So, these new MOTs ..

And given that the rules have been tightened and/or the existing rules are being enforced more strictly, how many people are going to want to risk their car being stranded at a test-only centre that cannot do the work to fix the fault? I bet there will be a big increase in the number of people calling out towing vans to move MOT failures from test centre to garage.

I'd be wary about getting a car tested at anywhere which couldn't fix faults, for that reason. OK, you run the risk of unscrupulous garages being over zealous because they want to drum up extra trade, but as long as you use a garage that you trust, that shouldn't be a problem. From the press reports about strict rules for diesels, I was unsure whether my car would fail, so I didn't risk a test centre just a couple of miles from me because they couldn't fix diesel-emissions faults so I've have been utterly buggered if they'd failed the car. I doubt whether AA/RAC covers you for towing to a garage in that situation.

But they aren't making it clear just how bad something has to be in each category.

Please rate the following

Last April Halford's quoted my mate £8.50 for a tail light bulb. But for Fiesta MKVI you do have to remove the whole tail light.

Along with £184 for front coil spring that had lost a tail at the lower perch end. They suggested the one the other side that I replaced last year be done as well. He got a pair for about £50 last year but we just hadn't got aroundtuit for fitting 2nd one and he hadn't noticed it had sagged the other way.

They listed but were unable to quote for the 2 trailing arm bushes that I know had been knocking for over 2 years and passed 2 MOTs (at same Halford's).

He got both bushes supplied and fitted by someone that had the required tool to do it on the car for £200 and they fitted the spring for £25. So Halford's spring would have had a premium of £134 over E-bay spring and back street mechanic.

Had you planned to get the tyres anyway? Putting a car in for an MOT with tyres that are close to borderline seems a bit of a gamble, it is at least one of the things that are fairly obvious and easy to check for oneself and to be honest tyres are that borderline are going to need replacing fairly soon anyway and many would change them before that.

GH

If the car had passed through a dealer at some point it may have been sold with a 12 month MOT - a new MOT irrespective of when the old one may have been actually due for renewal.

Well I had similar and as far as I know had not driven anywhere unusual. In my case it was not picked up on an MOT as the car was too young to require one, it was found as part of a service . As for stones and chips not having a sharp edge then some areas of the Country have chalk and flint in the soil, a flint previously cracked against another by an HGV going over them could have a sharp edge. That would be the most likely cause of mine or it could be the night time economy in a nearby town which seems to leave a lot of shattered glass from bottles lying in the car park and gutters.

GH

Agreed. I had one MOT place advise that an exhaust support had broken off, but that they would not fail it as it was still adequately supported. In the 10 (I think) MOTs since then, nowhere has even put it as an advisory.

SteveW

I am 51 and over the years, the only attempt I've seen to screw anyone by an MOT centre was when my mother made the mistake of using Kwik-Fit. They failed the car on leaking rear shock absorbers which they quoted to change.

My dad bought a pair elsewhere, but when we changed them, the old ones were caked in dried on mud with no sign of dampness at all.

He took the old ones in and confronted the manager, who predictably just shrugged it off.

My mother has never made that mistake again.

SteveW

I am not a MOT station tester, but it would be reasonable to assume that there are *some* guidelines. If in doubt, err on the side of caution.

In the case I cited before my tyres had about 3mm tread left, so they looked to all intents and purposes legal, but sharp gravel had cut into them enough to cause them to just fail

a set of tyres is a lot of cash and one tries to make them last as long as possible

Thos i'd say are driveable with care.

I wouldnt drive that except on the handbrake if it were a front disk. In fact a fault like that would probably precvent it from getting to the test - it would sieze up.

I'd say all of those wre OK to drive on if the punter understood that braking performamnce would be dire.

All those OK to drive

ARB s are handling niceties. ddribve

None of those are dangerous enough to stop the car being driven home

Out of interst when I bought a second hand XJS rather too cheaply, it was TWO MOTS before they discovered that the (front) nearside kingpin was hideoosly bent (it did tend to corner weirdly on an undulating surface).

Howevr it had been adjusted so the camnber and toe in were OK.

I have heard tell, back in the day, that some garages would "rent" legal tyres to customers to pass the MOT. Then round the corner put the bald tyres back ....

When I examined the tyres before the test, I noticed that one front tyre was very close (maybe 0.5 mm) from the wear marks. The other seemed a bit better. The official test figures were identical for the two tyres: 3 mm outer, 3 mm mid, 2 mm inner which was regarded as a "red" category.

In message , at 22:00:20 on Tue, 22 May 2018, Marland remarked:

I once had a car fitted with four new tyres from a tyre place a hundred yards from the MOT centre, and drove to straight to the test.

Collecting the car the chap said "everything's pretty much OK, apart from the tyres they are excellent".

My previous diesel Honda (non-DPF, so I think euroIV) you couldn't normally see the plume, except when accelerating up a motorway ramp, with some headlights behind you.

Present diesel Audi (with DPF euro V) I've never seen anything come out the pipes, and that does involve standing and watching its MOT tests.

Closer to limits than I would like for an MoT. However ATM I?m reasonable sure that our cars will pass without needing excessive expenditure compared to their worth on them, in fact one was MOT?d last week and passed, last year there we?re advisories on tyres due to age cracking rather than wear. It?s our short journey/ motored wheelbarrow car handed over by mother when she gave up driving. Fitted new tyres well before this years MOT so no problem this time.

I can see it may be a dilemma on an older vehicle if it fails on something emissions related or anything that may be uneconomical to repair. Putting new tyres on and then having to scrap the vehicle would be a waste so in that case it may pay to wait even if it means a fail on the tyres.

GH

How can tyres be borderline pass? They either have enough tread or they dont!

Mike

Cracking in the rubber. One of those things were 'judgement' is allowed.

Of course great business for an MOT place. Say the tyres are dangerous and charge you full price for replacements.

Which is why I use an MOT station that does *not* do repairs.