Bought 2nd car from dealer with, what appears to be, a dodgy MOT certificate

[Deleted User]

Glad you got it sorted and reported the incident. You'll probably be shocked at what little trading standards do - and this dealer will carry on ripping people off for years, but hopefully one day things will change in this industry.

colino

So you put on a new brake pipe and then not only kept the old rusty one, but refitted it when you got the car refunded?

Johno100

arcon5 wrote: »

At least we know the MOT station haven't done anything wrong then.

But he sounds like a right muppet to tell you that.

Well done.

No we don't, I'd go with what Joe Horner said

Looking at the fail list I suspect that his "cleaner and swapped parts" story is covering for his tame MOT tester.

Remember the OP had previously told the dealer that they were going to report the testing station. So the dealers story, if he sticks to it, would mean any DVSA investigation is effectively dead in the water.

laisbojar83

colino wrote: »

So you put on a new brake pipe and then not only kept the old rusty one, but refitted it when you got the car refunded?

Hi colino, you must have misunderstood me. I didnt do anything to the car. In fact, I have no mechanics knowledge whatsoever! I was just quoting what the dealer said to us.

laisbojar83

Johno100 wrote: »

No we don't, I'd go with what Joe Horner said



Remember the OP had previously told the dealer that they were going to report the testing station. So the dealers story, if he sticks to it, would mean any DVSA investigation is effectively dead in the water.

My husband agrees with you and Joe. He was prepared to do almost anything to avoid getting the mot station involved.

Joe_Horner

Well, when DVSA were VOSA (only about 2 or 3 months ago!) a lot of their regional offices were quite happy to receive unofficial intel about this sort of thing. It's always worth phoning them up and explaining the situation - including the dealer now volunteering to take the blame.

They won't be able to act directly in relation to your car, but the test station may well find itself due a spot re-test or two - basically, a guy from DVSA turns up unannounced and "asks" to retest a car that's just been tested. Doesn't go down well if they find faults!

arcon5

colino wrote: »

So you put on a new brake pipe and then not only kept the old rusty one, but refitted it when you got the car refunded?

Now you put it like that. Good point. Brake pipes are very inexpensive as it is so wouldn't make any sense.

I'd agree with the trying to keep out a dodgy tester of the equation.

salubrious

Good to read you got your money back.

For sure, some car traders (a lot) do have close relationships with who they use to do their mot tests. It is no surprise, and it is why I was suggesting to not go running into an appeal situation.

Taking it to an appeal wouldn't have resulted in any discipline, the fail points were easy to defend against - This is without what the dealer has now said

The reality is, if that testing station is being naughty with their trade customers, then vosa will already know (news travels fast amongst mot stations, especially that news getting back to vosa)

I wouldn't be surprised if they are already keeping an eye on them or building a case against them. What wouldn't have helped is an appeal going in that was subsequently rejected.

nobbysn*ts

I doubt the MOT station even saw the car. The trader probably has a look himself, tells his mate it's a good one, and his mate writes out the MOT. Probably normally is, but this one wasn't, so he's very keen his mate doesn't find out.

Joe_Horner

salubrious wrote: »

The reality is, if that testing station is being naughty with their trade customers, then vosa will already know (news travels fast amongst mot stations, especially that news getting back to vosa)

I wouldn't be surprised if they are already keeping an eye on them or building a case against them.

Still doesn't hurt to help make sure by giving them a quick call and explaining what's happened.

There's a world of difference between a tester being a little bit helpful and writing tickets to order. I'm not saying that's what happened here, but it does happen and needs stamping on whenever possible.

If the tester acted in good faith genuinely believing the trader would sort the issues then he may be less culpable but he's still at fault if he's issuing tickets that aren't earned.

A phone call costs practically nothing and all adds to the file if action does need to be taken.