Garage wrongly failed my MOT - justice needed!

almahadeus

Someone asked how much I paid the original garage - I paid only for MOT as didn't have any work done as didn't believe any problems with brakes and certainly didn't believe the car needed £600 spent on it.

Took the car elsewhere and they did a brake check for free, which found no problems. Why would this second garage lie? Surely the second garage have nothing to gain by telling me the brakes are fine. If they told me they needed changing that would have backed the first garage up and I would have had to bite the bullet and change them. Some people are missing the point on the replies: I'm no longer bothered about the £600 quote - it's the fact the first garage/mechanic most likely tried to con me. Must be the almost 10 yr old volvo s40 - may be it gives the impression the driver is rich/middleaged whatever (which I'm certainly not)!

Anihilator

almahadeus wrote: »

Someone asked how much I paid the original garage - I paid only for MOT as didn't have any work done as didn't believe any problems with brakes and certainly didn't believe the car needed £600 spent on it.

Took the car elsewhere and they did a brake check for free, which found no problems. Why would this second garage lie? Surely the second garage have nothing to gain by telling me the brakes are fine. If they told me they needed changing that would have backed the first garage up and I would have had to bite the bullet and change them. Some people are missing the point on the replies: I'm no longer bothered about the £600 quote - it's the fact the first garage/mechanic most likely tried to con me. Must be the almost 10 yr old volvo s40 - may be it gives the impression the driver is rich/middleaged whatever (which I'm certainly not)!

Maybe the 2nd mechanic just wasnt very good.

I know the garage I go to if they suspect a fault examine it beyond the MOT checks and diagnose it -for free

Its quite possible it passed the checks but something pointed to faulty brakes and the mechanic took wheels off to check. The 2nd garage maybe couldnt be bothered and just didnt check as well

You are just saying the 2nd garage is right because its what you want to hear.

oldagetraveller

Read all about it. http://www.motuk.co.uk/manual/mot_section_three.htm

hewhoisnotintheknow

can you confirm what a "brake check" actually is

the mot place may of found something that the second garage didnt check

almahadeus

Free brake check is:

• Check the condition of friction materials and hydraulics
• Clean and remove dust from drums
• Adjust rear brakes
• Check hand brake
• Check brake fluids
• Test and report

In any case the car is having MOT today/tomorrow- which will confirm the MOT result.

almahadeus

Anihilator wrote: »

Its quite possible it passed the checks but something pointed to faulty brakes and the mechanic took wheels off to check. The 2nd garage maybe couldnt be bothered and just didnt check as well

Why assume the second garage didn't do their job properly but the first garage did? The second garage was carrying out a dedicated brake check which is mainly to check safety (which I thought what the MOT was all about). The car did NOT pass MOT at the first garage so what you say in your first sentence is not a possibility.

In any case, tomorrow will yield some answers when I find out from second garage how MOT and service went.

Another question - surely if all those things were wrong with my brakes (handbrake, imbalance, little braking effort etc) I would have noticed it in driving?

goldspanners

hewhoisnotintheknow wrote: »

where can i get them for £6 online anywhere?

you can get them here

goldspanners

roddydogs wrote: »

So if a car passes the roller test, but has, say fluid dripping out of the front caliper, and totally corroded pipes, its a Pass?

nope, if the pipes are corroded the pipes fail.

if the pipes are leaking fluid then the brakes would show low effort or imbalance on the rollers im sure.

pompeyrich

oldagetraveller wrote: »

Read all about it. http://www.motuk.co.uk/manual/mot_section_three.htm

Thanks for that, my car failed last week on "pads below 1.5 mm, 3.5.1.f", even though they passed the efficiency test. the worn pads light came on the day before the test, so this probably made them look more closely than usual. I was under the impression that efficiency was the critical test, apart from corroded pipes etc. but there are lots of "if visible" checks they make too. The brakes are now less efficient than before but hopefully the pads will bed in soon !!

goldspanners

pompeyrich wrote: »

Thanks for that, my car failed last week on "pads below 1.5 mm, 3.5.1.f", even though they passed the efficiency test. the worn pads light came on the day before the test, so this probably made them look more closely than usual. I was under the impression that efficiency was the critical test, apart from corroded pipes etc. but there are lots of "if visible" checks they make too. The brakes are now less efficient than before but hopefully the pads will bed in soon !!

i think it would have been more the warning light that made them aware of your car needing pads, i doubt they would have stripped the pads out to measure the exact thickness left.