MOT Failure

[Rory]

I can understand the dealer not wanting to see this as a warranty claim.

Wear in an MOT advisory context is very subjective and and tear items are not usually covered by warranty. In addition it was just an advisory and therfore the vehicle is still fit for use.

I know it's arguable - of course they're wearing from the moment the car is first used.

VAG group has a definition: "Wear and Tear means the wear pattern that we would normally associate with any, brake, suspension, clutch and tyre components as demonstrated for the majority of vehicles of a similar age and mileage within the Volkswagen vehicle portfolio."

So if they say that all 3yr old / 30K mile VAG vehicles would get an MOT advisory then fair enough.

 

[Rory]

A garage I used years ago had a virtually 100% pass rate. That was because he would offer a pre MOT inspection, and advise the owner what would need to be done, if anything . He didn't do repairs so no way of making money. He was hounded by the authorities, but kept meticulous records so there was nothing they could argue with. There was even a "secret shopper" type attempt who brought in a total shed. Soon sussed them and sent them on their way.
I agree it's nonsense to fail on low washer fluid and similar, just to make up the numbers. At the opposite end of the scale in my neck of the woods there are apparently 1 or 2 dodgy places where an MOT can be obtained in "special" circumstances. Stupid thing to do.

A couple of times I've been miffed when I've had cars that have failed, or been given advisories, on things that would have been rectified at service. Service Managers insisted that VOSA implores garages to test cars before working on them, so they get a true picture of the state of cars on the road - they twisted this to say VOSA says they must test "as presented". That's true, but it's as presented for the test, not as presented to the garage!

Oddly, the three service/MOT combos I've had in the last month or so, all three have had the service done first so I've been sweating on the MOT result all day!

 

[DSM10000]

The reason it failed was presumably because the windscreen washer didn't work when tested. The reason for this might have been that the reservoir was empty, but equally it could have been a blocked or disconnected pipe, blocked jets, etc. IMHO it's not realistic to expect an MOT tester to spend any time diagnosing why something isn't working?

Indeed.

The clue is in the name "Tester"

I know it's arguable - of course they're wearing from the moment the car is first used.

VAG group has a definition: "Wear and Tear means the wear pattern that we would normally associate with any, brake, suspension, clutch and tyre components as demonstrated for the majority of vehicles of a similar age and mileage within the Volkswagen vehicle portfolio."

So if they say that all 3yr old / 30K mile VAG vehicles would get an MOT advisory then fair enough.

It will not apply to every 3 year old car though.

Suspension wear is influenced by both the driver and the environment in which the vehicle is predominantly driven.

A car that is mainly used in potholed streets and regularly driven over speed restriction humps etc will put more stress on those components.

This can be exacerbated if the driver is "enthusiastic" when driving over such obstacles.

I watched in amazement the other day as a Corsa was driven at well in excess of the 30mph limit toward a speed restrictor.

There was a loud noise and it briefly had air under its wheels

 

[DSM10000]

The reason it failed was presumably because the windscreen washer didn't work when tested. The reason for this might have been that the reservoir was empty, but equally it could have been a blocked or disconnected pipe, blocked jets, etc. IMHO it's not realistic to expect an MOT tester to spend any time diagnosing why something isn't working?

Indeed.

The clue is in the name "Tester"

I know it's arguable - of course they're wearing from the moment the car is first used.

VAG group has a definition: "Wear and Tear means the wear pattern that we would normally associate with any, brake, suspension, clutch and tyre components as demonstrated for the majority of vehicles of a similar age and mileage within the Volkswagen vehicle portfolio."

So if they say that all 3yr old / 30K mile VAG vehicles would get an MOT advisory then fair enough.

It will not apply to every 3 year old car though.

Suspension wear is influenced by both the driver and the environment in which the vehicle is predominantly driven.

A car that is mainly used in potholed streets and regularly driven over speed restriction humps etc will put more stress on those components.

This can be exacerbated if the driver is "enthusiastic" when driving over such obstacles.

I watched in amazement the other day as a Corsa was driven at well in excess of the 30mph limit toward a speed restrictor.

There was a loud noise and it briefly had air under its wheels

 

[Rory]

It will not apply to every 3 year old car though.

It does though - that's the point of VWs definition, it takes an average. Sure, if someone abuses the car they could wreck suspension parts quicker, but unless there's evidence of abuse then, within the warranty, VW should just suck it up. In my opinion, of course.

I'm being a little tonque-in-cheek - I suspect they're absolutely fine and the Technician was just being a bit keen as he'll get bonused on work he identifies. However he did recommend replacement.

 

[Bellow]

When the MOT test interval was extended by 6 months during lockdown there were no reports of carnage on the roads.

There wasn't much traffic either - lockdown, remember that?

It’s all about creating revenue for garages. A two year interval would be more acceptable with perhaps a more frequent test for commercial vehicles and others covering high annual mileage.

A two year interval and the absolute sheds that would be on the road would be absolutely shocking. If parts can fail so catastrophically in the one year interval between tests - and they do - then two years unchecked is a recipe for disaster.
There are people who do zero maintenance between MOT tests and regard the MOT as a 'service'. Giving them another year would be lunacy.

 

[BTB 500]

A two year interval and the absolute sheds that would be on the road would be absolutely shocking. If parts can fail so catastrophically in the one year interval between tests - and they do - then two years unchecked is a recipe for disaster.
There are people who do zero maintenance between MOT tests and regard the MOT as a 'service'. Giving them another year would be lunacy.

Don't know about other European countries but Germany has had 2-yearly tests (starting at 3 years old) for many years, without any apparent issues.

 

[Bellow]

Don't know about other European countries but Germany has had 2-yearly tests (starting at 3 years old) for many years, without any apparent issues.

All I know is that the winter salt here in the NE of Scotland can destroy car parts in one year - two years without being checked would be disastrous. Maybe OK elsewhere but not up here.

 

[BTB 500]

All I know is that the winter salt here in the NE of Scotland can destroy car parts in one year - two years without being checked would be disastrous. Maybe OK elsewhere but not up here.

I haven't been to Germany in winter for a while, but AFAIK they still salt the roads there.

 

[Nicebutdim]

There wasn't much traffic either - lockdown, remember that?

A two year interval and the absolute sheds that would be on the road would be absolutely shocking. If parts can fail so catastrophically in the one year interval between tests - and they do - then two years unchecked is a recipe for disaster.
There are people who do zero maintenance between MOT tests and regard the MOT as a 'service'. Giving them another year would be lunacy.

what evidence do you have to support any of this?

 

[DSM10000]

A 2 year test interval is the norm throughout most of the European countries.

 

[DSM10000]

It does though - that's the point of VWs definition, it takes an average. Sure, if someone abuses the car they could wreck suspension parts quicker, but unless there's evidence of abuse then, within the warranty, VW should just suck it up. In my opinion, of course.

I'm being a little tonque-in-cheek - I suspect they're absolutely fine and the Technician was just being a bit keen as he'll get bonused on work he identifies. However he did recommend replacement.

My point was that not every 3 year old car would show the same degree of suspension wear when presented for MOT. Not that VW have a get out clause.

 

[Bellow]

what evidence do you have to support any of this?

My eyes.
It's all very well saying that roads are salted in other countries/locations but what it does to cars in the NE of Scotland is entirely different.
My mate's Blackbird engined smart fortwo which has been all its life up here needed its rear subframe replaced as corroded beyond safe and the axle wasn't much better. He bought 20 year old replacements from a car that had been in London and they were like brand new.

 

[Petrol Pete]

IMHO a 2 year MOT would not be a good idea here in the UK , we are members on a car forum so by definition we are more 'aware' of our cars and how to look after them . For every one of us there must be hundreds of drivers who either do not know or do not care what goes on with the car they are driving .

These are the ones who need to be told that their brakes/tyres/ wiper blades are worn out by someone else, and then be told if they do not fix them the car can not be legally driven . A sad fact , but they are out there on a road near you.... in massive numbers.

 

[Bellow]

A quick perusal here >> MOT test results by class of vehicle - GOV.UK
shows an initial fail rate of circa one third. A two year test interval would see those fails being potentially undetected for another whole year.
Around one third of those fails were due to 'at least one dangerous item'. A two year test interval would see those fails being potentially undetected for another whole year - or until the safety critical component failed completely on the road. You may say that two thirds were failed without danger but if an owner cant get their shit together to fill a screenwash bottle or change a bulb or wiper blade (none of which are without safety implications) then they aren't to be trusted with maintaining a vehicle in a safe condition and therefore frequent external checking is absolutely required.

 

[BTB 500]

You may say that two thirds were failed without danger but if an owner cant get their shit together to fill a screenwash bottle or change a bulb or wiper blade (none of which are without safety implications) then they aren't to be trusted with maintaining a vehicle in a safe condition and therefore frequent external checking is absolutely required.

How does 2-yearly testing apparently work OK in other countries? Bearing in mind that some of them have higher speed limits than the UK as well.

 

[Bellow]

How does 2-yearly testing apparently work OK in other countries? Bearing in mind that some of them have higher speed limits than the UK as well.

I've no idea and don't care. Safety on the roads I use are my concern. Maybe other countries have populations more inclined to regular maintenance than in the UK where maintenance is a dirty word.

 

[Rory]

I've no idea and don't care. Safety on the roads I use are my concern. Maybe other countries have populations more inclined to regular maintenance than in the UK where maintenance is a dirty word.

I've no idea what happens in other countries but one of our daughters works in the NHS and her team visits clinics and people at home, so they're using their cars for work. She's the only one who gets her car serviced - the others get the car MOT'd and fixed if it breaks. She asked why and they think servicing is designed to find work to scam people.

Independently, her husband thinks the same - his last car fell to bits and we sold him my wife's old car and that's heading the same way.

 

[Deleted member 159894]

I've no idea what happens in other countries but one of our daughters works in the NHS and her team visits clinics and people at home, so they're using their cars for work. She's the only one who gets her car serviced - the others get the car MOT'd and fixed if it breaks. She asked why and they think servicing is designed to find work to scam people.

Independently, her husband thinks the same - his last car fell to bits and we sold him my wife's old car and that's heading the same way.

I had a colleague who ran an Avensis in that way, not one service in 8 years, the day he broke down in the M25 roadworks made it onto Sally Traffic’s Radio 2 bulletin.

 

[Nicebutdim]

Two year tests are fine by me.

Personal responsibility needs to be encouraged. Those who wish to be nannied or need reassurance can of course have a test at more frequent intervals.

Those who live in the salty wastelands of Northern Scotland must be required to submit to a monthly inspection with a full mot at quarterly intervals.