MOT history
Author
Discussion

BJM1985

Original Poster:

10 posts

97 months

Saturday 16th September 2017
quotequote all

Seen a car that is getting out through a MOT this week. Looked at the MOT history: Last one

Advisory notice item(s)
Front registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (6.3.1d)
Nearside Front Anti-roll bar linkage has slight play in a ball joint (2.4.G.2)
Both front lower wishbone rear rubber bushes slightly deteriorated
Offside rear tyre slightly perished
Nearside front tyre wearing on edges
Front brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened both front (3.5.1i)
Front Brake pad(s) wearing thin (3.5.1g)
Parking brake lever has little reserve travel (3.1.6b)


Ball joint seems to come up in the history a few times. Expensive to repair? Wishbone also. Both of these were on the last MOT advisory list.
Should this hisotry be causing concern?

Advisory notice item(s)
Front registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (6.3.1d)
Nearside Front Anti-roll bar linkage has slight play in a ball joint (2.4.G.2)
Both front lower wishbone rear rubber bushes slightly deteriorated
Offside rear tyre slightly perished
Nearside front tyre wearing on edges
Front brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened both front (3.5.1i)
Front Brake pad(s) wearing thin (3.5.1g)
Parking brake lever has little reserve travel (3.1.6b)
What are these?
Date tested
10 March 2017
FAIL
Mileage
40,961 miles

Reason(s) for failure
Offside Rear Stop lamp not working (1.2.1b)
Offside Rear Shock absorber has a serious fluid leak (2.7.3)
Offside Front Anti-roll bar linkage has excessive play in a ball joint (2.4.G.2)
Advisory notice item(s)
Front registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (6.3.1d)
Nearside Front Anti-roll bar linkage has slight play in a ball joint (2.4.G.2)
Both front lower wishbone rear rubber bushes slightly deteriorated
Offside rear tyre slightly perished
Nearside front tyre wearing on edges
Front brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened both front (3.5.1i)
Front Brake pad(s) wearing thin (3.5.1g)
Parking brake lever has little reserve travel (3.1.6b)
What are these?
Date tested
10 March 2016
PASS
Mileage
35,991 miles

Expiry date
10 March 2017
Date tested
10 March 2016
FAIL
Mileage
35,991 miles
Reason(s) for failure
Offside Front Headlamp not working on dipped beam (1.7.5a)
Nearside Rear Tyre has a lump, caused by separation or partial failure of its structure outer wall (4.1.D.1b)
Nearside Front Windscreen wiper does not clear the windscreen effectively (8.2.2)
What are these?
Date tested
10 March 2015
PASS
Mileage
30,992 miles

Expiry date
10 March 2016
Date tested
10 March 2015
FAIL
Mileage
30,992 miles

Reason(s) for failure
Nearside Front coil spring broken (2.4.C.1a)
What are these?
Date tested
27 February 2014
PASS
Mileage
26,138 miles
MOT test number
1264 9815 4095
Expiry date
10 March 2015
Advisory notice item(s)
Under-trays fitted obscuring some underside components
What are these?
Date tested
27 February 2014
FAIL
Mileage
26,138 miles

Reason(s) for failure
Offside Windscreen wiper does not clear the windscreen effectively (8.2.2)
Offside Front Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover excessively damaged so that it no longer prevents the ingress of dirt (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Front Upper Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover excessively damaged so that it no longer prevents the ingress of dirt (2.4.G.2)
Advisory notice item(s)
Under-trays fitted obscuring some underside components
Items removed from driver's view prior to test
Nail in nearside rear tyre
What are these?
Date tested
11 March 2013
PASS
Mileage
21,929 miles

Expiry date
10 March 2014
Advisory notice item(s)
Nearside Front Anti-roll bar linkage has slight play in a ball joint (2.4.G.2)
What are these?
Failure items must be fixed before the vehicle can pass its MOT.

Advisory items are provided for advice. For some of these, if they became more serious, your vehicle may no longer be roadworthy and could require immediate attention.
Date tested
8 March 2013
FAIL
Mileage
21,880 miles

Reason(s) for failure
Offside Front Headlamp aim too low (1.8)
Nearside Front Track rod end ball joint has excessive play (2.2.B.1f)
Offside Front coil spring fractured (2.4.C.1a)
Rear registration plate deteriorated (6.3.1d)
Brakes imbalanced across an axle (3.7.B.5b)
Advisory notice item(s)
Nearside Front Anti-roll bar linkage has slight play in a ball joint (2.4.G.2)
Front Brake pad(s) wearing thin (3.5.1g)
What are these?
Date tested
29 February 2012
PASS
Mileage
17,227 miles

Expiry date
28 February 2013
Advisory notice item(s)
slight movement at nearside inner track rod end
nearside front tyre wearing on outside wall
offside front tyre has slight bulge on outer wall
What are these?

BJM1985

Original Poster:

10 posts

97 months

Saturday 16th September 2017
quotequote all

Just realised this MOT ends March next year. But the garage said it was putting it through a MOT this week. Thought it had to be within a month of expiry ?

cuprabob

17,124 posts

232 months

Saturday 16th September 2017
quotequote all
BJM1985 said:
Just realised this MOT ends March next year. But the garage said it was putting it through a MOT this week. Thought it had to be within a month of expiry ?
You can do an MOT anytime and it's valid for 12 months from the date of the test.

If you test within a month of the current expiry date then it's valid from 12 months the current expiry date.

BJM1985

Original Poster:

10 posts

97 months

Saturday 16th September 2017
quotequote all
Thanks

Seems to have the same issue coming up. anti-roll bar linkage. First car so no idea about this stuff!

cootuk

918 posts

141 months

Saturday 16th September 2017
quotequote all
"Offside rear tyre slightly perished
Nearside front tyre wearing on edges"

If I'm reading this correctly then these appeared in two MOTs...looks like they're running the car on an absolute minimum budget.
Same for the brakes...they'll need doing soon.
There's a lot of advisories that appear year after year and the owner just left them.
You really really want it?


BJM1985

Original Poster:

10 posts

97 months

Saturday 16th September 2017
quotequote all

In two minds last test was: Advisory notice item(s)
Front registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (6.3.1d)
Nearside Front Anti-roll bar linkage has slight play in a ball joint (2.4.G.2)
Both front lower wishbone rear rubber bushes slightly deteriorated
Offside rear tyre slightly perished
Nearside front tyre wearing on edges
Front brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened both front (3.5.1i)
Front Brake pad(s) wearing thin (3.5.1g)
Parking brake lever has little reserve travel (3.1.6b)


They said they were doing a MOT this week. So I will like to see it have nothing in an advisory. Guy said they get an outside firm to do the MOTs

cootuk

918 posts

141 months

Saturday 16th September 2017
quotequote all
I would specifically ask them if they are getting the advisories fixed and get it in writing if you did buy it.
Then a fresh MOT from somewhere else to see if they really have been fixed or hope to fob you off in a year.

BJM1985

Original Poster:

10 posts

97 months

Saturday 16th September 2017
quotequote all
He said the MOT will be done and what needs to be sorted will be done. Hence why he could not say when I could drive away.

Pica-Pica

15,426 posts

102 months

Saturday 16th September 2017
quotequote all
All of them are fixable, but added together, they deem to indicate sustained neglect, for about 6 -7k miles a year. The tyre issues and headlamp beam and bulb failures do not seem to point to someone who cared about the car. A car should sail through its first MOT, OK the odd dodgy wiper blade and bulb, but the rest?
There are plenty of cars out there, I personally would look elsewhere.

BJM1985

Original Poster:

10 posts

97 months

Saturday 16th September 2017
quotequote all

2009 plate so I was thinking just wear and tear but its only got 43,000 £2,995

gamefreaks

2,040 posts

205 months

Saturday 16th September 2017
quotequote all
BJM1985 said:
2009 plate so I was thinking just wear and tear but its only got 43,000 £2,995
I was expecting a cheap sub £1k car when you posted the history.

If you've got £3k to play with, you should be able to find a well cared for car. Not this one.

BJM1985

Original Poster:

10 posts

97 months

Saturday 16th September 2017
quotequote all
Think I will bin the idea of buying this. Got 3500 to spend.