obstruction encroaching more than 40mm

Note: All the items listed in the information column should be taken into account before rejecting a vehicle

 

When you get it back, get a ruler and see whether it's a pass or fail.

 

 

Don't go kicking off to VOSA straight away though, a quiet word will often help.

 

Last year my MOT station failed my Berlingo for not having a steering lock (I removed it because it was broken) but I pointed out the section in the manual stating that it's not a fail if also fitted with an immobiliser, then they passed it.

[twosmoke300]

Here we go again !

 

You can appeal a fail - ask the test centre for an appeal form and submit it to DVSA along with the FULL test fee upfront and they will arrange another test .

 

Now do you feel lucky punk ! DVSA may find other things that should have failed but your tester missed or let you off .

[AlabamaShrimp]

Well I've just been to get it and the windscreen isn't the small chip it's the scuff marks from when an old biddy owned it. They're nothing and can be polished out but his boss was in so he felt he had to fail it.

 

The welding is a stupid triangle setting that for some reason has a drain hole about an inch from the bottom of it just in the back passenger wheel well. No idea why it's there as the car has no internal drains.

 

Wouldn't be that hard to fix for someone with patience I'm just worried when the ear up starts the arch falls apart.

 

Not going to appeal anything but it's nice to know you can as I thought what they said went.

[3VOM]

The MOT manual is online and in plain(ish) English, for windscreen damage the sizes allowed are clearly stated. 

http://www.motuk.com/mot_manual/6-1.asp#Menu_Top

Last year my MOT station failed my Berlingo for not having a steering lock (I removed it because it was broken) but I pointed out the section in the manual stating that it's not a fail if also fitted with an immobiliser, then they passed it.

Interesting. I had someone fail the Golf on that but he hadn't read the instructions as they only apply to post Sept 2001 vehicles. As it is fitted with an immobiliser that raises the further points that 1 - he didn't know the rules again and 2 - he can't check anyway, at least not easily and within the guidelines of the MOT.

[Dave_Q]

As it happens, I was given a spare key with my car which doesn't have the immobilizer chip in it, so I could demonstrate that it did have an immobilizer.

 

As you say though, not really within the MOT procedure.

 

To be honest he didn't really seem bothered and I think he would happily have assumed it did have an immobilizer based on age (2002)

 

I guess these things don't come up very often, as most normal people would either fix the steering lock or get a Juke on finance.

 

The garage were pretty cool about it, the key thing is to not come across like a bellend who's trying to tell them how to do their job, which is surprisingly hard when you are actually telling them how to do their job.

[MikeR]

I got rid of a Zafira because the front subframe was rusty , holes but not rotten , which were hidden behind a under tray , which cant be removed for the mot , I was not happy to keep it and moved it on , but surprise surprise its just past another mot !!!  ....... 

[Captain Furious]

I wouldn't bother challenging an MOT unless you're sure they're wrong without any shadow of a doubt.  I'd feel a right tit if the DVSA came out and failed it on more things than the original tester

[panhard65]

Mot's are a really tricky one. The manual is pretty straightforward now making passes and fails a lot clearer. The trouble is testers that aren't trained well enough or just think they know better. I had a C4 Citroen in the other day for mot repair work and had no idea what the tester was on about with one of the fails. I fixed the obvious things and told my customer to take it back and find out what he was on about. He had failed it on a macpherson strut having excessive movement in the sliding joint. All I could find was some roughness in the top strut mount which isn't a fail. The car got it's mot with an advise on the top mount worded very badly. I am sure DVSA are now making testers do more training to keep them upto date which is a good thing. Also the tester who was harder on the windscreen because his boss was there should remember that when you are testing you are working for DVSA not your boss so you can tell him to FRO if he trys to make you fail stuff that shouldn't fail. I had this row 30 odd years ago when my boss at the time got the hump over a car his son bought as a part ex that I had passed a few weeks before, the handbrake was poor and he told me I shouldn't of pulled it on as hard as I did in case a woman owned it !.

[Eddie Honda]

The MOT manual is online and in plain(ish) English, for windscreen damage the sizes allowed are clearly stated. 

http://www.motuk.com/mot_manual/6-1.asp#Menu_Top

 

Why not link to the primary source on the Gov.uk site? (Because current version / horse's mouth and all that)

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/mot-inspection-manual-for-class-3-4-5-and-7-vehicles

 

The windscreen is Section 8.3 now, not 6.1

[Dave_Q]

Why not link to the primary source on the Gov.uk site? (Because current version / horse's mouth and all that)

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/mot-inspection-manual-for-class-3-4-5-and-7-vehicles

 

The windscreen is Section 8.3 now, not 6.1

Because shit googling, just went for first link, thought they would be the same.

 

My university lecturers would be ashamed of that shoddy piece of research & referencing.

[scaryoldcortina]

Actually, if you want the absolutely up to date bleeding edge MoT manuals and other useful tester stuff, it's all available at the bottom of the tester's login page.

 

https://www.mot-testing.service.gov.uk/login?goto=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mot-testing.service.gov.uk%3A443%2F

 

You don't have to be a tester to read the manuals.

[michael1703]

The screen wording is

 

"drivers view of the road"

 

Not drivers view of the sky or bonnet etc.

 

DVSA put cars in for test with a crack running from one side of the screen to the other and you Have to pass it

[Eddie Honda]

it's all available at the bottom of the tester's login page.

Which links to the HTML manual page I posted earlier...

[scaryoldcortina]

Soz, I didn't check your link - The Gov.uk one used to mirror the tester's page but lagged on updates last time I checked but it looks like they are now the same thing.

[Guest Hooli]

The screen wording is

 

"drivers view of the road"

 

Not drivers view of the sky or bonnet etc.

 

DVSA put cars in for test with a crack running from one side of the screen to the other and you Have to pass it

 

I'd have expected that to fail on something structural, or likely to fall out etc

 

I'm surprised it's passable.