Lost car in Luton fire, new one failed it's MOT

Upsidedownyouturnme

facade said:

Upsidedownyouturnme said:

I can't post a screenshot of what it failed on, but it failed on:

• Nearside Rear Tyre has ply or cords exposed (5.2.3 (d) (ii))

Repair immediately (major defects):

• Parking brake lever has excessive movement indicating incorrect adjustment (1.1.6 (c))
• Registration plate lamp inoperative in the case of a single lamp or all lamps both (4.7.1 (b) (ii))
• Nearside Headlamp aim projected beam image is obviously incorrect (4.1.2 (c))
• Exhaust has a major leak of exhaust gases centre exhaust (6.1.2 (a))
• Exhaust Lambda reading after 2nd fast idle outside specified limits (8.2.1.2 (c))
• Exhaust emissions likely to be affected by an exhaust leak (8.2.1.1 (b))
• Parking brake efficiency below requirements (1.4.2 (a) (i))

So it needs a cheap tyre, the exhaust fixing which will more than likely sort the emissions, the hand brake adjusting/servicing, a numberplate bulb and either a new headlight or the bulb fitting correctly.

Take it to a cheap garage for a quote and an MOT, you can get another year out of it easily for a few hundred pounds- the exhaust is the biggest expense.

I'd guess the seller knew the exhaust wanted replacing for MOT and that was why he didn't get one.

tbh, it isn't rotten, it is worth spending £500 on it, then it will need tyres and possibly that balljoint in the future.

Thank you.  I'm not mechanically minded so have no ideas on these things, but that's really useful.

lincroft1710

The tyre wear should have been noted when you inspected the car prior to purchase. Exhaust systems, brake pads and light bulbs are all consumables. 

Herzlos

A lot of that stuff, particularly the lights, tyres and hand brake should have been obvious from a visual inspection. There's not much you can do about that in retrospect, but spend a bit of time looking at your next car.

As said, it's almost certainly a dealer pretending to be a student to avoid the tax man and any warranty, so whilst legally there are rights there you've got almost no chance of enforcing them and the expectations on a £950 car with 2 months MOT are pretty low.


On the plus side, it's all fairly simple stuff to sort - get 4 new tyres (only 1 failed but 2 are near the legal limit, we don't know what the 4th one is like, and you may get a discount on 4), new exhaust, adjusted handbrake.

The one that jumps out at me as potentially problematic is this one:

"Nearside Headlamp aim projected beam image is obviously incorrect (4.1.2 (c))"

So I'd try and get to the bottom of that first - if it's just a loose or faulty unit then that's not a big deal, but you want to rule out any underlying accident damage etc before spending any money on the rest of it.

Okell

Upsidedownyouturnme said:

... but the seller (a student but has a lot of cars for sale on Facebook and eBay), ...

If you have actual evidence of this (contact phone number, email address etc.) pass it on to your local trading standards people or ask CAB to refer it to them.

It won't help you but it might prevent it happening to others.  (It's one thing TS sometimes do well)

Upsidedownyouturnme

lincroft1710 said:

The tyre wear should have been noted when you inspected the car prior to purchase. Exhaust systems, brake pads and light bulbs are all consumables. 

Unfortunately I didn't look at the car only my husband.  This is the first dud car he's bought, but he was just too desperate.  It was also dark when he looked, as the guy kept changing when he could view it.

Upsidedownyouturnme

Herzlos said:

A lot of that stuff, particularly the lights, tyres and hand brake should have been obvious from a visual inspection. There's not much you can do about that in retrospect, but spend a bit of time looking at your next car.

As said, it's almost certainly a dealer pretending to be a student to avoid the tax man and any warranty, so whilst legally there are rights there you've got almost no chance of enforcing them and the expectations on a £950 car with 2 months MOT are pretty low.


On the plus side, it's all fairly simple stuff to sort - get 4 new tyres (only 1 failed but 2 are near the legal limit, we don't know what the 4th one is like, and you may get a discount on 4), new exhaust, adjusted handbrake.

The one that jumps out at me as potentially problematic is this one:

"Nearside Headlamp aim projected beam image is obviously incorrect (4.1.2 (c))"

So I'd try and get to the bottom of that first - if it's just a loose or faulty unit then that's not a big deal, but you want to rule out any underlying accident damage etc before spending any money on the rest of it.

That makes sense, thank you.  Interestingly he did make a big thing about my husband seeing him about the headlamp before taking it for an MOT, he said it was something to do with clouding on the plastic and he'd polish it, but hubby polished it. 

WellKnownSid

Herzlos said:

The one that jumps out at me as potentially problematic is this one:

"Nearside Headlamp aim projected beam image is obviously incorrect (4.1.2 (c))"

So I'd try and get to the bottom of that first - if it's just a loose or faulty unit then that's not a big deal, but you want to rule out any underlying accident damage etc before spending any money on the rest of it.

Or the headlight bulb is fitted upside down?

fatbelly

That list looks pretty typical for an older poorly maintained car.

How bad is the exhaust? My Dad got a car through an mot many times using this stuff

https://www.halfords.com/motoring/tools/garage-equipment/head-gasket-and-exhaust-repairs/holts-gun-gum-paste-200g-741504.html

Ps. Don't skimp on the tyres. It's a false economy.

Desmond_Hume

Any more details on the car. Make, model, age, mileage? 

Upsidedownyouturnme

Desmond_Hume said:

Any more details on the car. Make, model, age, mileage? 

It's a Nissan Almera, 2006 and 121,000 miles. It's a petrol, manual car.