oh man... big service bill!

anewman

morg_monster wrote: »

.. but its hard to know what stance to take if they thought they were doing a favour.

Thank them for doing the MOT, pay for that, and tell them you'll bring the car back to get the work done in a week or so as you don't have the money at the moment, then erm don't take it there.

morg_monster

anewman wrote: »

Thank them for doing the MOT, pay for that, and tell them you'll bring the car back to get the work done in a week or so as you don't have the money at the moment, then erm don't take it there.

but where do I take it? How do I find a good reliable garage? (I did try goodgarages or whatever that website is but the closest to me was 5miles away which could mean half an hour drive in the morning rush!)
this is the main problem i have with my car ... if I knew 100% the garage was reliable and trustworthy I'd have no problem handing over the money, I would be sure I was getting good value. But how do I know, and how do I find anywhere that is any better when i have pretty much zero knowledge about these things?! Currently I trust them purely because they are friendly and polite and explain things to me in layman's terms, and nothing has ever happened to make me not trust them...

bryanb

The only real way to find a reliable garage is by personal recomendation, preferably by someone who has the experience and knowledge to judge.

anewman

I think the car will survive until you move out of London if the problems are only advisory notice related. And if not you should be able to pick up a new car for £800 anyway.

Conor_3

bryanb wrote: »

Seems to me that if the test centre is separate from the garage, the advisories are not neccessarily fail items. I base this on the fact that I had an advisory last year that said "front brake discs slightly worn" This was at a main dealer who would apply the rules very strictly. Ask to see the paperwork.

The point I was making was that if the garage claims the shockers and brake parts need replacing, these ARE fail items so either the MOT was hooky or they're not actually at the point where they need replacing. The garage can't have it both ways - passing those parts in an MOT on the one hand then claiming they're duff on the other. Either they were fit enough to pass the MOT in which case they don't need replacing or they do need replacing and they shouldn't have issued an MOT.

The "passed it as a favour" holds no clout with me, especially if they're claiming dodgy brake components as there's no guarantee you're going to get them fixed straight away is there?

Keith

Inactive wrote: »

No need to have a spare wheel, so that was wrong.

I know of at least one new car that comes without a spare wheel of any kind.

I think it goes down as an advisory as they advise you that it should be there but it isn't.

Morg - It would be a great help if you could post what the advisory note says.

jeannieblue

Its passed the MOT. The decision to make is, do I gradually get the work done on the car that will at some point in the future need doing, or shall I trade it in for something newer?

Please note - that an advisory is just that - they are letting you know of various faults on the car, that may need doing in the near or distant future.
Shock absorbers have to be leaking quite badly to fail an MOT.

I recommend you find a garage in the future that has its own MOT test centre - can make it easier.

tomstickland

ALL OF THESE ARE MOT FAILURE ITEMS.

Not if they currently pass the MOT but the garage think they are borderline and will fail next time.

It looks to me like the garage are being reasonable.

goldspanners

i agree with the majority of posters here,how can a shock absorber be borderline? its either leaking,snapped or soft,either a pass or a fail,no grey area there,and brake cylinder that is leaking,thats a definate fail,brake fluid leaking all over the brake shoes is not a pass.
if all these faults are correct thenthe car should not have passed.
i think the garage is trying to drum up a bit of buisness,as anewman said,they know you are a regular customer so they are trying to take advantage of this fact,get the items double checked.

i also think the quote for the jobs is a bit exessive too.

jeannieblue

goldspanners wrote: »

i agree with the majority of posters here,how can a shock absorber be borderline? its either leaking,snapped or soft,either a pass or a fail,no grey area there,and brake cylinder that is leaking,thats a definate fail,brake fluid leaking all over the brake shoes is not a pass.
if all these faults are correct thenthe car should not have passed.
i think the garage is trying to drum up a bit of buisness,as anewman said,they know you are a regular customer so they are trying to take advantage of this fact,get the items double checked.

i also think the quote for the jobs is a bit exessive too.

Sorry Goldspanner but you are wrong.

Shock absorbers can weep for some years before they get to leaking badly enough to fail an MOT. But they will be mentioned on the advisory.

I think some of this thread has got a bit over dramatic regarding the advisory's. You can have an advisory which says - unable to check o/s rear seat belt due to child seat. Its not a fault with the car. Its an advisory. Brake pipes starting to corrode - but they're still safe for now ... and possibly the next MOT.

Common sense has to prevail here.