Also as said if a leaky shock isn't obvious & is cleaned off then it would pass anyway
Just bought a car for my daughter who has just passed her test. Last mot had an advisory on a shock absorber (which 2 days before had been a fail).Seller agreed to give it a new MOT and fix any fails and advisories. I was expecting at least the shock, but it came up as a clear pass. Should I be worried, do mot passes for mates still exist?
If he cleaned the shock they wouldnt see an issue there's no bounce test as part of the mot anymore there progress for you !!
Passes for mates most definitely still happen, I took my transit recovery in for a test and it went a long the lines of
'put it over the pit for me,does it all work?'
answer 'I know it needs a track rod doing'
'well thats all ok then lets put it on the gas meter'
'contrats mate it's passed'
Time to do MOT 4 mins, time to type up MOT, smoke fag, have a p#ss, drink coffee 25 mins.
Still feel safe about having 3800kg transit recovery sat 10ft behind you on that B road?
As reliable as the testers ability to spot or not faults. Its not unfeadible for a mate to 'not see' an obvious fault. Proving it may be
difficult. Is it tested at same place?
I had an escort fail on corroded battery tray, patched it with fibre glass, painted then smeared with used engine oil and vacuum cleaner contents so
did not look newly repaired, different mot place did not even look at it.
As reliable as the tester that did the test/signed the certificate i.e. not very
Also as said if a leaky shock isn't obvious & is cleaned off then it would pass anyway
quote:
Originally posted by SteveWallace
do mot passes for mates still exist?
I was always told you should go the council MOT place where they don't do any fixes, just the MOT, but that was to solve the problem of a garage
finding extra faults to get work.
As the DVLA (Or whoever it is that runs MOTs) always say, the MOT isn't any sort of proof or guarantee the car is ok.
covering things up is a good one, I worked with a bloke who glued plastic sheets over rust patches to pass an MOT no issues.
Thanks guys,that's what I hoped you wouldn't say! I'll challenge him on it and have a closer look myself. Worst case scenario, I can replace the shocks, discs and pads on both sides at the front for £200, so not the end of the world even if I have had my leg lifted.
quote:
Originally posted by morcus
I was always told you should go the council MOT place where they don't do any fixes, just the MOT, but that was to solve the problem of a garage finding extra faults to get work.
As the DVLA (Or whoever it is that runs MOTs) always say, the MOT isn't any sort of proof or guarantee the car is ok.
covering things up is a good one, I worked with a bloke who glued plastic sheets over rust patches to pass an MOT no issues.
Was it the same MOT station that passed it as had given it the advisory?
If so, I'd have thought you'd have a case to take it up with the DVSA if the damper does prove to be defective?
You can now see the vehicles MoT history which shows the results from each time it's been taken for MoT. It shows the fails and advisories. Print
them out and confront the seller. If his mate has turned a blind eye to faults, then mention the garage and tester by name and suggest that you may
take the car to a VOSA centre for a retest......
https://www.check-mot.service.gov.uk/?_ga=1.236280390.653928017.1447268240
[Edited on 11/11/15 by owelly]
quote:
Originally posted by owelly
You can now see the vehicles MoT history which shows the results from each time it's been taken for MoT. It shows the fails and advisories. Print them out and confront the seller. If his mate has turned a blind eye to faults, then mention the garage and tester by name and suggest that you may take the car to a VOSA centre for a retest......
https://www.check-mot.service.gov.uk/?_ga=1.236280390.653928017.1447268240
[Edited on 11/11/15 by owelly]
I had a clear lesson in shock absorber MoT failure on my Transhit.
One rear shock was deemed a pass, the other one was deemed an advisory. There's no bounce test. The 'pass' was because the shock
wasn't leaking oil and looked good, the advisory shock had a slight oil weep.
Because the van also failed on brake pipes, front discs and a few other 'excessive corrosion' issues (as expected) I had it in the air to
attend to it all, weld spatter burns (lovely), plenty of time, so replaced the shocks....
The MoT 'pass' shock had no oil in it, no damping action *whatsoever*. The 'advisory' shock had some damping and seemed
useable.
