Car failed MOT - What now?

takman

freelancepuddle wrote: »

EDIT: I thought you meant the new car I was purchasing. Sorry. No, where it was MOT'd only does tyres. It was a National Tyres and Autocare shop where it was MOT'd. My parents recommended it, their cars always pass except for maybe a bulb or tracking here and there.

Checking the tracking isn't even part of an MOT, so if they are saying to your parents that it needs doing for the MOT they are talking rubbish!.

freelancepuddle wrote: »

My car had 14 advisories for extreme rusting and apparently somebody put duct tape over some of the rust to hold it together, which I had no idea was even there.

Don't you bother checking cars before you buy them?. I hope you have had a good look at this new car your buying and actually got underneath it and checked for rust.

freelancepuddle

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Got to say that sounds like an explanation given by a garage that's trying to sell a replacement. Please say that the replacement isn't coming from the same place or anywhere they suggested?

That was my explanation - after looking at the advisories. The car is essentially fine where you can see, but underneath it's a nightmare. It's all out of sight and since it was only 6-8 months in my ownership and the MOT was coming up, I never thought to check (this is my first car).

Rest assured, the garage where the rust bucket was MOT'd and where the new one is coming from are separate garages. The garage where it was MOT'd was National Tyres. The garage I am buying the replacement from is family owned with a good reputation in the area for reliability and honesty (mostly due to the fact that many car dealerships get shut down pretty quickly if they sell faulty cars in my area).

freelancepuddle

takman wrote: »

Checking the tracking isn't even part of an MOT, so if they are saying to your parents that it needs doing for the MOT they are talking rubbish!.



Don't you bother checking cars before you buy them?. I hope you have had a good look at this new car your buying and actually got underneath it and checked for rust.

I do bother checking cars before driving them. If you have read my previous posts, I pointed out that the rust has essentially happened in the last 6-10 months. :money:

freelancepuddle

jbond wrote: »

No, I know you're not! No one in their right mind would!
My 'new car' comment was meant as an example to show you why I wouldn't have been referring to the new car!


Post 1:
"Unfortunately I can't book it into repairs any time soon due to the Christmas holidays"

Post 13:
"Got my eye on a 2001 Daihatsu Sirion that's been recently MOT'd, new cam belt, serviced, road tested & valeted."

Post 15:
"The car has to be put through an MOT by the garage before they can sell it to me"

Post 27:
"I meant my new car has been fully serviced today and waiting for MOT tomorrow."

Why would you be thinking about repairs to the Ford in post 1, when I believe you said you'd already bought the Diatsu?

In post 13, you said the new car had been recently MOTed, so why put it through (and one assumes) pay for another MOT (unless it's free, in which case who cares!)? MOTs last for a year, so it doesn't need MOTing again surely?

You have got majorly, majorly confused by this conversation. I haven't paid for another MOT, I pointed out that the new car INCLUDES an MOT in the price. They road test and MOT it before handing it over to me to check it's roadworthy.

I pointed out about repairs because I wanted to drive it, so was checking if I could after it had failed its MOT. Read the entire thread.

takman

freelancepuddle wrote: »

I do bother checking cars before driving them. If you have read my previous posts, I pointed out that the rust has essentially happened in the last 6-10 months. :money:

But you said there was evidence of some of the rust being covered up by duct tape and if it's as bad as you described there would have definetly been evidence of it 6 months ago when you bought it.

I know most people don't check cars underneath when they buy them. But make sure you fully check this one that you are getting now so you don't end up getting the same issues.

freelancepuddle

takman wrote: »

But you said there was evidence of some of the rust being covered up by duct tape and if it's as bad as you described there would have definetly been evidence of it 6 months ago when you bought it.

I know most people don't check cars underneath when they buy them. But make sure you fully check this one that you are getting now so you don't end up getting the same issues.

It was hidden underneath the engine inside a panel. They noticed it when they raised the car up.

Way ahead of you.

LandyAndy

freelancepuddle wrote: »

EDIT: I thought you meant the new car I was purchasing. Sorry. No, where it was MOT'd only does tyres. It was a National Tyres and Autocare shop where it was MOT'd. My parents recommended it, their cars always pass except for maybe a bulb or tracking here and there. My car had 14 advisories for extreme rusting and apparently somebody put duct tape over some of the rust to hold it together, which I had no idea was even there.

You don't mean advisories do you?

Londoner_1

As a guide i would never get a car with an mot date between 20 dec and 3 jan. The holiday period to fix anything is just too long, if anyone has a mot date over this period i would change it to avoid these dates.

AndyMc.....

Londoner_1 wrote: »

As a guide i would never get a car with an mot date between 20 dec and 3 jan. The holiday period to fix anything is just too long, if anyone has a mot date over this period i would change it to avoid these dates.

Why no, if it’s passed without any advisories?

Roland_Sausage

Car_54 wrote: »

They may well be good cars, but customer support (and resale values) will almost certainly suffer.

Im pretty sure that neither of them are going to matter on a 16/17 year old motor :rotfl: