MOT Inconsistency

Joe_Horner

AdrianC wrote: »

That's for a pass that you don't think is warranted. The OP's failed both tests.

That's only listed for an inverted appeal because it's hard to come up with a situation where the time for corrosion to happen would be a factor in an appeal against a fail.

To his credit, the OP has potentially found such a situation because, if the existing corrosion is indeed a fail, then his "appeal" isn't against the fail this time but against their "passing" that particular item 3 weeks earlier.

The whole point of the 3 months is that corrosion doesn't appear and develop to failure point overnight. In most cases it'll actually take far more than 3 months but that's the timescale they chose.

In the OP's case it's entirely reasonable to extrapolate that back to say that, if the coil mount is a corrosion fail now, then it shouldn't have been a pass 3 weeks (never mind 3 months) ago.

Effectively he'd be appealing against the passing of a particular component, and that's true irrespective of what other parts passed or failed.

Say, for example, that everything else had been fine on the car, so it had passed first time. Then, 3 weeks later, this excessive corrosion had come to light. The appeal in that case would be on exactly the same grounds of "rusty spring mount wasn't spotted" and the 3 month deadline would apply.

The problem is, DVSA don't really have an appeal system that obviously fits this situation so he'd need to speak to them to see if they can look at it on that basis.

facade

natlol wrote: »

Out of interest what car is it? On my 16 year old Fiesta the spring sits in the cup at the bottom of the damper so it would be really easy to see severe corrosion by removing the wheel.

The tester is not allowed to remove the wheel or dismantle anything.


Unfortunate that he missed it first time, get some quotes for repairing it, there are still a few welders about.

mmcmahon

natlol wrote: »

Out of interest what car is it? On my 16 year old Fiesta the spring sits in the cup at the bottom of the damper so it would be really easy to see severe corrosion by removing the wheel. They must have missed it the first time round. I’d be a bit miffed too.

Kia Carens

mmcmahon

Update - I called DVSA this morning and they looked at both test results and agreed there was a problem. They suggested getting a second opinion and then putting in either a complaint or an appeal.

Not long after the garage called and said they spoke to the tester who wasn't budging, however they agreed he has at least messed up with the first test and have agreed to cover the cost of the new repair

Thanks for the help.

LandyAndy

mmcmahon wrote: »

Update - I called DVSA this morning and they looked at both test results and agreed there was a problem. They suggested getting a second opinion and then putting in either a complaint or an appeal.

Not long after the garage called and said they spoke to the tester who wasn't budging, however they agreed he has at least messed up with the first test and have agreed to cover the cost of the new repair

Thanks for the help.

Excellent result.

AdrianC

That's very, very good indeed of them.

Joe_Horner

Good result, and as it should be.

Businesses do make mistakes, the staff are only human after all. How they deal with those mistakes says a lot!

System

natlol wrote: »

Out of interest what car is it? On my 16 year old Fiesta the spring sits in the cup at the bottom of the damper so it would be really easy to see severe corrosion by removing the wheel. They must have missed it the first time round. I’d be a bit miffed too.

You don't remove the wheel during the MOT.

natlol

Just to clarify I know the MOT inspector is not allowed to remove the wheel. I meant that the OP could easily take a look. Apologies for not adding sufficient depth. What a great result.

Jackmydad

Good result!