MOT Rip Off? Quoted £860! Please help

unholyangel

iBreakTheDawn wrote: »

I bought the car in March...it was last serviced around the date of the last MOT, so a year ago. I was going to have the MOT and service done together but with this quote, I have my suspicions...

Also, looking at the previous MOTs. It seems odd to me that out of all these 'major defects', none show up as advisories in the previous one other than the lights and handbrake - which I pointed out when I booked the MOT test. Even 2017, shows some corrosion as an advisory but not in the areas mentioned in 2019.

I have a feeling they're exaggerating the price. Even when I rang and tried to get repairs done such as light bulb replacements and the handbrake. They insisted they'd just do the MOT and "check it" first. They even offered to do it that day but I had work that evening and have worked every evening since - I need my car to get to work as I finish after midnight and the 1 last set of trains is usually cancelled leaving me stranded.

To make it clear, I DID NOT EXPECT THE CAR TO PASS FIRST TIME.

But I have the last service/MOT receipt from the last owner and she paid £343.70.

The only defects mentioned for that to pass were regarding the brakes. No mention of corrosion whatsoever - as shown in the OP.

I get the service & MOT done separately months apart as I feel its better practice to have the car checked every 6 months or so rather than just once a year. Means any problems are picked up on quicker and aren't left to cause more damage, costing more money.

When you bought the car, did you take a look/get someone qualified to check the car? If so were there signs of corrosion then?

The latter part about doing the MOT to check it....if you think its going to fail (even on something small like a number plate bulb) then its always better running the test first imo - its a free retest and around the value your vehicle is probably at (given the mileage - although I appreciate I could still be a few grand), major repairs may result in it being more financially viable to scrap it. Assuming your car is about 8+ years old, the faults you mention are far from unusual.

Scrapit

iBreakTheDawn wrote: »

Hello, I purchased a Fiat Punto Mk2 1.2 in March.

Due to a constantly changing work rota (I work nights), I only had the MOT expiry date available to book a test - turns out another rota change meant I didn't have the day off either!

I feel the garage took advantage of this and have quoted me £860 after failing the car for a long list of major defects and 2 dangerous (needs new front tires worth no more than £60).

I expected a few hundred based on the receipts I have from the previous owner for each MOT/service, plus the age of the car...but £860!

How does 10,000 miles between this MOT and last result in £860 worth of wear and tear?

Out of all the MOTs, only the 2017 notes any signs of corrosion as ADVISORIES and for; 'Rear Both Bumper Mounting', 'Rear Shock absorber' and 'Offside Rear coil spring'.

Yet an excerpt from the 2019 'major defects' lists:
Nearside Front Suspension arm pin or bush excessively worn lower wishbone rear bush (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Offside Front Suspension arm pin or bush excessively worn lower wishbone rear bush (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Nearside Rear Suspension component mounting prescribed area excessively corroded significantly reducing structural strength floor (5.3.6 (a) (i))

Could they be exaggerating?

Is £860 a fair price to repair a car with that list?

I expected the hand brake to come up again as it's been a recurring issue on this car but I feel as I'm a young (effeminate) man and I had my retail work uniform on when I went they obviously think I'm an idiot and pushover - far from it.

MOT I JUST HAD (17 JUNE, 2019)
Mileage
101,608 miles
Do not drive until repaired (dangerous defects):
Nearside Front Tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm (5.2.3 (e))
Offside Front Tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm (5.2.3 (e))
Repair immediately (major defects):
Offside Rear Position lamp not working (4.2.1 (a))
Nearside Headlamp aim projected beam image is obviously incorrect (4.1.2 (c))
Offside Headlamp aim projected beam image is obviously incorrect (4.1.2 (c))
Windscreen washer provides insufficient washer liquid (3.5 (a))
Nearside Front Suspension arm pin or bush excessively worn lower wishbone rear bush (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Offside Front Suspension arm pin or bush excessively worn lower wishbone rear bush (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Nearside Rear Suspension component mounting prescribed area excessively corroded significantly reducing structural strength floor (5.3.6 (a) (i))
Exhaust emissions likely to be affected by an exhaust leak front exhaust/cat leaking (8.2.1.1 (b))
Exhaust Lambda reading after 2nd fast idle outside specified limits (8.2.1.2 (c))
Offside Rear Parking (secondary brake) on a single line braking system has inadequate effort at a wheel (1.3.1 (a) (i))
Parking brake efficiency below requirements (1.4.2 (a) (i))
Monitor and repair if necessary (advisories):
Offside Rear Suspension component mounting prescribed area is corroded but not considered excessive floor (5.3.6 (a) (i))
Nearside Rear Coil spring corroded (5.3.1 (b) (i))
Offside Rear Coil spring corroded (5.3.1 (b) (i))
Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))

BY COMPARISON:

2018 - PASS
Mileage
90,009 miles
MOT test number
3047 3222 3549

2018 - FAIL
Mileage
90,009 miles
MOT test number
4762 1865 5378
Do not drive until repaired (dangerous defects):
Parking brake efficiency less than 50% of the required value (1.4.2 (a) (ii))
Repair immediately (major defects):
Offside Stop lamp(s) not working (4.3.1 (a) (ii))
Offside Direction indicator not working (4.4.1 (a) (ii))

2017 - PASS
Mileage
83,757 miles
MOT test number
4094 8658 5472
Expiry date
17 June 2018
Advisory notice item(s)
Rear Both Bumper Mounting Corroded.
Rear Shock absorber has slight corrosion to the casing Both (2.7.2a)
Offside Rear coil spring corroded (2.4.C.1b)
Front Inner Anti-roll bar rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Front Outer Anti-roll bar linkage rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Engine Sump has slight Oil Leak

Presents a car guaranteed to fail and then asks if MOT centre are taking the Mick...There's someone here having a laugh but they ain't a mechanic.

Nilrem

Front Inner Anti-roll bar rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Front Outer Anti-roll bar linkage rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)

Advisories tend to lead to things like

Nearside Front Suspension arm pin or bush excessively worn lower wishbone rear bush (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Offside Front Suspension arm pin or bush excessively worn lower wishbone rear bush (5.3.4 (a) (i))

If not seen to, and can also lead to additional damage as one part wears and puts extra stress on others.

Some of the defects seem like common ones that should be spotted by the driver, others seem to basically be continuations of previously highlighted issues that have got worse or spread.

Unfortunately short of paying for it to be tested at another garage (and be taken there) I suspect you're not going to get much luck, and the chances are the other garage will have most of the same issues, or at the very best you might scrape through with a couple of the majors getting changed to advisories if they're ones the examiner has any leeway on (although I'd suspect than any examiner getting a car with majors listed a few days earlier would be paying extra attention to them).

wongataa

unholyangel wrote: »

Dangerous faults mean you can no longer drive it - even if the previous MOT still had a period left of its validity.

That has always been the case though. Nothing has changed in that regard. An unroadworthy car is not allowed on the road no matter what its MOT status is.

prowla

Two tyres are an easy fix.
Headlight alignment & bulbs are DIY.
The exhaust problems probably mean a new exhaust, but it might be possible to have the front bit repaired (welded).
The suspension does need sorting.
The handbrake doesn't work.


Now, I've taken a car to an MOT with marginal tyres because I wanted to see what other jobs needed doing first, so that is a valid strategy. The MOT place is 200 yards from the tyre place, so it's easy for me. (But of course the car would fail on that.)


The MOT garage has quoted for them to do it as a one stop shop, but it may well be that shopping around (eg a tyres & exhaust specialist) may be cheaper.


However, the MOT having expired makes it not so easy.


An alternative strategy would be to book it in for an MOT at another place and see what they say.


As far as the MOT goes, it is intended to set an absolute minimum level of roadworthiness for your own and others' safety; imagine losing control of the car because the tyres were shot and the suspension was unstable?

photome

why didnt you change the tyres before they became illegal and you must have known that the washers werent working properly, probably just a jet needed clearing.


sounds to me like you dont do any routine checks on your car, its something you should learn to do and it may prevent a large bill come MOT time.


sorry it doesnt help this time though

angrycrow

I have had one of these mk2 puntos a few years ago. Bought it at 12 years old and kept it a couple of years. Spent most of my free time under it fixing one thing or another. Typical Fiat it's not badly designed but all the fixing are ridiculously fragile, snapped bolts every time I worked on it, never snapped a fixing on any other car.

There are two items on the list that should never have been allowed to get to the fail point, tyres and screen wash.

