MOT (passed too easily?)

Joe_Horner

colino wrote: »

only naïve testers with no real mechanical sympathy or knowledge make up their own, over cautious, benchmarks for fails or advisories.

Only naive testers don't bother with advisories, you mean, and it's as much for their own sake as for the customer's. There's a standard mantra in the MOT industry - CYA (cover your arrse) - which in broad terms means ISSUE ADVISORIES.

The reason for that is simple:

If there's any doubt about the condition of an item later on and VOSA become involved, the fact you've given an advisory on it demonstrates to VOSA that you actually looked at in on the test and made a judgement that it was still a pass at that time.

Much of the test is down to tester's opinion in terms of what's acceptable wear etc, and VOSA won't (in theory) penalise a tester for such professional judgement calls unless they're way below the expected standard. On the other hand, if there's no evidence that he even looked it they'll come down on him like a ton of bricks.

john_white

Westmead_Fan wrote: »

advisories are there to worn customers that advisory items require attention, but do not YET warrant an mot fail notice

Incorrect.

I was given advisories about;

Could not check xxx as there was an engine cover
Could not check xxx as there is a tray under car
Could not check seatbealt as child seat present.

They do not mean these will fail in the future.

Interesting that the previous MOT's made no mention of trays and covers which are put on when the car is built.

They were nonsense IMO.

Sam_Fallow

Deleted_User wrote: »

hi all

my other half has an approved used mini cooper which came with a free mot (and free mot repairs) at 6 mths as part of the purchase. well we went back to the dealer and got it serviced and mot'd, and it passed with flying colours (without any advisory notes etc).

the car is now in another garage 4 months later, (but hardly used as we have a new car - i.e. <300miles on the clock since the mot) and they have found, incidentally, that both rear brake pads are worn to only 2mm (legal limit is 1.5mm) and brake discs significantly corroded.

we plan to take this written report to the dealership who did the mot, and ask them to replace the brake pads/discs for free.

what should we do if they refuse? i have a feeling they will refuse, given the above!

thanks!

I think you mean 'when they refuse.' As has been said already, this other garage has found nothing wrong with your brakes. Brake discs are made of steel and spend most of their time outdoors so they will rust on any part that doesn't get touched by the pads. Every brake disc will have corrosion around the rim, the centre and the inside of vented discs. That doesn't mean they won't work. It means that the mechanic/tester has spotted some corrosion and made a note of it.

Pads. These take a long time to wear down. Unless the pads have been removed, I would be impressed by anyone who can tell the difference between 1.5 and 2mm while still in the caliper and the wheel still fitted.

So, what should you do? By all means go back to the original garage, they will probably point out that there is nothing wrong with the brakes (because there isn't). My advice would be to run car for another 8 months and put it in for another MOT which will probably have an advisory saying 'rear discs showing corrosion and rear pads worn.'

keith1950

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 419
Thanked 219 Times in 166 Posts



What on earth are you worried about? If

He is obviously upset that it didn't fail, the MOT insurance would then have kicked in and he would have had new brakes for free !!

Jamie_Carter

Westmead_Fan wrote: »

most mot testers are or have been mechanics so they do know there ways around cars. the uk mot's is not hard to pass it is minimal standards so when you get advisory you should take note of them, dosen't mean get them done asap but in the future they most likely need doing. what do you call over cautious? if a part is showing signs of wear & tear and starting to fail then that is what that part of the mot is for.

perfect example an mot tester had carried out a test on a vehicle page of failures & advisories customer done just the failures so it passed on welding which they welded but the tester could not see how well the repairs were done due to the way they repaired it & under seal the vehicle, he passed it & advised as the book says, along with advisories was corrosion, 6 months car was sold & new customer rung the garage accusing him of doing a bad mot because the old customer welded using fiberglass on a mini & would cost quite a bit to repair vosa said due to him passing & advising they could do nothing it was the right thing to do.

i know on my vehicle if my pads were at 2mm i would want to know so i can decide on whether i change them now or let them go on for a couple of months the garage can't force you to replace them.

A simple tap would have revealed this, even if it was covered with underseal.

GwylimT

2mm break pads are perfectly fine, you could easily get 5K miles out of those, you could get more depending on the level of corrosion. Corrosion is caused by moisture, if you drive a car on a regular basis just breaking will remove the surface corrosion, however if you decide not to drive your car for long periods of time such as yourself then the corrosion becomes worse to a point where some good breaking wont get rid and you need new pads.

So, your car passed its MOT, today it would pass its MOT, the only 'problem' with the car is the fact that you haven't been driving it so you have left it to corrode, I don't see how you can blame someone else for this happening.

Westmead_Fan

Incorrect.

I was given advisories about;

Could not check xxx as there was an engine cover
Could not check xxx as there is a tray under car
Could not check seatbealt as child seat present.

They do not mean these will fail in the future.

Interesting that the previous MOT's made no mention of trays and covers which are put on when the car is built.

They were nonsense IMO.

the only advisory that i see often is the child seat fitted one to cover their !!!! because if their is a problem with the belt they could not test it as an obstruction is in the way. the other 2 i have never seen but it maybe covering his !!!! as if there is for example a fault that causes damage after the mot fromt the engine area the tester could not check them areas.

simple fact is if testers fail to cover there themselfs they get points enough points they lose there license loose that they can loose there job and maybe the station can get shut down.

A simple tap would have revealed this, even if it was covered with underseal.

the way it was repaired from inside the car you can't start ripping into it

the way they bodged it & slapped a thick layer of underseal the tester could only pass & advise which they did saying unable to fully check repairs carried out due to heavy underseal on vehicle.

famous repairs which i have heard is with cv gaiters not there but plastic from drinks bottle tied around cv joint. the most common bodge is with abs faults which is a fail they just wire it up with another light like the oil light to make it look like its working but the testers can't fail it

Jamie_Carter

Westmead_Fan wrote: »

the way it was repaired from inside the car you can't start ripping into it

the way they bodged it & slapped a thick layer of underseal the tester could only pass & advise which they did saying unable to fully check repairs carried out due to heavy underseal on vehicle.

famous repairs which i have heard is with cv gaiters not there but plastic from drinks bottle tied around cv joint. the most common bodge is with abs faults which is a fail they just wire it up with another light like the oil light to make it look like its working but the testers can't fail it

You said they "welded it with fibreglass", which isn't actually possible.

If the tester had failed it originally, then they would be able to check it again on the retest. Even through underseal you would be able to hear the difference in tone when tapping it.

Joe_Horner

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

You said they "welded it with fibreglass", which isn't actually possible.

If the tester had failed it originally, then they would be able to check it again on the retest. Even through underseal you would be able to hear the difference in tone when tapping it.

I took that to mean the old favourite of a metal patch glued on with resin and a "weld bead" of chopped glassfibre run round the edge. Once it's undersealed it looks, sounds and feels like a welded repair as far as MOT testers are allowed to dig. Until it falls off, of course :rotfl:

As for the "covers fitted" type advisories. Those are because under-trays on many modern cars make it virtually impossible to inspect a lot of MOT items - brake pipes, structural areas and so on can all be inaccessible without dismantling stuff, which the tester isn't allowed to do.

So they advise to put it on record that certain parts of the car couldn't be tested. That way, when you suffer brake failure 5 minutes down the road and, in the resulting crash, your seat belt rips itself out of its seriously corroded mounting point, they're not liable.