Anyway, one last thing to say, the replacements (ECP) have transformed the feel of the rear end.
quote:
Originally posted by SteveWallace
Just bought a car for my daughter who has just passed her test. Last mot had an advisory on a shock absorber (which 2 days before had been a fail).Seller agreed to give it a new MOT and fix any fails and advisories. I was expecting at least the shock, but it came up as a clear pass. Should I be worried, do mot passes for mates still exist?
quote:
Originally posted by Sam_68
Was it the same MOT station that passed it as had given it the advisory?
If so, I'd have thought you'd have a case to take it up with the DVSA if the damper does prove to be defective?
quote:
Originally posted by 02GF74
As reliable as the testers ability to spot or not faults. Its not unfeadible for a mate to 'not see' an obvious fault. Proving it may be difficult. Is it tested at same place?
I had an escort fail on corroded battery tray, patched it with fibre glass, painted then smeared with used engine oil and vacuum cleaner contents so did not look newly repaired, different mot place did not even look at it.
Above post from Brook lands {like button}
very imformative
aside to this, in aviation we have some funnys that are banded about, and one of them goes a bit like this
Pilot adds to the tech log that "evidence of oil on nose leg oleo" as a tech defect
Maintenance engineers see's the tech log, and wipes the oil off the oleo leg, and writes in the tech log
"evidence of oil removed"
so it is a failure ??
steve
[Edited on 11/11/15 by steve m]
My diesel passed recently with an advisory on mild bottom ball joint wear. Closer inspection showed clamp bolt mostly undone and joint bouncing around in the clamp. Fails every year on handbrake efficiency, first few years I stripped, lubed, reconned the lot for retest. Recently I've just cleaned the caliper and miraculously the efficiency rockets ?!
quote:
Originally posted by steve m
Above post from Brook lands {like button}
so it is a failure ??
[Edited on 11/11/15 by steve m]
I'm probably getting more wound up by this than it deserves. When I went to inspect the car, I saw the advisory on the shock and thought
"so what, I've driven loads of cars with advisories and if it needs replacing before the next MOT then its a simply fix and only £70 a
side". I also wouldn't have thought too much about the advisory not being there at the next test as they are very tester dependent as has
been said.
Problem was, I got home found the link on here to the MOT test history site and saw that it failed an MOT based on a severely leaking shock 2 days
before it passed with an advisory. To be fair to the seller, he had probably not seen the previous fail either and had only been given the later
pass, so even if it is a mates test he probably doesn't see it as a big issue.
It might be that the original test (which had a few other simple fix fails such as wiper blades and not sufficiently attached exhaust) was a Halfrauds
special and that the shock should only ever have been an advisory. Alternatively the shock might have failed completely now and therefore not be
showing any oil.
I'm also kicking myself for not testing the suspension when I did the first inspection on the car. My excuse is that I looked at it on the way
to hospital to see my nearest and dearest who had just been taken in for an op - I should have probably bailed out.
Being honest, my anger is probably 8/10 pride for having potentially missed something when I inspected the car!
As I said earlier in this thread, worst case is that it will cost £140 two new front shocks and I had might as well do the brakes and discs whilst
I'm at it for a total of £200 ish and a couple of hours of my time to get a sorted car
[Edited on 11/11/15 by SteveWallace]
Your daughters car
MOT is nice to have and gives you a year to fix the faults you are not happy with.
For me the MOT identifies areas I may have overlooked and I thank them for that
I've found a good MOT garage that does fix if you ask or just advises if it fails
They are always full of cars and don't push for work
I always get MOT from them and if I can't be asked they get the work
The problem is the test is still somewhat subjective for some things and the inability of the tester to do further investigation within the test means
it often comes down to a judgement call - define badly leaking?
At the end of the day old cars are old cars (and even some not so old cars) have bits than need fixing.
I've used the same tester for 27 years so we know each other quite well. He knows that if he puts down an advisory or mentions something to me it
will get fixed straight away but he is always complaining that things he would happily (and correctly) mark as an advisory on my cars, he really wants
to put as a fail for some other customers because he knows they won't do anything about it until it breaks or the car comes back next year. But
as he says, if it meets the standard it passes, if it doesn't, it fails end off.
Now I know there are some bad'uns out there but I do have some sympathy for the good guys that work in these big national chains. Unlike my chap
who knows his customers and can make a call as to what ought to be done between now and when he is likely to see the car next, the testers or fitters
in the multi outlet chains probably don't. If a car comes in with what might be a developing problem they have no idea when it might get looked
at next so what do they do? We've all heard these conversations.
Fitter "Your front brakes are looking a bit worn" -subtext, they're ok at the moment but are going to need replacing sometime.
Customer " How worn" -subtext that sounds expensive can I get away without spending any more money on it just now.
Fitter "Quite worn they will need doing soon" - subtext I've not see you or your car before I don't know how you drive or how long
those pads have been on, they could last a week, a month or a day.
Customer "How soon" - subtext that sounds a bit more urgent but I still don't want to spend more money just now.
Fitter "Well we can do them for you today and then you know they're done" - subtext how the hell do I know how much longer they will
last, ok I'll go for the safe option and suggest they are done now.
Customer "Do you really think I ought to do that" -subtext I still don't want to spend money but now its sounding more urgent, or is he
just ripping me off and wants more work because he's on an incentive scheme.
At this point the customer
1 has the work done but still at thinks that maybe the fitter was just looking for more work.
2 doesn't have it done, the brake last another 12 months because they drive like a nun so they are now convinced the fitter was just looking to
do unnecessary work.
3 they don't have it done, thrash the car to death for the next month because that is how they always drive, the pads go down to the backing
plates, wreck the discs, the bill is twice as much and the customer then complains that the place the car was taken to a month early is a right dodgy
place and passes cars with duff brakes.
PS. Interestingly I didn't know the bounce test had gone because my chap still does it, guess old habits and all that.
quote:
Originally posted by snapper
Your daughters car
MOT is nice to have and gives you a year to fix the faults you are not happy with.
For me the MOT identifies areas I may have overlooked and I thank them for that
I've found a good MOT garage that does fix if you ask or just advises if it fails
They are always full of cars and don't push for work
I always get MOT from them and if I can't be asked they get the work
But the reality of the situation is, regardless of whether I can be asked or not, he won't do any work on any of my cars.
quote:
Originally posted by coyoteboy
My diesel passed recently with an advisory on mild bottom ball joint wear. Closer inspection showed clamp bolt mostly undone and joint bouncing around in the clamp. Fails every year on handbrake efficiency, first few years I stripped, lubed, reconned the lot for retest. Recently I've just cleaned the caliper and miraculously the efficiency rockets ?!
I have been rebuilding cars for years that all had MOT passes and most had serious safety issues somehow missed by the MOT inspectors.
The landy I am repairing now had a crack right through the rear chassis leg next to a huge hole I could get my fist through and whole car sagging due
to it, all that barely covered by a sheet steel patch held on with silicon sealant...rest of the car not much better, passed its MOT like that
MOT's are only as good as the person doing the test.
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
MOT's are only as good as the person doing the test.
quote:
Originally posted by Charlie_Zetec
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
MOT's are only as good as the person doing the test.
I was also told once that as well as the person doing the test, the MOT is only really valid on the day it's done. How many times have people swapped items over before or after an MOT (or IVA for that matter)?? Down to who does the test and how the car "appears" on the day it's tested.
quote:
Originally posted by Slimy38
quote:
Originally posted by Charlie_Zetec
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
MOT's are only as good as the person doing the test.
I was also told once that as well as the person doing the test, the MOT is only really valid on the day it's done. How many times have people swapped items over before or after an MOT (or IVA for that matter)?? Down to who does the test and how the car "appears" on the day it's tested.
Valid for the whole day? I thought it was valid only until it's driven off the ramps!
Our old Toyota had an advisory on a suspension joint for two years around 2011/2012 but it got better and has passed without a mention since.
Testers often tried to fail the rear bushes on my various Alfasuds even though the new ones were often softer and mt Citroen GSA once failed because
the hydraulic pressure regulator worked and in doing so ticked occasionally.
In short as reliable as the mechanic / muppett [delete as appropriate] that is testing it.
Stu
quote:
Originally posted by Charlie_Zetec
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
MOT's are only as good as the person doing the test.
I was also told once that as well as the person doing the test, the MOT is only really valid on the day it's done. How many times have people swapped items over before or after an MOT (or IVA for that matter)?? Down to who does the test and how the car "appears" on the day it's tested.