New m.o.t

[BEOWULF]

Took my car for m.o.t today not impressed to say at least.
I got 4 advisory's and i can not see why
1. engine covers fitted obscuring some components in the engine bay
2. turbo pipe insecuer
3. items removed from driver's view
4. nearside front (lens marked) headlamp deteriorated but light output not reduced


whats ? that all about

 

[andythom]

Items removed from drivers view??

 

[LEE69]

Standard engine covers?

 

[sonnex22]

if you have fluffy dice in the window (or anything hanging from the interior mirror) the tester can fail or remove the item and issue an advisory.

Dont forget there have been a lot of changes to the MOT to bring it into line with the European version.

It does sound a bit picky though

 

[Ronin225]

1. Ditch the engine covers or if they're OE tell him thats how they come and take it up with SEAT
2. Tighten the jubilee clip
3. ???
4. Yellowy tinge to the light??, new headlight at worst
5. Find new MOT tester

 

[BEOWULF]

Yes mate proper engine covers
nothing hanging in the window about from the rear view mirror
checked headlight looks like it as a bit of weather wear at the bottom very picky me thinks
and i can not find the insecure turbo pipe ?????????

 

[iSamKing]

so did they actually fail the car??

 

[BEOWULF]

so did they actually fail the car??

yer failed on hazards not working but it was only a fuse so nipped to halfords £3.99 for a pack of fuse's job done but i just think they are being to picky on things
and all them issues go down on the mot sheet as well now

 

[LEE69]

I got advised for being on lower springs, i think it's just to make a note on the system on the car itself.

 

[antony-lcr]

item's removed from driver's view could be something as small as an air freshener hanging from the mirror, the tester has the right to remove these but must issue an advisory if they do so, basically just informing the customer that they have been removed from view.

the engine cover is a new non-component advisory basically aimed at newer car's which have lots of engine covers fitted therefore testers are unable to inspect the bulkhead, brake pipe's etc to their full extent. their is also an advisory for covers fitted to the underside of the vehicle therefore not allowing full inspection of vehicle components. just to cover the tester's back really if a brake pipe was too pop and it couldn't be seen and so on.

tbf on the leon the engine cover is tiny so just sounds like the tester was just being picky and taking advantage of the new advisory list. i wouldn't worry

 

[The Ham]

My little brother passed his MOT once even though they couldnt open the bonnet! It just had a bit in the advisory explaining that. Definately just covering the testers back.

 

[iSamKing]

yer failed on hazards not working but it was only a fuse so nipped to halfords £3.99 for a pack of fuse's job done but i just think they are being to picky on things
and all them issues go down on the mot sheet as well now

well they guy who does the mots for the garage i work at got points on his mot licence for not writing n advisory on the sheet... i think VOSA were there and i think they are really cracking down on the little petty stuff

 

[BEOWULF]

Bit over the top if u ask me and what it going to be like when more things come in in April as the battery will be part of the test and that has a cover on it are they allowed to move the cover to look ?

 

[antony-lcr]

if no tools are required then yes they can remove the battery cover, its the same with towbar cover's

 

[Lodey23]

as mentioned i get advisories for sill covers fitted, because the tester cant check for rust

 

[The Ham]

How far would they go with this though? Could you just cover up any problem areas in the hope that they skip them and put them in the advisories section!

 

[antony-lcr]

How far would they go with this though? Could you just cover up any problem areas in the hope that they skip them and put them in the advisories section!

If in any doubt that an aftermarket cover has been fitted to mask component failure then he/she can refute to test the vehicle. However what I do not understand is the amount of people that try and hide problems, people need to realise mot's are minimum standard for road worthiness. As an example let's say someone coats a corroded brake pipe in underseat etc, it will be advised as unable to inspect brake pipe due to underseal. So the car then has passed, the same car is then travelling down the m1 at 80mph and has to perform an emergency stop, the brake pipe pops and the car cannot stop . Whose to blame?

 

[BEOWULF]

If in any doubt that an aftermarket cover has been fitted to mask component failure then he/she can refute to test the vehicle. However what I do not understand is the amount of people that try and hide problems, people need to realise mot's are minimum standard for road worthiness. As an example let's say someone coats a corroded brake pipe in underseat etc, it will be advised as unable to inspect brake pipe due to underseal. So the car then has passed, the same car is then travelling down the m1 at 80mph and has to perform an emergency stop, the brake pipe pops and the car cannot stop . Whose to blame?

1St he or she his braking the law and 70mph is the speed limit on the motorway
2nd Just depends on if he/she the driver knows about it but thats a safety issue (and i would expect that on a mot like lights and over safety issues but i am not taking about theses kinds of things as they have been on the mot ever since i have been driving a car)
Never know a car causing a accident because his/her tow-bar did not have the correct 13 pins or he/she as a engine cover fitted to the top of the engine fitted by the manufacturer.
That what i am on about why should it be advised for that

 

[n1ff]

No mention of HID's?

 

[BEOWULF]

No mention of HID's?

April this comes in mate lights in correct color or something like that