Proposed changes to the MOT Test.

[voy2age]

If your car failed a smoke test it has serious smoke emission problems and needs sorting.

All my cars pass on the first rev of the fast Pass and come in at less than 1/3rd of the permissible allowance.

The £50 fee is well deserved if it gets unserviced, smoky old bangers off the road.
If someone reports you to the VOSA smoke hotline, the £50 will seem like a dream.

just read the reg's for the smoke test and i was wrong about the rev limit, so please except my apology..., i still think the UK smoke test is an **** BTW

 

[Tiff]

Tiff , what are the proposals re towbar electrics ?

When I fitted my towbar , I put on both sockets , but only bothered to wire up the 12N socket as , for now , I only use the car to tow a trailer . If I get a caravan , then I will wire up the second socket . Am I going to be obliged to do this now , regardless of whether I need the 12S socket ?

Nothing 100% set in stone yet, but I believe its only the modern euro sockets that will be tested, the 12S socket won't come into it at all.

 

[Dieselman]

just read the reg's for the smoke test and i was wrong about the rev limit, so please except my apology..., i still think the UK smoke test is an **** BTW

Hopefully the garage you reported to VOSA will be as charitable. They did exactly what they should do and your smoky car failed..

Any diesel working properly will easily pass a smoke test. One of mine seems to have a overly high governor point, but passes with ease....that's both the smoke test and other cars...

 

[voy2age]

Hopefully the garage you reported to VOSA will be as charitable. They did exactly what they should do and your smoky car failed..

Any diesel working properly will easily pass a smoke test. One of mine seems to have a overly high governor point, but passes with ease....that's both the smoke test and other cars...

yes it failed the first time, but passed the second time with no work to the car except turning the screw down, which could be a good reason for Vosa to think about taking the Mot away form these back street testers who don't know want they are doing only what they are told to do.. just a thought

 

[Tiff]

yes it failed the first time, but passed the second time with no work to the car except turning the screw down, which could be a good reason for Vosa to think about taking the Mot away form these back street testers who don't know want they are doing only what they are told to do.. just a thought

Every MOT tester must go through the same VOSA training to become a tester. The whole point of doing an MOT is doing what you are told to do- that way the MOT test should be the same whether you are in Lands End or John 'o' Groats. If you find a tester who isn't carrying out the test properly, find another tester!! All the MOT test regulations are easily avaliable to anyone on the Internet, however it takes experience to call what's worn or not,or what's a fail or not - that's where the difference lies.

Being a tester is no fun. Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't. Glad I'm out of it now.

 

[CLK320Cabrio]

Let's not be under any illusion here, the MOT is as someone else has already said a snapshot of the road worthiness of a car on that day, how do I know this, in the 1970s I was prosecuted for driving a car which was unfit for the road after I crashed my Ford Anglia after a steering link arm broke,, my defence was "It's only passed the MOT last week". At my court hearing the garage was investigated, and fined for documentation issues(they couldn't find the copy of my certificate in their pad) I was then told the garage was only liable for 24 hours and after that it's up to the driver to make sure it's road worthy.

These issues don't exist in the HGV world, If you are caught with any defects whilst driving, It's down to you the driver for not doing your vehicle checks.

It doesn't matter how frequently the MOT is done because you are ultimately responsible for the road worthiness of your car.

Enforcement of the law is key to this, but it doesn't always happen.

 

[Tiff]

The garage is only liable until the vehicle leaves the testing station. I've lost count of the amount of Corsa's etc I've tested with huge bodykits...and 13" steel wheels... You just know what's going to happen as soon as he gets the car home.. same with bikes- plenty bikers appeared for their MOT with the standard can in their rucksack...

 

[Dieselman]

yes it failed the first time, but passed the second time with no work to the car except turning the screw down, which could be a good reason for Vosa to think about taking the Mot away form these back street testers who don't know want they are doing only what they are told to do.. just a thought

I don't understand you.
Your car legitimately failed a correctly performed smoke test, so you fiddled with the maximum fuelling or revs screw making the car undrivable, but it passed a second test.

Your car was faulty...the garage was right... end of..!

