MoT - Fact and fiction

[Albert Ross]

As already stated, if you have wheeltrims fitted, and a few wheelnuts not fitted, then so be it. BUT. If you have a magic tree on your interior mirror, it should fail due to an obstruction in Zone B larger than 40mm......

 

If you have a 7 seater like a Zafira, there is no stipulation to actually check the 3rd row seats for security if they are folded into the floor (Or removed in the case of a Galaxy). If there are no seats visible, therefore there are no belts required, so they should be ignored by the tester. However if the seats are up, then the belts should be tested..... So if your dog has a taste for belt webbing, fold the seats down............

 

Tyre laws. Your average Class 4 car needs 1.6mm across the central 75% of the tyre. However a minibus larger than 9 seats I think, needs only 1mm......!!

 

You can remove a bumper and leave the mounting brackets sticking out, that's fine (Wilful modification). But collision damage (accidental and not planned) which leaves bits of sharp stuff sticking out is a no-no.

 

You can have front fog or spotlights fitted, which dazzle other road users, and it's no issue. But if they have cracked lenses which might cut a pedestrian walking too close, then that's a fail. My attitude on sharp edges, dependent on position, is that if they are in that area, you have already run them over........ Discretion rules!

 

You can't have impediments to vision. But on my Land Rover, I have the spare wheel on the bonnet. GR-987 for visibility. I could also, if I wanted, fit security grilles to the windows. Yup. Also fine. Curse those Magic Trees!

[Mr_Bo11ox]

Magic trees are bowk anyway, i'm glad they are an MOT 'phail'

[Albert Ross]

Have they changed the rules on 'doors must open from the outside'? I thought that there was an exemption if the handle had been 'shaved'? (and isn't there an Alfa 4-door of some sort with no rear handles?)

 

On the hypothetical 'Q' plated Vectra, wouldn't it still fail under the 'If it's fitted, it must work' rule re. hazards, rear belts ect? I once took a Landcrab for MOT that had been fitted with rear belts, failed as one didn't lock up. Took them out completly = pass.

 

It's a minefield, for sure.

 

There is no stipulation to check locking mechanisms on inertia reel belts. Just security, mounting areas, webbing condition, whether they clip together and hold secure, and also if they retract.... slow is ok, with assistance is ok, but if it stops and won't go any further, that's a fail. Whether it stays tight or not when you're crashing, that's fine! Yeah right!

[hennabm]

For the true facts the best thing is to check the MOT manual. This can be found on the link below,

 

http://www.transportoffice.gov.uk/crt/d ... guides.htm

 

The spare wheel condition has NEVER been part of the test and it is only external mounted spare wheels that are tested for security.

 

@oldford - all you say is true according to the manual.

 

Where a tester is faced with a car with controls unfamiliar to them, they are allowed to use the presenter to move the vehicle. As an example a lot of 30s cars etc have the throttle in the middle and the brake pedal on the right. Imagine an unaware tester trying to stop that car

 

Bonnets were introduced as a reason to refuse to test if they didn't open about 15-20 years ago. More recently it has become part of the test to ensure the bonnet secures in the locked postion.

 

As far as if fitted it must be tested, then this only applies to certain parts of the car eg the seat belts. On a pre 87 car rear seat belts are not required but if fitted must be tested.

Inertia locks have never been tested because it is not always possible to to check them on a car when it is stood still.

 

Only front doors must open from inside and outside the car by some means, be it a handle or a blip control for example. The rear doors just need to open by some means.

[Richard]

If you have a magic tree on your interior mirror, it should fail due to an obstruction in Zone B larger than 40mm......

 

What about those dirty great MOT stickers that some testers stick right in your line of vision?

[Albert Ross]

If you have a magic tree on your interior mirror, it should fail due to an obstruction in Zone B larger than 40mm......

 

What about those dirty great MOT stickers that some testers stick right in your line of vision?

 

 

The sticker should be stuck in by the presenter... anywhere outside the swept area. Testers have no right to put anything IN your vehicle.

I do, however, remove trees regularly, and leave them on seats. I have seen pairs of kiddies shoes dangling, photo albums, and a rolling pin! All removed or failed. I'm a bastard for it.

I just stick to the rules. If a vehicle can be adjusted to help it pass, under a PRS rectification, then I do so. Lamps adjusted, washers filled, stickers or trees moved, tyres inflated correctly to set lamp aims, etc. We are permitted to do it, the scheme allows it.

[Richard]

It only happened to me once, the first time I got an "electronic" MOT but I noticed it on a lot of cars around that time.

[Pillock]

Here's my bollocks MoT loophole/fail

 

Presented my Polo - despite 145bhp, drum brakes. Keeps the bowels moving! Anyway, failed on a rear brake imbalance.

Took it home via the motor factors, bought new shoes. Stripped both sides, new shoes, brake cleaner on the linings, made sure it was all shipshape. Took it back.

Tester came in with the pass sheet, wetting himself. Seems that I'd removed the imbalance by making the good brake as bad as the bad one, they were now still shockingly bad but both equally shockingly bad, ergo computer says PASS.

 

That was also the car that passed a Cat emissions test with no cat - it is possible.

[hennabm]

Here's my bollocks MoT loophole/fail

 

Presented my Polo - despite 145bhp, drum brakes. Keeps the bowels moving! Anyway, failed on a rear brake imbalance.

Took it home via the motor factors, bought new shoes. Stripped both sides, new shoes, brake cleaner on the linings, made sure it was all shipshape. Took it back.

Tester came in with the pass sheet, wetting himself. Seems that I'd removed the imbalance by making the good brake as bad as the bad one, they were now still shockingly bad but both equally shockingly bad, ergo computer says PASS.

 

That was also the car that passed a Cat emissions test with no cat - it is possible.

 

Looking at the manual I can't see how the tester could fail the rear brakes for imbalance as it only applies to front steered wheels

[oldford]

In vehicles such as the Zafira, where the folded seats can be raised without the need for tools, the manual states that the seats should be lifted to check the belts (section 5.2).

 

It's these step tread tyres that get me, OK the centre 3/4 should have 1.6mm, but if the steps encroach a long way into the tread width, you could only be left with 50% of tread width of where you can take a measurement. You can't measure it where the tread wasn't originally at the maximum depth when new. The result is a tyre that looks well dodgy but is technically a pass.

[dollywobbler]

An odd one I've discovered with the Landy is that if the rear seats are fitted sideways, the 'rear seatbelts after 1986' rule doesn't apply. Was initially very confused that my 1988 Landy has no rear seat belts.

 

And just an info thing - I sprayed anti-corrosion wax all over the BXs sills in a feeble attempt to stop them rotting. This just made slight corrosion look really quite worrying, so I got an advisory... (I should have been neater and wiped the stuff away where it met the white bodywork!)

[scaryoldcortina]

Agreed, there isn't a fail for rear brake balance. Effort, roughness and binding are checked but balance is front only. Closest a back axle gets to a fail for balance is if one wheel has little or no effort recorded (Ie totally borked) so making the other one broken to match won't help

 

Also, as mentioned, a cat car between '92 and '95 will be retested with the non-cat test if it fails the cat test. I suppose this means the effective cut off date for cats is 1995 not 1992......

[hennabm]

An odd one I've discovered with the Landy is that if the rear seats are fitted sideways, the 'rear seatbelts after 1986' rule doesn't apply. Was initially very confused that my 1988 Landy has no rear seat belts.

 

You''re right, side facing seats do not need seatbelts fitted to them. But again if they are fitted with belts then they become testable.

[CIH]

All Q plated cars are tested as though their year of manufacture was 1971. This means that a stolen recovered 98 vectra diesel doesn't need rear seat belts, or hazard lights, fog lights. side repeaters, can have a multi tone horn and white on black numberplates and will only get a visual emission check

 

that is interesting

 

good excuse for having a Q plater

 

I wonder what the implications are for ANPR and the like with the black 'n' white number plate ? I'd expect fuzz would be tugging such a car almost daily.

[CIH]

In vehicles such as the Zafira, where the folded seats can be raised without the need for tools, the manual states that the seats should be lifted to check the belts (section 5.2).

 

It's these step tread tyres that get me, OK the centre 3/4 should have 1.6mm, but if the steps encroach a long way into the tread width, you could only be left with 50% of tread width of where you can take a measurement. You can't measure it where the tread wasn't originally at the maximum depth when new. The result is a tyre that looks well dodgy but is technically a pass.

 

I see this all the time. I think it's Bridgestone Turanza have a shoulder tread that sits on a layer of rubber so can easily give a depth reading like 2mm even though the TWI clearly shows it's more like 4mm.

 

All Q plated cars are tested as though their year of manufacture was 1971. This means that a stolen recovered 98 vectra diesel doesn't need rear seat belts, or hazard lights, fog lights. side repeaters, can have a multi tone horn and white on black numberplates and will only get a visual emission check

 

that is interesting

 

good excuse for having a Q plater

 

I wonder what the implications are for ANPR and the like with the black 'n' white number plate ? I'd expect fuzz would be tugging such a car almost daily.

[scaryoldcortina]

All Q plated cars are tested as though their year of manufacture was 1971. This means that a stolen recovered 98 vectra diesel doesn't need rear seat belts, or hazard lights, fog lights. side repeaters, can have a multi tone horn and white on black numberplates and will only get a visual emission check

 

that is interesting

 

good excuse for having a Q plater

 

I wonder what the implications are for ANPR and the like with the black 'n' white number plate ? I'd expect fuzz would be tugging such a car almost daily.

 

Yes, they would, but it would pass a MoT... also the not checked items would have to be removed before they are not testable (like the belts and the hazard switch)

 

There are quite a few areas (like Albert's bumper brackets example) that pass a test but fall foul of DA_LAW, an open wheeled hotrod will pass because wheel protrusion from arches isn't part of the test.

[Minimad5]

Thanks for making this thread Scary'

 

It has answered a few questions i have / had in regards to the Rebel and the engine change.

 

Just a quick question about welding:

My fiesta has had many an MOT patch in the past, which were not completely welded with a bead. And yet it passed.

I've cut most of the patches out and repaired the area(s) propperly.

But does VOSA or the MOT rules state a full bead must be used when welding ?

[scaryoldcortina]

Welded repairs... patches within a panel must be seam welded. Replacement panels that meet at a panel joint can be attached "in the manner of the original construction" as long as all traces of the old panel are removed. In practice this means that when fitting a sill repair the top edgee needs seam welding, but the bottom flange can be spotwelded if the remains of the old sill are ground off.

[Minimad5]

Thank you

[hennabm]

Also, as mentioned, a cat car between '92 and '95 will be retested with the non-cat test if it fails the cat test. I suppose this means the effective cut off date for cats is 1995 not 1992......

 

Looks to me from the book that the non cat test limits only apply if there is no exact match in the database for a car 92 - 95.

This is only once the BET test has been failed.

[25v6turbo]

Reverse lights are not checked at MOTS?

This seems strange,would of thought this was very important.

[Pete-M]

Reverse lights are not checked at MOTS?

This seems strange,would of thought this was very important.

 

Nope, never have been.

 

Checked on Hackney MOT's, and quite often Private Hire ones, but not on normal MOTs.

[oldford]

A frayed parking brake cable is a pass unless it is 'significantly' weakend.

[scaryoldcortina]

Also, as mentioned, a cat car between '92 and '95 will be retested with the non-cat test if it fails the cat test. I suppose this means the effective cut off date for cats is 1995 not 1992......

 

Looks to me from the book that the non cat test limits only apply if there is no exact match in the database for a car 92 - 95.

This is only once the BET test has been failed.

 

I see what you mean... another good excuse for having an oddball import or an engine swap then!

[mattblack]

Welded repairs... patches within a panel must be seam welded. Replacement panels that meet at a panel joint can be attached "in the manner of the original construction" as long as all traces of the old panel are removed. In practice this means that when fitting a sill repair the top edgee needs seam welding, but the bottom flange can be spotwelded if the remains of the old sill are ground off.

 

 

Does that apply to old patches that are already on the car when it's presented for MOT, or just repairs that are done as a result of a fail?

[scaryoldcortina]

Both. If I find a poorly attached repair it will fail regardless of how old it is.

[simmo]

When I first started doing MOTs people used to moan when they got failed for having repair panals pop-rivoted on, we didn't even need a rolling road brake tester to start with.

[trigger]

Quick question, If your car has a (wrongly placed) VIC marker next to it, Would that stop an mot being taken place?, I only ask as mines going in on Tuesday for it's MOT but the DVLA have placed a marker on it to be checked by VOSA, even though it's the wrong car.

[Pillock]

 

Looking at the manual I can't see how the tester could fail the rear brakes for imbalance as it only applies to front steered wheels

 

Hmmm!! It was definitely a fail, and it was the rears I did not the fronts.

 

Does the handbrake have to balance? As it was drums the handbrake works the same friction surface.

[Albert Ross]

The VIC check is primarily to check the identity and completeness, and ability to meet type approval, rather than safety type items. Things like the IVA test are stricter than MOT's yet don't cover some of the aspects. Roadside inspections by the Police may reveal things that are unroadworthy, but would pass MOT.

 

Numberplates for instance, need only be secure, legible, and have letters the correct font and colour. They might be painted onto white cardboard, and tied on with string, but will pass. Once the car is driven in the rain, they become illegible, and would fail a roadside examination.

 

An inner CV boot is not testable..... even if you have inboard disc brakes... Jaguar, Citroen etc. Unless the leaking grease has contaminated the braking components. In which case you fail the brakes, not the split, leaking boot. All you need to do for a pass is clean the brakes off..... Yes the boot stays split and leaking.