What is wrong with this picture?

[markjay]

They changed it from VOSA to DVSA a few years ago now so you should have been contacting the DVSA...?

That's the number I called:

 

[markjay]

Why would an engine cover in place be an advisory, it doesn't cover anything they have to check.

Close enough !

 

[Dippo]

It's got loads of black marks over where the information should be?

 

[markjay]

The official explanation was that the MOT tester made a note of the fact that there were engine covers in place. I have a few issues with that.... but for the purpose of this thread, the full correct answer I was looking for is this: how is the car owner expected to monitor the engine cover and undertray..... ?

(Obviously, these notes shouldn't be in the 'Advisory' section, because they do not actually provide any advice to the car owner, in fact this information is totally irrelevant to the owner).

 

[markjay]

It's got loads of black marks over where the information should be?

Haha, yes well you get second place !

 

[John]

Looks like something has not been updated!

That's the number I called:

 

[ALFAitalia]

I used to have to write that on tests with engine covers. They often do cover parts of the suspension and as we are not allowed to remove covers for the test and they could be a split gaiter or whatever behind it or a large oil leak (both fails)....we did it to cover us. Same thing with body kits that potentially cover rotten sills.....its a pass!....half the reason some older cars have kits fitted....or the factory sill covers from models higher up the range!!!
You can use knowledge this to your advantage though. A couple of years back the recoil failed on one of my rear seat belts just before the test (now fixed of course). So I borrowed a mates child seat and put it in place using the dodgy belt. It passed...the advise being that belt could not be tested due to child seat in place....they are not allowed to move child seats.

 

[markjay]

I used to have to write that on tests with engine covers. They often do cover parts of the suspension and as we are not allowed to remove covers for the test and they could be a split gaiter or whatever behind it or a large oil leak (both fails)....we did it to cover us. Same thing with body kits that potentially cover rotten sills.....its a pass!....half the reason some older cars have kits fitted....or the factory sill covers from models higher up the range!!!
You can use knowledge this to your advantage though. A couple of years back the recoil failed on one of my rear seat belts just before the test (now fixed of course). So I borrowed a mates child seat and put it in place using the dodgy belt. It passed...the advise being that belt could not be tested due to child seat in place....they are not allowed to move child seats.

As I pointed-out over the phone to the chap from VOSA/DVSA.... I fully understand that the MOT tester is covering him/herself, but VOSA should either change the header of the Advisory section from 'Monitor and repair as needed' to 'Notes' or 'Comments', or otherwise advise their MOT testers not to make these notes at all. Alternatively, they could add a separate section for 'Notes' or 'Comments', and leave the Advisory section for... advisories. But as things stands, the official MOT certificate seems to suggest that the owner should 'monitor' the engine covers.... which is odd.

The chap from VOSA was actually quite sympathetic, he said they get a lot of complaint about 'advisories' and said that people just don't like to have advisories on their certificates, but unfortunately there's nothing they can do because the Advisory section is totally at the MOT tester's discretion, and they can practically write there whatever they want (well, within reason, presumably).

He also said that given the amount of complaints they are getting about advisories, perhaps the Advisory section should be removed altogether from the MOT certificate, as it serves no real purpose (especially now that ther's a new separate section for 'Minor faults').

The other obvious issues is that given that (almost) all cars have engine covers and undertrays these days, in practical terms a 'pedantic' MOT tester will add these advisories to each and every car they test (bar perhaps some very old ones)... which again, makes no sense.

But.... the short answer to the photo quiz is that the owner is expected to 'monitor and repair' the engine cover and undertray, which is obviously nonsensical.

 

[ALFAitalia]

Would not worry me. It affects nothing and has no affect on the value of the car..........

 

[markjay]

Would not worry me. It affects nothing and has no affect on the value of the car..........

True... but it's annoying