MOT fail due to garage error

[Deleted User]

Mildly_Miffed said:

Several hundred quid's worth of grovel for that triviality is unbelievably generous.

Nah, they weren’t grovelling at all. And I appreciated their honesty. They did a poor job, owned it and played fair. And they still got a shed load of money at the end of the day.

born_again

Daughter had 2 tyres fitted by KF before MOT.
Took it to usual garage for MOT. Same as OP wrong way round. Garage sorted & retested @ no charge
Complained to KF & got £16 for each one.
Bite mini's hands off with that compo.

njkmr

Only thing I would be miffed at is the MOT record showing a fail in its history.
If the car was "special" in any way then a potential new purchaser looks at the history for a guide as to how the car has been looked after and a clear run of passes at MOT time tends to show it's been "looked after".
Only my opinion. 

sheslookinhot

njkmr said:

Only thing I would be miffed at is the MOT record showing a fail in its history.
If the car was "special" in any way then a potential new purchaser looks at the history for a guide as to how the car has been looked after and a clear run of passes at MOT time tends to show it's been "looked after".
Only my opinion. 

…and this years failure would in no way tend to show the car had not been looked after. At least by any sensible person.

Mildly_Miffed

[Deleted User] said:

njkmr said:

Only thing I would be miffed at is the MOT record showing a fail in its history.

Exactly that. Immaculate. Really well looked after. 10yrs old, top spec, only 20k on the clock, full service history, no MOT fails - until now. I accept things go wrong at this age, but this was so unnecessary. Frustrating but it’s done now.

Poor thing. Use it more.

Anybody vaguely sensible looking at the MOT history will realise that's a trivially irrelevant fail, and absolutely no reflection on the car at all.

I presume the replacement tyres were needed because they were cracked and perished? Did you not notice that on your regular checks?

MACKEM99

WellKnownSid said:

[Deleted User] said:

The garage admits making an unacceptable error, falling far short of expected standards. 

It’s a main Mini dealership who really ought to know how to fit tyres to one of their own cars. 

They won't fit tyres themselves.  Bob from the local tyre fitters will pop round to do it.

Yes but customer pays them not Bob.

badmemory

It is however very worrying that someone who is fitting new tyres on a regular basis actually managed to get it wrong.

facade

Mildly_Miffed said:

[Deleted User] said:

njkmr said:

Only thing I would be miffed at is the MOT record showing a fail in its history.

Exactly that. Immaculate. Really well looked after. 10yrs old, top spec, only 20k on the clock, full service history, no MOT fails - until now. I accept things go wrong at this age, but this was so unnecessary. Frustrating but it’s done now.

Poor thing. Use it more.

Anybody vaguely sensible looking at the MOT history will realise that's a trivially irrelevant fail, and absolutely no reflection on the car at all.

I presume the replacement tyres were needed because they were cracked and perished? Did you not notice that on your regular checks?

You've hit the problem on the head.

When looking at the MOT history with that fail do you think 

"Only bothers to fit tyres to get it through the MOT" (= not looked after)? or do you think

"Drives round with tyres on backwards for ages" (= not looked after)?

Either way the car's history has a blot on it now.

Still, a free service is a good result compared to just an apology- assuming they don't put the oil in backwards

Mildly_Miffed

facade said:

Mildly_Miffed said:

[Deleted User] said:

njkmr said:

Only thing I would be miffed at is the MOT record showing a fail in its history.

Exactly that. Immaculate. Really well looked after. 10yrs old, top spec, only 20k on the clock, full service history, no MOT fails - until now. I accept things go wrong at this age, but this was so unnecessary. Frustrating but it’s done now.

Poor thing. Use it more.

Anybody vaguely sensible looking at the MOT history will realise that's a trivially irrelevant fail, and absolutely no reflection on the car at all.

I presume the replacement tyres were needed because they were cracked and perished? Did you not notice that on your regular checks?

You've hit the problem on the head.

When looking at the MOT history with that fail do you think 

"Only bothers to fit tyres to get it through the MOT" (= not looked after)? or do you think

"Drives round with tyres on backwards for ages" (= not looked after)?

I'd think "idiot tyre fitter" and simply move on.

But "only bothers to fit tyres to get it through the MOT" is also accurate.

Goudy

I wouldn't worry too much about MOT advisories and fails for consumable items like tyres.
Things get older and wear out. No matter how special it is, it's a ten year old car.
It could have been sat in a garage unused all year and still failed on something.

The history shows it's been sorted, sent back for a retest and passed.

I'd be annoyed if it failed for a split or a nail in the tyre or worn brakes or anything else that should have been picked up at the service.
I'd be wanting some sort of compensation from the dealer for that as they clearly haven't done what I paid them to do.