Corrosion & failed MOT

vfeich

My car failed MOT due to "excessive corrosion" in a certain part of the body.
It went through a master services and very expensive repairs only about 3 months ago. If the corrosion is so bad, would the garage be responsible to point this out? If they should have pointed it out, what are their obligations for failing to mention it?

Also, if the corrosion is so bad, should not have it been flagged on any of the previous MOT advisories?

Sorry for so many questions, I'm absolutely gutted as just spent so much money to have the car fixed... and if I knew this problem came up, I would have sold it and got another car
Many thanks for any advice!!!!

AdrianC

Where is the rot?

vfeich

AdrianC wrote: »

Where is the rot?

Sill corroded around rear parking brake cable (as per certificate of refusal)

AdrianC

Eh? Handbrake cables aren't normally particularly near the sill. It's not somewhere a service, no matter how major would normally go particularly near, either, unless it's somewhere that'd be visible while doing any fuel filter that might be there, or the rear brakes.

Remember - rot rarely comes from outside. It comes from inside box sections and double-skinned areas. It's entirely possible that the rot was reasonably well hidden until the tester put a good light onto it, then decided it was worth investigating with the approved "corrosion assessment tool". He's allowed - encouraged - to poke, scrape and prod at any metal that he thinks might be weak, but only with this.

vfeich

Thanks Adrian... so that's another trip to the garage then

ratrace

vfeich wrote: »

My car failed MOT due to "excessive corrosion" in a certain part of the body.
It went through a master services and very expensive repairs only about 3 months ago. If the corrosion is so bad, would the garage be responsible to point this out? If they should have pointed it out, what are their obligations for failing to mention it?

Also, if the corrosion is so bad, should not have it been flagged on any of the previous MOT advisories?

Sorry for so many questions, I'm absolutely gutted as just spent so much money to have the car fixed... and if I knew this problem came up, I would have sold it and got another car
Many thanks for any advice!!!!

I can understand your frustration (depending on the garage setup) the way they work is that they have certain mecanics to do certain jobs so

for example the mechanic who did you the original work when you spent loads of money was not an mot tester so may not necessarily know what he's looking for in regards to rot etc.... also unless you use the hammer that adrian has put a picture of it cannot be seen due to rain mud wet dirt etc...

also garages are accused of trying to drum up more work, so some nowadays dont bother and only fix the problems the customer is complaing about it just makes life easier for them

hope this helps

System

vfeich wrote: »

My car failed MOT due to "excessive corrosion" in a certain part of the body.
It went through a master services and very expensive repairs only about 3 months ago. If the corrosion is so bad, would the garage be responsible to point this out? If they should have pointed it out, what are their obligations for failing to mention it?

They quite probably didn't notice it. They don't go around with a hammer testing how solid the body is unlike a MOT tester so unless there was an actual hole there they wouldn't see it.

Also, if the corrosion is so bad, should not have it been flagged on any of the previous MOT advisories?

It could have quite easily been OK previous years or it wasn't but you were lucky that the MOT tester didn't poke the bit that's rotten.

As for selling it and getting another car, why? Doesn't cost much to repair and it is insane to spend far more on another car which is an unknown to avoid a couple of hundred quid of repairs where you have a car which is good again which you know all the problems on.

This is what the place I took my MX5 to underseal found when they were cleaning it to underseal it. I'd only bought it a week previous with a new MOT. The dealer missed it, the MOT tester missed it, hell even I missed it because the original underseal looked just fine so there didn't appear to be anything amiss and I've owned and restored classic cars so I know about hunting for rust. Fortunately the dealer covered the £100 repair cost.

Noree

MOT testers shouldn not be poking or prodding with the Corrosion Assessment Tool (as displayed above). It is for light scraping and tapping only.

It would be worth getting a photo of the location of the corrosion or perhaps ask the tester to show you first. It is a big deal that if they have failed it on corrosion, then it must warranted.

Corrosion failure if often failed when it shouldnt. It is on the agenda for this years MOT tester training as DVSA have wanted to make a point of this.

For example, a hole caused by corrosion on an outer sill would not be an outright fail, as it depends if it is in a prescribed area AND supporting panelling or structure for the integrity of a brake cable. If it is the inner sill then it may be more likely warranted as a failure.

vfeich

Thank you all, these are all really good information! This is an old car, but with extremely low mileage for it's age (less than 75k) and I would prefer not to part with it.
I will ask for a second opinion as I am even less convinced now that this was a genuine reason and see what comes out of it.