Thinking of buying this...any feedback, pointers please

[markjay]

I used to use that one all the time.....just to make me feel OK about passing a car where the brake pipes could be dust....but I can't see them!
As long as it passes it matters not and whether it has advises in the history and shows you or a potential buyer nothing about how good the car is or how well it's been looked after.

The point is that there's no consistency. I am not arguing with your logic, but then every single car manufacturered in the past 20 years should have this advisory. The idea that MOT testers can write whatever they want in the advisories section often leads to confusion.

Additionally, I'd expect an 'advisory' to be just that - advice - meaning that the driver should be able to do something about it if they wished to. 'Advising' me that my car is blue or that the steering wheel is round is not an advice as all - what am I supposed to do with this information? The same applies to 'advice' regarding the presence of undertrays.

 

[st13phil]

The same applies to 'advice' regarding the presence of undertrays.

Not really. It's a CYA for the tester who isn't allowed to dismantle parts of the car in order to check the condition of obscured components. In the example given by @ALFAitalia I would argue that it is potentially useful for the owner to know that the condition of a key safety component - the brake pipes - couldn't be verified at the time of the test. It's then up to the owner to decide whether to have them checked separately or to trust to luck (and I accept that most will do the latter).

And as a general principle, there are many conditions that are (rightly, imo) "at the discretion of the tester" wrt whether it's a pass or fail, so that can and does lead to greater inconsistency than simple advisory notices.

 

[markjay]

Not really. It's a CYA for the tester who isn't allowed to dismantle parts of the car in order to check the condition of obscured components. In the example given by @ALFAitalia I would argue that it is potentially useful for the owner to know that the condition of a key safety component - the brake pipes - couldn't be verified at the time of the test. It's then up to the owner to decide whether to have them checked separately or to trust to luck (and I accept that most will do the latter).

And as a general principle, there are many conditions that are (rightly, imo) "at the discretion of the tester" wrt whether it's a pass or fail, so that can and does lead to greater inconsistency than simple advisory notices.

This reminds me of the days when when we did database conversions. There were tools that were written to automate the process, but the new database still required many hours of manual 'cleaning'.

Why? Because if a letter bounced back with a note 'moved away', the computer operator would type-in 'moved away' in the field that said 'Gender' because they were no longer allowed to ask this and the 'Gender' field wasn't used. Etc.

I am fully sympathetic to the testers' concerns, but if there is no field in the online form that says 'CYA', then he shouldn't stick it in just any field he can find.

CYA is not an 'Advisory', and shouldn't be entered in the Advisory section.

As for 'I couldn't check it', the average motorist won't have a clue as to what checks, specifically, weren't done because of the undertray. The text didn't specify what exactly the tester wasn't able to see. So there's no advice there.

 

[such01]

So, I had a conversation just now with one of the managers who replied to my email. He was very surprised by the images and checked the car over before he returned my email. He said that if I am not happy with the original MOT he will take it somewhere else on Monday. They used kwik fit for the mot done this week. He is happy to change the cracking tyre with a tyre of my choice. ( I will ask him to replace the other side with the same at my cost)
Re the mud on the front left of the bumper - The car has since been cleaned and there is nothing showing. He cannot see anything wrong with the liner and is putting it up on a ramp to send some pictures over on Monday.
Some of there cars are stored on a grassy area and this is where it picked up the mud. He was 100% sure it had not got stuck or had any impact.
The washer system now works - a blocked tube apparently, and there are now no low voltage battery issues.
The side skirt was fine when he checked - he did say they had now done the pre delivery inspection and valet, which was not the case when the inspection was carried out and it probably just needed clipping back in. Again I'm, awaiting pictures.

I'll go along in the week and have a look - He assured me there is nothing wrong and it is really in great condition with everything working as it should, bar the last owners budget tyres, whom he bought this car personally from.

I think I'll take a punt as it's relatively low mileage for the money with a good spec.
All the others I've seen have well in excess of 100k.