 

[theogeor]

Let's not be under any illusion here, the MOT is as someone else has already said a snapshot of the road worthiness of a car on that day, how do I know this, in the 1970s I was prosecuted for driving a car which was unfit for the road after I crashed my Ford Anglia after a steering link arm broke,, my defence was "It's only passed the MOT last week". At my court hearing the garage was investigated, and fined for documentation issues(they couldn't find the copy of my certificate in their pad) I was then told the garage was only liable for 24 hours and after that it's up to the driver to make sure it's road worthy.

These issues don't exist in the HGV world, If you are caught with any defects whilst driving, It's down to you the driver for not doing your vehicle checks.

It doesn't matter how frequently the MOT is done because you are ultimately responsible for the road worthiness of your car.

Enforcement of the law is key to this, but it doesn't always happen.

+1 On that. At the end of the day if you do not take care of your car a lot can happen in a year or even 3 months.
I do not trust all MOT centers. Some of them are honest others are money hunters. Years ago I asked my wife to take my car for an MOT (first MOT of the car) and it failed for the headlight adjustment to be broken and wanted £300 to replace it in order to adjust it. I challenged them and I was very cross with them because it was not broken it just move and with two bolts you could reposition it again which I force them to do.
And I am afraid they are not the only ones... Since then I found another MOT centre that the guys are always honest and open about it and never try to steal money out of you and never looked back. And by the way I always take care of my cars and check them often for any defects/tyres etc and rectify them without delays but most people don't.
Tyres, bulbs and brakes (pads or disks) are the most common failures according to a friend who works in the industry and if you are doing a lot of miles per year then its not difficult to be ok at the MOT and not OK after 3 months

Theo

 

[finisterre]

Mind you I daresay the type of owner that isn't bothered about proper maintenance isn't likely to be bothered about an MOT cert or probably insurance either.

Maintenance does not interest me.

I use my MOT to keep the vehicle roadworthy. My van is held together with baler twine, cable ties and rust. Annual MOTs suit me best, the wheels could fall off if it was left a couple of years, it could even fall in half. I do change the oil every two/three years, that's it though.

But insurance is not an option. I do insure it. I wouldn't dream of using an uninsured vehicle.

I think you have to care about the car/van to consider maintenance to be worthwhile. I find it much easier to care about other people's welfare than my rusting heap of crap of a van.

 

[Shude]

Maintenance does not interest me.

I use my MOT to keep the vehicle roadworthy.

There are a lot of people who think exactly like this and were it not for the MOT or warning lights on the dashboard their cars would never see a workshop or a mechanic unless it actually stopped working.

I try to keep on top of the things I have some control over (basically bulbs and tyres) and have the car serviced when it asks for it. I like to have the car inspected pre-MOT about a month before it's due to see if anything is needed, then I get fewer surprises.

 

[finisterre]

Shude, I am not completely irresponsible.

I do all my own repairs so the MOT acts as a pre-test and I end up knowing the state of play all too well. I do check tyres, the fines are too stiff to ignore. Bulbs, they need to work, I sometimes drive after two pints (carefully) and I don't want to be pulled over by the Old Bill.

I don't know many people that actually check their subframe chassis mounting for fun. The MOT needs to be faster than rust on an old merc. Yearly is a reasonable maximum for my van.

 

[st4]

Shude, I am not completely irresponsible.

I do all my own repairs so the MOT acts as a pre-test and I end up knowing the state of play all too well. I do check tyres, the fines are too stiff to ignore. Bulbs, they need to work, I sometimes drive after two pints (carefully) and I don't want to be pulled over by the Old Bill.

I don't know many people that actually check their subframe chassis mounting for fun. The MOT needs to be faster than rust on an old merc. Yearly is a reasonable maximum for my van.

I wont flame you for that but a random stop test might get you into a spot of bother as the odds of you blowing over the limit might be quite high.

Best just to have the one

 

[finisterre]

I have to guess it is fifty fifty.

I normally manage to stick to a pint and a half, but sometimes it is the devils brew, rich, hoppy, malty, and I just think, sod it and have a second pint.

Probably twice a year, so I am almost in control.

 

[finisterre]

Found this

Drink-Driving Guidelines

Ever since the introduction of the breathalyser in 1967, official sources have been extremely unwilling to publish any figures on the amount of alcohol you need to consume to take you over the 80 mg legal limit for driving. The reason for this is that they feel it will encourage drivers to "drink up to the limit". But, in reality, nobody can do that, because of the extremely unpredictable rate at which alcohol is absorbed by the body. Either you play safe, and stay well below it, or you try to drink up to the limit, and run a serious risk of exceeding it.
Of course, everyone knows that the law lays down a limit, not a prohibition, and that a certain amount of alcohol can be consumed without taking drivers outside the law. This is expressed in the popular wisdom that the limit equals two pints. This can be misleading, but contains some truth. Broadly speaking, if a man of average weight consumes two pints of ordinary strength beer of 4% ABV or less, it is extremely unlikely to take him above the 80 mg legal limit, and in reality will probably lead to a maximum BAC of no higher than 60 mg.
The following is an attempt to express this in rather more detail. It is drawn from various sources, including individuals' experiences of being breath tested, but the primary source is a booklet entitled The Facts about Drinking and Driving, published by the Transport and Road Research Laboratory in 1986, which presumably can be regarded as reasonably authoritative. However, these guidelines are not a statement of fact, and must not be taken as a guarantee of keeping below the legal limit in any particular circumstances.
Alcohol is normally measured in "units" of 10ml of alcohol. This is the amount of alcohol contained a a half-pint of beer of 3.5% ABV, a single 25ml pub measure of spirits, or a small 125ml glass of light table wine.
The rate of absorption of alcohol into the bloodstream is unpredictable and depends on a number of factors such as the level of hydration, the type of alcoholic drink consumed and whether food is eaten at the same time. As a broad rule of thumb, the alcohol in a drink is fully absorbed about an hour after the drink is finished.
The rate at which alcohol is metabolised and removed from the bloodstream is rather more predictable, and averages out at one unit per hour, starting one hour after the first drink is finished. However, the capacity of the body to metabolise alcohol is finite, and is limited to about 16-20 units per day. If you consistently drink around or above this level, you will probably never be below the limit - and you also need to consider seriously whether you have a drink problem!.
To ensure you run no risk of being "over the limit":
Immediately before driving: - men should consume no more than 4 units, women no more than 3

 

[voy2age]

Every MOT tester must go through the same VOSA training to become a tester. The whole point of doing an MOT is doing what you are told to do- that way the MOT test should be the same whether you are in Lands End or John 'o' Groats. If you find a tester who isn't carrying out the test properly, find another tester!! All the MOT test regulations are easily avaliable to anyone on the Internet, however it takes experience to call what's worn or not,or what's a fail or not - that's where the difference lies.

Being a tester is no fun. Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't. Glad I'm out of it now.

i would like the test for cars to go the way trucks go, to a government mot station (like spain etc), not these MOT garage places, you can take a car to one place and it passes and go somewhere else and it will fail... it will still give the chance for the garage's to rip you off... but at least they will only be able to do the jobs that need doing.. just a thought

 

[Tiff]

i would like the test for cars to go the way trucks go, to a government mot station (like spain etc), not these MOT garage places, you can take a car to one place and it passes and go somewhere else and it will fail... it will still give the chance for the garage's to rip you off... but at least they will only be able to do the jobs that need doing.. just a thought

Agreed. And that's coming from a tester.I have been on the other side myself, and its bl**dy frustrating. I hate MOT testers!

 

[voy2age]

Agreed. And that's coming from a tester.I have been on the other side myself, and its bl**dy frustrating. I hate MOT testers!

i find it frustrating too, in the area we live you stay away from some Mot places because they have a reputation to fail you for the smallest of things, then there is some places find fault with brakes (which they happen to fit at a good price... and others who like to fail you on the smoke test "you need a service mate and we do it for a good price, then it will pass". at least if you went to a govenment place you can trust the result, because they have no interest in doing any work on the car... makes you wonder why they take the trucks to these places.. probably for safety reasons...

 

[Tiff]

LOL, the place I had hassles with recently don't do repairs...not even a bulb. Worst of all, I used to work there....

 

[voy2age]

I don't understand you.
Your car legitimately failed a correctly performed smoke test, so you fiddled with the maximum fuelling or revs screw making the car undrivable, but it passed a second test.

Your car was faulty...the garage was right... end of..!

faulty in the eyes of the law which all know can be an ****.. even the Govenment admits that a rolling road test is the right way, but because of the Mot sations saying we don't want to pay for the kit, they came up with this silly test.. take the test away from these guy's and it will be better, more jobs at Vosa for people who work in these Mot places and maybe they will learn how to test cars, without the incentive to get work out of a fail.. just a thought