Quick help - numberplates and MOT failure

[TooMany2cvs]

shep1001 said:

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.

Still, since you already knew they were f**ked, that's exactly why you replaced 'em before the MOT - to preempt any such problems. Right? Oh, wait...

[rscott]

Spangles said:

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'.

I had plates from them using that 3d font and it passed 7 MOTs at 4 different garages, so I'd have thought they were likely to meet the rules.

[Sump]

TooMany2cvs said:

shep1001 said:

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.

Still, since you already knew they were f**ked, that's exactly why you replaced 'em before the MOT - to preempt any such problems. Right? Oh, wait...

Why are you trying to cause a problem where this isn't one.

You have serious issues.

[Old Fart]

This dealer http://www.autotrader.co.uk/services/car-dealers/u...

Fits the same type of plates to most of his cars, have a look, and they are legal according to the sales director.

[TooMany2cvs]

Sump said:

Why are you trying to cause a problem where this isn't one.

I'm not.

There was a complaint that somebody had taken a car with tyres that weren't quite illegal for an MOT, and was surprised when the tester fell slightly on the other side of the line. Cue argument over, apparently, less than half a millimetre of tread depth. Well, whoop-de-doo. Legal minimum is not a target.

In case you hadn't twigged, I was suggesting that it might have been wise to change the tyres (which they actually acknowledged were f**ked and needed changing) _BEFORE_ the test, and avoiding any risk of such discussions and accusations of malfeasance.

But, hey, maybe that's just me preferring an easy life...

[jagracer]

TooMany2cvs said:

I'm not.

There was a complaint that somebody had taken a car with tyres that weren't quite illegal for an MOT, and was surprised when the tester fell slightly on the other side of the line. Cue argument over, apparently, less than half a millimetre of tread depth. Well, whoop-de-doo. Legal minimum is not a target.

In case you hadn't twigged, I was suggesting that it might have been wise to change the tyres (which they actually acknowledged were f**ked and needed changing) _BEFORE_ the test, and avoiding any risk of such discussions and accusations of malfeasance.

But, hey, maybe that's just me preferring an easy life...

Tread depth is not subjective in the MOT test, it's either above or below the legal limit, there's no falling over the line.

[speedking31]

75% can be subjective though.

[speedking31]

pingu393 said:

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.

In the rain, light mist, thick fog dark, at an angle, when a bit dirty, etc. Not quite so objective then.

[jagracer]

speedking31 said:

75% can be subjective though.

Not really, 75% is 75%, it just depends how good the tester is at measuring, in the OPs case not very good it seems.

[pingu393]

speedking31 said:

pingu393 said:

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.

In the rain, light mist, thick fog dark, at an angle, when a bit dirty, etc. Not quite so objective then.

MOT stations have ramps of the similar lengths. The reader could be a set distance from the end of the ramp. There is no need to worry about rain, fog, etc. at the test would be indoors.

Otherwise, there is a simple objective test using a ruler and a list of legal fonts.

[speedking31]

I was thinking the reverse. A numberplate that can be read in a clear well-lit environment may not be readable to a real life ANPR camera. Therefore the authorities would want a more challenging test that would become less objective with the different variables.

[pingu393]

speedking31 said:

I was thinking the reverse. A numberplate that can be read in a clear well-lit environment may not be readable to a real life ANPR camera. Therefore the authorities would want a more challenging test that would become less objective with the different variables.

Ahh, understand you now. If that's the case, then I think a ruler and a book of legal fonts is the only way to go.

I've just remembered that one of my vans failed it's first MOT with me because there were small splatters of concrete on it. I'd have been hacked off it it was all that it failed on, but it was just one of lots of fiddly things (all of which were reasons to fail, but none were serious). It took longer to clean the number plate than all the other jobs put together. (It would probably have passed the ANPR test ).

[Andy3004]

So an update...car passed mot today at a different garage...god I'm shocked. not. :-)