Possible redress against MOT Test Station
Discussion
Recently introduced myself to a previously used local garage, requiring that i was seeking a friendly MOT tester. My reason for that introduction being, that twelve months and six thousand miles earlier, the car's Pass MOT certificate, listed just two advisories, being structure corrosion but not significantly reduced, and a slight oil leak.
The latest MOT test resulted in a Test failure, with a Do not drive until repaired (dangerous defects), and listing twenty six repair immediately major defects and seven minor repair advisories, with both power steering and brake leaking from the vehicle, resulting in me have to have the vehicle towed home.
Having no brakes and power steering, with their relevant fluids leaking from the vehicle, together with the excessive number and type of defects, four defects covering prescribed area strength of seat belt anchorage etc. etc, left me completely uneasy, to the extent that i am giving some consideration to whether there was some malice involved when carrying out the MOT test.
Not sure if i have any redress against the MOT test station, and if the number of defects and the non driveable is a viable financial repair option.
The latest MOT test resulted in a Test failure, with a Do not drive until repaired (dangerous defects), and listing twenty six repair immediately major defects and seven minor repair advisories, with both power steering and brake leaking from the vehicle, resulting in me have to have the vehicle towed home.
Having no brakes and power steering, with their relevant fluids leaking from the vehicle, together with the excessive number and type of defects, four defects covering prescribed area strength of seat belt anchorage etc. etc, left me completely uneasy, to the extent that i am giving some consideration to whether there was some malice involved when carrying out the MOT test.
Not sure if i have any redress against the MOT test station, and if the number of defects and the non driveable is a viable financial repair option.
I don’t get it?
Are you saying that the MOT station did damage to the car in order to creat failure points OR that the previous MOT missed stuff?
A lot can go wrong in a year, MOt check are getting more thorough and stuff that might have passed before are now picked up….cars do deteriorate.
Are you saying that the MOT station did damage to the car in order to creat failure points OR that the previous MOT missed stuff?
A lot can go wrong in a year, MOt check are getting more thorough and stuff that might have passed before are now picked up….cars do deteriorate.
Wings said:
Recently introduced myself to a previously used local garage, requiring that i was seeking a friendly MOT tester. My reason for that introduction being, that twelve months and six thousand miles earlier, the car's Pass MOT certificate, listed just two advisories, being structure corrosion but not significantly reduced, and a slight oil leak.
The latest MOT test resulted in a Test failure, with a Do not drive until repaired (dangerous defects), and listing twenty six repair immediately major defects and seven minor repair advisories, with both power steering and brake leaking from the vehicle, resulting in me have to have the vehicle towed home.
Having no brakes and power steering, with their relevant fluids leaking from the vehicle, together with the excessive number and type of defects, four defects covering prescribed area strength of seat belt anchorage etc. etc, left me completely uneasy, to the extent that i am giving some consideration to whether there was some malice involved when carrying out the MOT test.
Not sure if i have any redress against the MOT test station, and if the number of defects and the non driveable is a viable financial repair option.
So, you've submitted a car for MOT and now want to have a go at the MOT station for failing it with numerous faults.....??The latest MOT test resulted in a Test failure, with a Do not drive until repaired (dangerous defects), and listing twenty six repair immediately major defects and seven minor repair advisories, with both power steering and brake leaking from the vehicle, resulting in me have to have the vehicle towed home.
Having no brakes and power steering, with their relevant fluids leaking from the vehicle, together with the excessive number and type of defects, four defects covering prescribed area strength of seat belt anchorage etc. etc, left me completely uneasy, to the extent that i am giving some consideration to whether there was some malice involved when carrying out the MOT test.
Not sure if i have any redress against the MOT test station, and if the number of defects and the non driveable is a viable financial repair option.
If you are a keen spanner twiddler I expect a lot of the fails can be ticked off quickly and easily.
If not then get a quote from a mechanic that wants the work.
Often the list may look bad but is a repetition of related or same issues.
Maybe post up the fail sheet and tell us what car.
If not then get a quote from a mechanic that wants the work.
Often the list may look bad but is a repetition of related or same issues.
Maybe post up the fail sheet and tell us what car.
I've bought cars which passed an MOT less than a year previously and been able to fit my entire arm through the holes in structural metal.
Mate had an advisory for corrosion on a brake pipe and it went pop as he drove it away from the test.
Cars can degrade quite a lot in a year, low mileage is little defence against it.
I've only ever had an incorrect fail once, and that's because the tester didn't know the exact regs for a slightly specialist issue, nothing malicious.
I'm afraid I think it's more likely that your car is in a worse state than you believed it was, and the garage have done their job and found the issues.
Have you got under the car and poked and prodded the suspect areas yourself?
Mate had an advisory for corrosion on a brake pipe and it went pop as he drove it away from the test.
Cars can degrade quite a lot in a year, low mileage is little defence against it.
I've only ever had an incorrect fail once, and that's because the tester didn't know the exact regs for a slightly specialist issue, nothing malicious.
I'm afraid I think it's more likely that your car is in a worse state than you believed it was, and the garage have done their job and found the issues.
Have you got under the car and poked and prodded the suspect areas yourself?
Different testers do seem to have different approaches. My cars always passed their MOT until I started using a particular garage - and then every year my car would fail, and he'd quote a price to fix it. 'Plus the VAT' he'd say with a glint in his little beady eye. One year he came up with a list of faults costing more than the car was worth. So I took it to a different garage and it passed. I suspect Garage One saved the pass quota for his mates and failed the rest.
Is the car actually as bad?
I have stopped using one garage because they Failed cars with a long list of things, last car I took needed practically rebuilding according to them, did work myself, finding at every stage it was BS but replacing things as I had bought parts and rented ramp.
I replaced wishbones to find bushings and ball joints without play, rot or separation, cleaned brake lines that only had dried mud on, looking exactly same on rubber fuel hoses underneath it, bearings supposedly needed doing, but was told they didn't on dropping it at another garage, handbrake needed a spot of oil and working on & off a bit as I suspected and asked them to do beforehand, but they said definitely needed new rear calipers, inner sill and subframe rust they stated was excessive and essentially told me was rotten flaked off to a smooth non flexible clean metal layer...
Check it out yourself or have another garage look at it.
I have stopped using one garage because they Failed cars with a long list of things, last car I took needed practically rebuilding according to them, did work myself, finding at every stage it was BS but replacing things as I had bought parts and rented ramp.
I replaced wishbones to find bushings and ball joints without play, rot or separation, cleaned brake lines that only had dried mud on, looking exactly same on rubber fuel hoses underneath it, bearings supposedly needed doing, but was told they didn't on dropping it at another garage, handbrake needed a spot of oil and working on & off a bit as I suspected and asked them to do beforehand, but they said definitely needed new rear calipers, inner sill and subframe rust they stated was excessive and essentially told me was rotten flaked off to a smooth non flexible clean metal layer...
Check it out yourself or have another garage look at it.
Wings said:
Having no brakes and power steering, with their relevant fluids leaking from the vehicle, together with the excessive number and type of defects,
No one picked up on this yet? No brakes and power steering? And you submitted it for an MOT test? No wonder you were after a "friendly" tester!Sebring440 said:
Wings said:
Having no brakes and power steering, with their relevant fluids leaking from the vehicle, together with the excessive number and type of defects,
No one picked up on this yet? No brakes and power steering? And you submitted it for an MOT test? No wonder you were after a "friendly" tester!Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff