39 replies to this topic

[100ev8]

I love this type of response whenever someone fails a car.

Item 16, if there's a bootlining kit, there are several areas in the boot that the tester cannot inspect, the rear of the seat back being just one example. All he's done is note as an advisory that he can't see it to properly inspect it. Kind of the same thing with the underseal. If he can't see the seams around patches, but know there are areas that have been repaired, then he's noted that he can't see how good the repairs are. It's his name on the certificate, so he's totally entitled to make notes like that.

The rest of it, is it really that hard to believe that it's genuine? Most garages wouldn't want the work, I doubt they've got a load of stock of subframe mounts.

all looks good to me and i been testing 23 years . if you dont advice and somone moans we get it in the neck of the ministry !

[jbs.998]

I have changed all the mounts to solid, even the front teardrop mounts.
They are all really easy. The tower mounts are easy too.
Just jack the car up and support it, use your jack to take the weight of the front subframe, undo the brackets at bottom, and undo top tower mounts the slowly lower the jack. The subframe will drop with the jack, then basically slide the new mount in, change the top tower mount and tighten up!
There is a topic in the FAQ section.
Hope this helps!

[mab01uk]

I love this type of response whenever someone fails a car.

Item 16, if there's a bootlining kit, there are several areas in the boot that the tester cannot inspect, the rear of the seat back being just one example. All he's done is note as an advisory that he can't see it to properly inspect it. Kind of the same thing with the underseal. If he can't see the seams around patches, but know there are areas that have been repaired, then he's noted that he can't see how good the repairs are. It's his name on the certificate, so he's totally entitled to make notes like that.

The rest of it, is it really that hard to believe that it's genuine? Most garages wouldn't want the work, I doubt they've got a load of stock of subframe mounts.

I agree, sounds like a fair test was done if the garage wants to keep its MOT testers licence. Most of the work could have been sorted out in advance before the test with a more through pre-test inspection.

[The Matt]

all looks good to me and i been testing 23 years . if you dont advice and somone moans we get it in the neck of the ministry !

Exactly, when I was testing (only did it for around 4 years, stopped 12 years ago) we used to get people complaining that we had only failed their car to make work for ourselves. I would then take them to the tester's manual, show them the text by which I was basing the failure on, then show them the fault with their car, often explaining why it was deemed to be unsafe. It often made people realise that the test is there for a reason.

I can see why people think it's job-creation, but it really isn't. to be honest, most of the minis that I MOTd over the years had at least one subframe mount broken every time you tested them. Back in the 90s there were some really RUBBISH replacement teardrop mounts (Mafco IIRC) that would literally last one year, then have to be replaced again the next MOT.

I would personally swap them for solid ones, especially the front ones. The rear ones can suffer if you've got leaky oil too, the rubber in them can perish a little because of it. I wouldn't solild mount the rears, but that said I put Deflex ones on mine and they were pretty solid.

[Claibo]

It's true, any advisories I've had on my MOT have eventually needed sorting before the next MOT!!

My Swift got an advisory for the bonnet catch, that it was slightly corroded, sure enough when I opened the bonnet to take some photos, when I tried to shut it again the second catch just wouldn't hold it down! Luckily my dad's a bit of a whizz and managed to find some spring that would normally be used to fix an IBM printer worked just the same! And it wasn't until I was laying out the MOTs to get a photo that I noticed that advisory.

I also don't see how the garage is making work for themselves, I don't take my car to get repairs where I have the MOT done, if they tell me there's problems, I drive it home and ring around for quotes at other garages (Important you check if you can have a free retest!!) So essentially they're helping all the little garages in my area, by pointing out everything that's wrong, and keeping them in business

[mini-luke]

You hear all sorts of stories of garages failing cars to get the extra work, but I'm sure it really doesn't happen very often.

I found all the MOT's for my Mini yesterday, only one failed MOT, for...wait for it... RUST

[maggies_minder]

i only failed on a track rod end and a bulb this year.

got an advisory for both my front arches, which were only held on by one rivet and would literally flap over 40mph.

[minidave1991-89]

MOT's are a total joke anyway to be honest, they get you for any little thing just to get more money off you. £35.00 retest for a £2.00 bulb?? on your bike son!

[maggies_minder]

i failed my first MOT with the mini on an incorrectly angled headlight.
a 2 minute fix, and on a mini does it really matter?? the lights are pants and in no one (other than garden knomes) eye line.

Edited by maggies_minder, 11 October 2011 - 09:54 AM.

[minidave1991-89]

Mine failed for the same thing and that the mirrors were sagging? whats the problem with that! can still see out of them lol

[jmini22]

how many pages did this equal mine was a total of 4 pages and i managed to get that through doing all the work my self including welding, ball joints, front and rear breaks, lights, steering column.... and i only spent about £500 so dont worry mate anything is possible with a mini

[puggered]

I have been using the same garage for my MOT's for 17 years and in that whole time I have had 4 failures. I do think that you will get the occasional back street garage that will create work for themselves [usually the ones that advertise MOT's for £25] but if you give your car a good look over prior to its test then anything obvious should be spotted and you can get it sorted. Also most test centres will give you a free re test within 10 days.

[oliver122]

all the jobs have been done , apart from emission's and that's getting done tomorrow , gone for poly bush's front and back

[spacekadett]

I love this type of response whenever someone fails a car.

Item 16, if there's a bootlining kit, there are several areas in the boot that the tester cannot inspect, the rear of the seat back being just one example. All he's done is note as an advisory that he can't see it to properly inspect it. Kind of the same thing with the underseal. If he can't see the seams around patches, but know there are areas that have been repaired, then he's noted that he can't see how good the repairs are. It's his name on the certificate, so he's totally entitled to make notes like that.

The rest of it, is it really that hard to believe that it's genuine? Most garages wouldn't want the work, I doubt they've got a load of stock of subframe mounts.

Agreed, same with the underseal. So there's a load of patches thickly covered with underseal even if it is welded properly underneath it all it just screams BODGE! And yet it's implied the tester is in the wrong for covering his backside in case the car's sold / in a shunt etc and the patches fall off. Same with the boot liner. It's an add on thing, not factory like in modern motors, that could hide nasties, pretty much equivalent to add on skirts that can hide rust. despite taking the mickey that it was advised, if it was removed and rust (i.e. in the corners of the boot floor which you CAN'T see from underneath) found there are those who would be straight on the blower to VOSA accusing them of doling out dodgy tickets.
Sorry but it does rankle that whatever you do as a tester you are always percieved to be in the wrong; just touting for work if you fail it and giving out bent tests if you pass something that's been covered up.

[blakie]

MOT's are a total joke anyway to be honest, they get you for any little thing just to get more money off you. £35.00 retest for a £2.00 bulb?? on your bike son!

And why are they a total joke? MOTs are bear minimim standards the car needs to be in to be on the road. Ive had to pass vehicles that I wouldnt drive because I wouldnt feel safe in them. As for the prices, all VOSA give is the max test fee to charge. Its up to the garage what they charge to re-test and repairs.

i failed my first MOT with the mini on an incorrectly angled headlight.
a 2 minute fix, and on a mini does it really matter?? the lights are pants and in no one (other than garden knomes) eye line.

Course it matters........ regardless of how low the lights are positioned on the vehicle if the aim is pointing up then it can shine is anyones eye line. If it was a two minuite fix why didnt you do it before the test?