Quick help - numberplates and MOT failure

[Andy3004]

rscott said:

Don't agree - take a look at the 3d font here http://www.newreg.co.uk/services/dvla_number_plate... .
That looks identical to this plate and is definitely legal.

Thanks for that link! Good spot - as you say that font is identical to mine.

[Impasse]

mcford said:

Reference discoloured indicators - after time the colouring on the bulb cracks & flakes off, which means that the indicator will flash white instead of amber. You'll know how distracting it can be if you've been behind someone at night who's using a white indicator, 21 watts of flashing white light in your face isn't good for your night vision.

I think the real issue in that case was not whether or not the indicators might be a fail, it was that their potential failure was dependent on who would pay for them to be fixed. If it were the customer footing the bill they'd fail. If it were the supplying dealer (whose workshops were carrying out the MOT test) who might be faced with the expense, then they'd pass.
The actual technicalities of the colour of the car's indicators were somewhat secondary.

[pingu393]

Impasse said:

mcford said:

Reference discoloured indicators - after time the colouring on the bulb cracks & flakes off, which means that the indicator will flash white instead of amber. You'll know how distracting it can be if you've been behind someone at night who's using a white indicator, 21 watts of flashing white light in your face isn't good for your night vision.

I think the real issue in that case was not whether or not the indicators might be a fail, it was that their potential failure was dependent on who would pay for them to be fixed. If it were the customer footing the bill they'd fail. If it were the supplying dealer (whose workshops were carrying out the MOT test) who might be faced with the expense, then they'd pass.
The actual technicalities of the colour of the car's indicators were somewhat secondary.

Exactly.


Re number plates. How much does an APNR system cost? If it's reasonable, then the very first part of the test could be to read the plate with the ANPR tester from a set distance, this would pull up the data page for that vehicle with VIN, etc. If the plate couldn't be read = fail. Objective, indisputable test.

[Spangles]

Andy3004 said:

rscott said:

Don't agree - take a look at the 3d font here http://www.newreg.co.uk/services/dvla_number_plate... .
That looks identical to this plate and is definitely legal.

Thanks for that link! Good spot - as you say that font is identical to mine.

As another MOT tester has already pointed out, some other fonts on there will fail an MOT so I don't know why it's being claimed as 'definitely legal'.

[mcford]

Impasse said:

I think the real issue in that case was not whether or not the indicators might be a fail, it was that their potential failure was dependent on who would pay for them to be fixed. If it were the customer footing the bill they'd fail. If it were the supplying dealer (whose workshops were carrying out the MOT test) who might be faced with the expense, then they'd pass.
The actual technicalities of the colour of the car's indicators were somewhat secondary.

That's rubbish, the tester doesn't think of who's footing the bill for repair, the result is either a pass or a refusal. If a dealer is going to baulk at £10 for a set of bulbs, I'd seriously consider getting payment for the test in advance. Quite often the tester will replace bulbs at the end of the test and charge for parts only, so not a great retail expense either.

The above quote implies that all MOT testers are corrupt which isn't true. Often they are put in a position by a vehicle presenter of making a pass/refusal decision with the possibility of getting a disciplinary should it be wrong, on an item where if the regulations were correctly followed and not bent and twisted into a grey area there would be no need to make a refusal.

[Slidingpillar]

The issue of indicator colour is a vexed one. Because the fashion is now to have clear thing flash orange, you need bulbs with an orange coating. As this fades with time and use, the indicators slowly move to flashing white. And as this is a slow process, there's a lot of room for some testers to fail, and some to pass.

A few orange lenses fade as well, the Lada car was well know for this, but there can't be many left now!

[jagracer]

contractor said:

Also a fail due to lack of place of plate manufacturer. I think there should be a postcode in v. Small font at the bottom in the centre

That's not a fail, VOSA could never make their mind up on that one. It is illegal to have plates that are made after 200 without the kite mark and manufacturers post code but It's not part of the MOT.
In the OPs case I think the tester is being a jobsworth.

[Roo]

I've got the same font on my number plates, and have had since 2005.

Never had a problem at MOT with them over it.

[shep1001]

Andy3004 said:

Thanks very much for the quick response! Yep you're correct - the marking in the bottom right states the name of the maker and (I think) postcode, they were bought online but purchased as legal plates.

Does reassure me I'm ok then - they were trying it on failing me on tyres that are not illegal too...might have a chat to vosa!!

Elms by any chance?

[Andy3004]

shep1001 said:

Elms by any chance?

Wouldn't like to comment on the dealership concerned until all resolved, suffice to say it is a BMW main dealer!!

[shep1001]

Andy3004 said:

Wouldn't like to comment on the dealership concerned until all resolved, suffice to say it is a BMW main dealer!!

They can and will wiggle out of the tyre issue. Not worth the hastle unless you enjoy winding them up just for sport.

[TooMany2cvs]

Shouldn't those "3d" plates just be failed on taste grounds?

[Bodmin]

Andy3004 said:

Thanks very much for the quick response! Yep you're correct - the marking in the bottom right states the name of the maker and (I think) postcode, they were bought online but purchased as legal plates.

Does reassure me I'm ok then - they were trying it on failing me on tyres that are not illegal too...might have a chat to vosa!!

I would suggest you go back to the dealer and explain you are unhappy (in a nice way) about the grounds for the MOT failure & request that the MOT Quality Controller(QC) reviews the failed items. The QC has the power to override another testers decision. If they refuse this then request a VT17 Appeal form.

Most Service Managers will do anything to avoid the Ministry getting involved including putting pressure on a tester or QC, I know people will say it shouldn't happen but it does, to get them out of trouble.

If you approach the dealer in a resonable manner not they will be more likely to assist you
than .

Bodders

[Martin_M]

Maybe a daft question (I've never had a car long enough to need an MOT!) but would they not let you know about that sort of thing before taking your car in and then failing you?

[grumpy52]

mcford said:

That's rubbish, the tester doesn't think of who's footing the bill for repair, the result is either a pass or a refusal. If a dealer is going to baulk at £10 for a set of bulbs, I'd seriously consider getting payment for the test in advance. Quite often the tester will replace bulbs at the end of the test and charge for parts only, so not a great retail expense either.

The above quote implies that all MOT testers are corrupt which isn't true. Often they are put in a position by a vehicle presenter of making a pass/refusal decision with the possibility of getting a disciplinary should it be wrong, on an item where if the regulations were correctly followed and not bent and twisted into a grey area there would be no need to make a refusal.

If you think that many MOT testers are not put under pressure by the people that employ them then I think you live in a very sheltered world .

[Andy3004]

Bodmin said:

I would suggest you go back to the dealer and explain you are unhappy (in a nice way) about the grounds for the MOT failure & request that the MOT Quality Controller(QC) reviews the failed items. The QC has the power to override another testers decision. If they refuse this then request a VT17 Appeal form.

Most Service Managers will do anything to avoid the Ministry getting involved including putting pressure on a tester or QC, I know people will say it shouldn't happen but it does, to get them out of trouble.

If you approach the dealer in a resonable manner not they will be more likely to assist you
than .

Bodders

That's a fair point and one I'll probably employ on reflection

Edited by Andy3004 on Sunday 14th September 08:11

[jagracer]

Andy3004 said:

Does reassure me I'm ok then - they were trying it on failing me on tyres that are not illegal too...might have a chat to vosa!!

What did they fail the tyre/s on?

[shep1001]

jagracer said:

What did they fail the tyre/s on?

When I had this, they had put rears down as fail 1.6mm which I had to point out was not a failure or illegal. I made then re-measure them and we could not find anything lower than 2mm anywhere on any of the 4 tyres. Apparently the tester had gone home for the day so was unable to justify his readings, they changed their mind under duress which ironically would not of made any difference as I would not have purchased tyres through the main steeler anyway

[TooMany2cvs]

shep1001 said:

When I had this, they had put rears down as fail 1.6mm which I had to point out was not a failure or illegal. I made then re-measure them and we could not find anything lower than 2mm anywhere on any of the 4 tyres.

So, instead of the tyres being f**ked, they were merely f**ked?

[shep1001]

TooMany2cvs said:

So, instead of the tyres being f**ked, they were merely f**ked?

Correct. However, the point was the dealer was trying to use the MOT failure as a revenue stream to try and force me and probably countless others to buy their tyres at a significantly higher price. There was no MOT failure as 3/3/2mm on both back tyres is not illegal OR an MOT failure.