The ask an MOT tester thread
Discussion
Cascade360 said:
Hole in the sill - obviously a fail. However, is it a "dangerous defect" such that the car cannot be driven after a fail if the old test is still valid? Thinking about getting it tested early and if it otherwise doesn't need much done finding someone to do the welding. Would be useful if still driveable.
A hole in a sill is not automatically a fail, it depends where it is. For corrosion to be a dangerous defect, the brakes and/or steering would have to be adversely affected, unlikely for a hole in a sill.
Little Pete said:
A hole in a sill is not automatically a fail, it depends where it is.
For corrosion to be a dangerous defect, the brakes and/or steering would have to be adversely affected, unlikely for a hole in a sill.
It is at the rear of the sill, just before the wheel arch. A hole about the size of a 50p piece or so. I had assumed it would fail? It got an advisory for corrosion in that region last year.For corrosion to be a dangerous defect, the brakes and/or steering would have to be adversely affected, unlikely for a hole in a sill.
Cascade360 said:
It is at the rear of the sill, just before the wheel arch. A hole about the size of a 50p piece or so. I had assumed it would fail? It got an advisory for corrosion in that region last year.
It will fail if it’s within 300mm of a suspension or seat belt mounting point. 
Bit of a change as im a fairly new tester asking other testers, Peugeot 207 front sill, fail or no?
One guy here said yes as its within 30cm of seat mounting.
One guy said no as its not the inner sill and therefore just a sill covering and not structural
This was a recent one and it was P+A by second tester
It's funny that on the Dacia thread we have people saying they wouldn't buy one as it doesn't have lane assist, Occupant Status Monitoring or an automatic speed limiter, yet we have people who think it is fine to drive around in a heap of rust like this.
Pass or not, surely common sense tells you that if you prod the car with a screwdriver and you get a big hole and pile of oxide you probably shouldn't drive it?
Pass or not, surely common sense tells you that if you prod the car with a screwdriver and you get a big hole and pile of oxide you probably shouldn't drive it?
Joey Deacon said:
It's funny that on the Dacia thread we have people saying they wouldn't buy one as it doesn't have lane assist, Occupant Status Monitoring or an automatic speed limiter, yet we have people who think it is fine to drive around in a heap of rust like this.
Pass or not, surely common sense tells you that if you prod the car with a screwdriver and you get a big hole and pile of oxide you probably shouldn't drive it?
Ive driven things in much worse condition. Sometimes your just broke and if it works it works. Pass or not, surely common sense tells you that if you prod the car with a screwdriver and you get a big hole and pile of oxide you probably shouldn't drive it?
The people buying brand new cars are not the same market as people scraping every penny to keep £200 sheds on the road.
Joey Deacon said:
It's funny that on the Dacia thread we have people saying they wouldn't buy one as it doesn't have lane assist, Occupant Status Monitoring or an automatic speed limiter, yet we have people who think it is fine to drive around in a heap of rust like this.
Pass or not, surely common sense tells you that if you prod the car with a screwdriver and you get a big hole and pile of oxide you probably shouldn't drive it?
If it's only cosmetic then it's fine. Surely you wouldn't want to scrap a safe vehicle just because it doesn't look pretty?Pass or not, surely common sense tells you that if you prod the car with a screwdriver and you get a big hole and pile of oxide you probably shouldn't drive it?
spikeyhead said:
If it's only cosmetic then it's fine. Surely you wouldn't want to scrap a safe vehicle just because it doesn't look pretty?
Erm..... I did once scrap a Ford Cougar with a much smaller hole than that as I just couldn't be bothered to deal with it and I wanted a new car anyway.P675 said:
Quick silly question..
If I have 6 weeks until an MOT expires, I get it tested and it fails, does the existing MOT still stand or would I then have so much time to get it sorted.
Yes - but if it fails on a dangerous defect then no thats it.If I have 6 weeks until an MOT expires, I get it tested and it fails, does the existing MOT still stand or would I then have so much time to get it sorted.
You have 10 working days to fix it or its a new test.
stevemcs said:
P675 said:
Quick silly question..
If I have 6 weeks until an MOT expires, I get it tested and it fails, does the existing MOT still stand or would I then have so much time to get it sorted.
If I have 6 weeks until an MOT expires, I get it tested and it fails, does the existing MOT still stand or would I then have so much time to get it sorted.
Yes - but if it fails on a dangerous defect then no thats it.
You have 10 working days to fix it or its a new test.
After a failed test dangerous or not you have now been made aware that in reality the vehicle is unroadworthy.......onus is on you to maintain roadworthiness.
stevemcs said:
Yes - but if it fails on a dangerous defect then no thats it.
You have 10 working days to fix it or its a new test.
My test is a many weeks away but would an MOT test now be a sensible way of getting a handle on if there's on ongoing issue whilst being able to keep running the car?
Garages I've spoken to want to start swopping out parts, I'm thinking this could be a cheaper approach to getting an overview of running order.
Also there is a clause in my warranty that excludes the cat - except if it fails government emissions tests.
if it fails then I've then got something to go on when talking to the dealership about resolving my issue?
stevemcs said:
Dangerous means it shouldn't leave the test centre unless on the back of the low loader, however we cannot stop them Any other than a dangerous failure then it can go.
Drives to test centre.......30 mins later......too dangerous to drive home.I'm sure a small % this is the case...but really?
No new MOT can override the current one, it stays as the current test until it's expiry date. If you get a 'dangerous' fail it means you really should not take the car on the road as we have seen something that could hurt you or someone else.
We can't stop you taking the car away, that is not our job, but if you get stopped and they check the MOT history and see you are knowingly driving a car with a major defect you are in bother.
As for corrosion, some corrosion fails are major (holes in inner sills etc etc) some are dangerous (A Jeep upper spring platform corroded away to almost nothing and the spring staying in place by good fortune). Like and any fail, there are degrees of broken and there is plenty of guidance in the books to help us decide if needed.
HTH
We can't stop you taking the car away, that is not our job, but if you get stopped and they check the MOT history and see you are knowingly driving a car with a major defect you are in bother.
As for corrosion, some corrosion fails are major (holes in inner sills etc etc) some are dangerous (A Jeep upper spring platform corroded away to almost nothing and the spring staying in place by good fortune). Like and any fail, there are degrees of broken and there is plenty of guidance in the books to help us decide if needed.
HTH
magpie215 said:
stevemcs said:
Dangerous means it shouldn't leave the test centre unless on the back of the low loader, however we cannot stop them Any other than a dangerous failure then it can go.
Drives to test centre.......30 mins later......too dangerous to drive home.
I'm sure a small % this is the case...but really?
Drives to test centre with a dangerous defect….30 mins later…..fails on a dangerous defect. The time on the test lane has nothing to do with it.
Edited by Little Pete on Wednesday 18th May 20:22
magpie215 said:
Drives to test centre.......30 mins later......too dangerous to drive home.
I'm sure a small % this is the case...but really?
Walk into doctor's appointment ... 30 mins later ... got cancer.
You had the cancer/dangerous MOT failure prior to the appointment - all that's changed is that you are now aware of it and can act accordingly.
Andrew Hirst said:
On this point I'm concerned about a P0421 code relating to cat efficiency reading (as you know as you've contributed to my thread).
My test is a many weeks away but would an MOT test now be a sensible way of getting a handle on if there's on ongoing issue whilst being able to keep running the car?
Garages I've spoken to want to start swopping out parts, I'm thinking this could be a cheaper approach to getting an overview of running order.
Also there is a clause in my warranty that excludes the cat - except if it fails government emissions tests.
if it fails then I've then got something to go on when talking to the dealership about resolving my issue?
If the EML is on at time of test its an instant fail, the tester doesn't know why or care, that would be dealt with afterwards. The emissions test may pick something up and is a better way of testing efficiencies. For yours it could be a sensor, the cat or an air leak either on the induction side or exhaust side.My test is a many weeks away but would an MOT test now be a sensible way of getting a handle on if there's on ongoing issue whilst being able to keep running the car?
Garages I've spoken to want to start swopping out parts, I'm thinking this could be a cheaper approach to getting an overview of running order.
Also there is a clause in my warranty that excludes the cat - except if it fails government emissions tests.
if it fails then I've then got something to go on when talking to the dealership about resolving my issue?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff