[Closed] MOT incompetence

Notify DofT! Nothing worse for the industry than rip off garages!

What are you talking about?

You took your car with no brake pads to an MOT, it failed, and you are upset that you have to replace your brake pads?

Are you sure you should be allowed to drive a car?

continuity - Member
What are you talking about?

You took your car with no brake pads to an MOT, it failed, and you are upset that you have to replace your brake pads?

Are you sure you should be allowed to drive a car?

POSTED 2 MINUTES AGO # REPORT-POST

You want to turn the stick over.

What are you talking about?

You took your car with no brake pads to an MOT, it failed, and you are upset that you have to replace your brake pads?

Are you sure you should be allowed to drive a car?

Mores the point - What are you talking about?

To the OP - take the old pads in with you and complain like ****.

What are you talking about?

I agree. What are you talking about?

To the OP, stop confusing continuity with your words. You know it gives him the vapours.

Did continuity read the whole post?

I'm sure he read [i]a[/i] post. Just not the OP's in this thread, perhaps.

As I understand.

The OP had his car MOT'd.
It failed due to pads being shot (apparently)
OP buys new pads with the aim of replacing himself.
OP removed said "shot" pads to find they have 6-7mm of material remaining.
OP is less than impressed with the MOT bods.

I'm with continuity on this one. There's no place for custard on a plate of cold chicken.

I don't think they should have failed the car here - I assume it passed the roller road brake test?

Was the garage part of a chain?

Normal VOSA advice is to 'pass and advise'.

I'd appeal the fail.

Hth
Marko

Das is correct. So I've shelled out for a decent tool and pads for zip. I've put them in anyway so I can show him and say where the nearest specsavers is. Just annoying I've got to go back take time off work etc for FA

It's an mot only place. No work undertaken purely testing. So no reasons for him to fail apart from cocking up.

Save them for next time. You'll need new pads at some stage.

Report. Its not kwikfit?

Why would a tester risk his test/job?

Disgusting if true as others must be blatantly ripped off. Which hes knowingly (stealing) from people who have to trust him.

If it wasnt bear metal but a few mms subjective thrn I'd let it slide.

They're already in so I can show him the virtually unworn ones. Otherwise they could question if done any work and that they weren't worn

On the fail it says under 1.5mm. He said to me down to the metal on inner side of both rears.

It's a local chain. Nothing to gain from failing it. Pos a genuine mistake but annoying I've spent £60 and need another hr off work.

I reckon he's either made a mistake, or thought you were a whopper and thought he could rip you off.

continuity - Member
What are you talking about?

You took your car with no brake pads to an MOT, it failed, and you are upset that you have to replace your brake pads?

Are you sure you should be allowed to drive a car?

If you report they'd need evidence themselves not on the word of one person - true?

So they'd probably inspect/cold call in to check work.

So you shouldnt worry about someone losing their testers licence on a one off.

If hes upto something then he should be investigated. Hes cost you £60 extra for a start.

Was continuity the MOT tester???

I only ever have my cars MOT tested by my local Council. They cannot do any work on a failed car, so there is no incentive to fail them on something trivial to earn some cash. They are always scrupulous in their testing. See if you have a council fleet depot that does testing near you.

I was not familiar with this member continuity before this thread, but I await his future contributions with great anticipation.

The "issue" is that if they cant see the pads they will fail it.
A lot of cars now you cant see the pads without removing the wheel - they aren't allowed to anymore.
Same as they any remove any covers underneath, etc.
Had a car of mine fail a few years ago and had a full on row over it - I'd had the rear wheels off an hour before to check it all over so I knew there was 5+mm on them.

Continuity got Anything for sale?

The "issue" is that if they cant see the pads they will fail it.

Not true !

So if they can't see the pads how can they either know that they are down to the metal or that you've replaced them?

How can they ever pass a car they can't see the pads on?

The "issue" is that if they cant see the pads they will fail it.

What about shoes inside drums?

trail_rat - Member
The "issue" is that if they cant see the pads they will fail it.

Not true !

100% True - They are "supposed" to pass and advise - all of the testers I know will fail rather than risk it in case.

wanmankylung - Member
The "issue" is that if they cant see the pads they will fail it.
What about shoes inside drums?

Drums have indicators on the rear along with the brake test results.

I was not familiar with this member continuity before this thread

I miss a lot of names, but the gentlemen in question has already alerted my spidy senses to being a troublesome sort.

If only we had someone to sniff such people out within seconds.

[b]JAMIE?[/b]

[url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/how-likely-is-it-that-ive-just-bought-a-stolen-bike ]history[/url]

Hammyuk - so if inability to see pads is an automatic fail how do cars like this ever pass?

As I said its "supposed" to be a "pass with advisory"
In reality the tester won't pass it just in case.
Remember very few are not in a garage - so repairs are done.
However the ones I know will fail it in case it's a DoT car.
That's their license gone.

Have you checked the front pads?! Might have got the wrong end 🙂

I don't believe you, sorry, otherwise every car would be having new pads every year.

spooky_b329 - Member

Have you checked the front pads?! Might have got the wrong end

That seems like the most sensible comment in the thread.

mcmoonter - Member

I only ever have my cars MOT tested by my local Council. They cannot do any work on a failed car, so there is no incentive to fail them on something trivial to earn some cash. They are always scrupulous in their testing. See if you have a council fleet depot that does testing near you.

Same reason I used to take my motorbike to a place that doesn't do bikes. It could be annoying if there was a minor quick fix issue though

Now I have a trustworthy garage. It is awesome.

Where is this in the guidance notes ? I dont see anything saying if you cant see it fail it....brakes or otherwise.

Ive never had a car rejected for this , including ones where you cant see the inner pad , or where the drums do not have indicators....

I miss a lot of names, but the gentlemen in question has already alerted my spidy senses to being a troublesome sort.

🙂 I hope he starts posting in the chat forum more, there is sport to be had I think.

Laugh all you want, but I wouldn't have mistaken you if you hadn't written it in johnny age five prose.

Took my passat for MOT earlier this week. Failed on rear pads "down to metal" poo. So been out bought pads and a windback tool. Takes both sides out 6/7mm a side. We are umamused. Waste of cash and a waste of time I've got to drive to the retest.

I took my passat to have an MOT earlier this week. It failed as the rear pads were "down to the metal", which is annoying. I bought a pair of pads and a windback tool. [i]I then removed the old pads and discovered that they have 6-7mm of remaining wear on both sides[/i].

That's much clearer. Almost as if we're speaking english.

The ambiguity in your original post makes it sound like the "windback tool" "takes the pads out 6-7mm a side". I don't know why. Probably because the exact wording is "bought pads and a windback tool. Takes both sides out 6/7mm a side".

I blame all poor grammar on my iphone. Obviously should be 'Taken'.

All most imposible to fail pads unless you can see they are metal to metal and even then you could be asked how you measured them as we testers have no approved tool to check them with. Advise pads all day long and inner ones you can hardly ever tell how low they are so advise them. We are always told pass and advise if you are not sure but there is a lot going on about what can and cannot be advised in the future. Comp 2 very soon if it works "??????? and stuff may change in that. Read the tester manual then read the VOSA mot blog and see how the manual may say some thing and the blog tells you some thing else manual not been changed as it cost £1000s to change one word.Screens and batterys are good ones.

Continuity will you take an offer?

Laugh all you want, but I wouldn't have mistaken you if you hadn't written it in johnny age five prose.

Nobody would be taking the piss out of you if you hadn't responded in the style of a surly teenager who was in such a rush to mock that they failed to understand what everyone else evidently did 😀

What are you talking about?

You took your car with no brake pads to an MOT, it failed, and you are upset that you have to replace your brake pads?

Are you sure you should be allowed to drive a car?

Are you sure you should be allowed unsupervised access to the Internet?

Well I read the OP's post just fine and understood it as it was intended, have seen much worse posts on here.

Regards checking brakes the MOT testers manual states 'A visual and physical check must be carried out on all mechanical components that are visible and accessible.' bearing in mind that they are not allowed to remove parts to make them visible, I nearly always get a advisory mentioning the engine undertray restricts inspection.

[url= http://www.motuk.co.uk/manual_350.htm ]MOT brake inspection[/url]

Yep i know that bit, im looking for the bit that says " if its not visible fail it"

If you can't understand and need a translation written by Prince Charles to understand the O.P?

You're either a toff, an idiot or a troll.

Don't ever travel! as some of the people in other countries don't speak a word of English...

trail_rat - Member
Yep i know that bit, im looking for the bit that says " if its not visible fail it"

You won't find it.

As I said the guidelines say to "pass with an advisory" - in reality every tester I know (5 car, 2 bike) will fail it "just in case".
For them the risk of passing it and there being a fault is not worth the chance of losing their license.
The 1.5mm for pads/linings is classic - on both cars I own there is no way of checking WITHOUT removing the wheel - which the tester is no longer allowed to do.
The tester then has a choice to give an advisory OR fail depending on his judgement.
Some will ask permission to remove the wheel to check if you argue it at the time (as I did on a previous car having had the wheels off an hour before the test to check the brakes).

There's one a few miles from me (it's in Beaumont Leys) they don't carry out any work onsite but DO charge for a retest.
They only got me the once.

As I said the guidelines say to "pass with an advisory" - in reality every tester I know (5 car, 2 bike) will fail it "just in case".

Really?

My local test station use to have regular visits from the man from VOSA, not because they were doing anything wrong, but just because of the volume of tests they did - 6 testers and 2 MOT bays - and the fact that VOSA HQ was about 3 miles away.

The VOSA man would always say, if you are unsure always pass and advise. Everybody is covered that way. Rear brakes that pass the roller test, would be a classic for 'pass and advise' if the tester thought the pads were low.

Hth
Marko

[quote=wysiwyg ]I blame all poor grammar on my iphone. Obviously should be 'Taken'.

I'm not sure you're understanding what's confusing about your post - changing "Takes" to "Taken" doesn't help at all, whilst a full stop (and maybe a "left") would make a huge difference.

Glad i dont know any of your tester friends, its a phenomenon ive never come across it.

Blue coveralls per chance ?

Hammyuk - you still haven't said how any car with hidden pads can ever pass an mot?

@wwaswas- IANAMOTT but the requirement is "Examine all the mechanical components of the brakes which can be seen without dismantling".

Basically the MOT fails you for things that are wrong; it's not supposed to fail you for things that they don't know whether they're right or wrong.

Well that's what I think Northwind but hammyuk seems insistent that if it can't be seen its an auto fail. So even if you fit brand new pads and take it back they'd still fail the car.

Ah sorry, I misunderstood your post!

tbh I think he's just wrong- I'd be straight onto VOSA if it happened to me.

hammyuk seems insistent that if it can't be seen its an auto fail

My cars often have child seats fitted when taken for a test, same again there is a advisory that they were unable to test the seatbelt due to childseat fitted, as they have not tested the belt(for all they know it could be faulty) they mention it to cover themselves just in case.

For an MOT, quite simply if you can't see it, you can't fail it.
Pass and Advise is VOSA's recommendation.
To fail an MOT, components have got to be pretty much on the verge of failing or failed.

we lost a trade customer due to me playing by the rules and passing and advising correctly where as he wanted stuff failed to make money out of it .If we had to fail pads when you could not see how low they are you would even fail a new car straight out of the main dealer which is brand new. As a tester you can be done for fail for profit and as well as pass for profit. Looking at pads thought the wheel can be very misleading how low they are and you can even have the pad backing on the wear lip of the disc and it is a pass as very are only looking at the friction material and even then you can not measure it. On a tester forum some one said some one who he worked with failed pads below the test min and VOSA turned up and kept asking him how he measured it and keep asking him which he could not answer.
Read some of the VOSA mot blog stuff if you want your eyes opened up.

wwaswas - Member
Hammyuk - you still haven't said how any car with hidden pads can ever pass an mot?

Because they guidelines say "pass with advisory" so they pass.
I know what they say - I'm saying what the testers I personally know and from experience of having a car tested elsewhere - they couldn't see the amount left so failed the car. I queried it there and then and had to give permission for him to remove the wheel because they aren't allowed anymore to touch anything.
The area is so grey many will pass, many will fail - no-one wants to be the one that DoT catch out.

hammyuk - Member

The area is so grey

It isn't though, it's very black. Or maybe white. Which way round is it?

It isn't black and white - that is where the rules read very differently and the "issue" again is how they can be interpreted in different ways.
I've just had this very chat after the rugby with one of the guys who's a tester - his opinion is to base the decision on the vehicle overall and if in doubt - fail it.
Easier to rectify that than pass an unroadworthy vehicle because the rules now state "without dismantling"

Where do you think the room for intepretation is?

[img] [/img]

Well that stirred up a hornets nest.

Well here's a hypothetical for you. If it failed on low pads. New pads are in and it's been a week. If the tester turns round and says it's something else causing a brake bias can it fail?

Yes it can still fail if the brakes still don't work. I wouldn't have thought worn pads would cause a bias in the first place though (you didn't mention that in your original post). A seized caliper is the most likely reason for that (assuming tyre pressures are good etc).

A friend of mine is adding an MOT bay to his garage, he tells me that later on this year they will be required to have a video camera over each bay so VOSA can verify that the test is actually being done.

Phew went thru. I asked the guy who retest and he said. "Dunno I didn't test it"

Ah well. I'll chalk it up to a bad day in his behalf.