You don't say what year it was but the earlier pre 2003 cars have a issue where the headlight lens deteriorates to the point it affects the beam pattern, sometimes you can wet sand the lenes back to a pass level sometimes they are too far gone. Good luck finding suitably replaced headlights at a reasonable price if they have the integrated fog lights. Check out local breakers yards.

Front wish bones are an easy fix, three bolts on wishbone and 2 antiroll bar bolts and they drop out, parts are very cheap but cheaper wishbones can go again in 1 to 2 years.

The exhausts have a habit of fracturing the flang on the back of the catalytic converter, part can be pricy as it includes the cat and exhaust manifold but they weld back on very successfully.

Rear brakes likely need a good service and the handbrake cables readjusting.

So far my Punto had every one of the above faults in the time I owned it plus a few more. My parts spend to keep it going was under £150.

The killer for yours is the corrosion. Front subframes do rot but a wire brush and some new paint normally keeps them. Going a few more years. Also worth checking the sump pan as these rot at the front and can spontaneously rupture. What kills these cars is corrosion between the rear quarter panel and the rear wheel well which is also the rear shock absorber mounting. This can be particularly bad on 3 door cars.

Before spending anything you need to find out how bad the corrosion is to see if it is worth fixing. Also check the rear of the floor near the sill. In the factory the shells were hung from brackets welded on to the bottom of the floor. The floors tend to rot away under these brackets.

angrycrow

If you do have the repairs done get them to change the anti roll bar bushes at the same time as the wish bones No additional labour to do this and the cost a couple of £ each so good preventative maintainance.

AdrianC

iBreakTheDawn wrote: »

MOT I JUST HAD (17 JUNE, 2019)
Mileage
101,608 miles
Do not drive until repaired (dangerous defects):
Nearside Front Tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm (5.2.3 (e))
Offside Front Tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm (5.2.3 (e))

Thank the tester very nicely for saving you from three points and a hundred quid, and make a mental note to do your basic checks more often.

Repair immediately (major defects):
Offside Rear Position lamp not working (4.2.1 (a))
Nearside Headlamp aim projected beam image is obviously incorrect (4.1.2 (c))
Offside Headlamp aim projected beam image is obviously incorrect (4.1.2 (c))
Windscreen washer provides insufficient washer liquid (3.5 (a))

I mean, seriously? You took it in for an MOT with two illegal tyres, a tail light out, both headlights pointing every which way, and no screenwash...?

Nearside Front Suspension arm pin or bush excessively worn lower wishbone rear bush (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Offside Front Suspension arm pin or bush excessively worn lower wishbone rear bush (5.3.4 (a) (i))

Bottom arm bushes knackered. Wear and tear.

Nearside Rear Suspension component mounting prescribed area excessively corroded significantly reducing structural strength floor (5.3.6 (a) (i))

A bit of floor rot. How old's this Punto?

Exhaust emissions likely to be affected by an exhaust leak front exhaust/cat leaking (8.2.1.1 (b))
Exhaust Lambda reading after 2nd fast idle outside specified limits (8.2.1.2 (c))

Exhaust blow, so the emissions are out.

Offside Rear Parking (secondary brake) on a single line braking system has inadequate effort at a wheel (1.3.1 (a) (i))
Parking brake efficiency below requirements (1.4.2 (a) (i))

Handbrake doesn't work, especially the offside wheel. (They picked the wrong fail - it won't be a single-line system, but the end result is the same). If this is a frequent issue, then get the rear brakes sorted properly.

Monitor and repair if necessary (advisories):

It passed, but these are on your to-do list.

I expected the hand brake to come up again as it's been a recurring issue on this car but I feel as I'm a young (effeminate) man and I had my retail work uniform on when I went they obviously think I'm an idiot and pushover - far from it.

This isn't about you. You took a shed in for a test with illegal tyres, lights out and pointing all over the place, no screenwash, a blowing exhast, and a handbrake you knew didn't work... and are trying to make out this is some kind of discrimination? Nope.

To make it clear, I DID NOT EXPECT THE CAR TO PASS FIRST TIME.

You should. The MOT is not a once-a-year high-water-mark, it's a bare minimum.

seatbeltnoob

wongataa wrote: »

That has always been the case though. Nothing has changed in that regard. An unroadworthy car is not allowed on the road no matter what its MOT status is.

You're wrong, if you have no MOT and there are no dangerous faults like bald tyres you can drive the car to a prebooked appointment to a mechanic to get the car fixed.