RE: MOTs given automatic six-month extension

RE: MOTs given automatic six-month extension

Author
Discussion

dhutch

14,198 posts

196 months

Monday 11th May 2020
quotequote all
stoop44rio said:
Ref:What MOT fees are being refunded? you pay on the day!
I'm in n.ireland so we pay ahead of time and book a slot at mot centre.
I don't think refunded, just saved, by not having to do the MOT.
Didn't know in NI they where paid for in advance, interesting,

dhutch

14,198 posts

196 months

Monday 11th May 2020
quotequote all
donkmeister said:
dhutch said:
The MOT test IS a roadworthiness test.

You might not like some of the definitions of roadworthiness, or at times how certain testers interpret them, but is is exactly that. I do feel the pain of people who have an expensive item on a car which has failed to the point it becomes deemed 'non-road-safe' in a way which you might dispute or might be difficult or non economic to repair, such as a £500 bill for a new wishbone/controlarm for a worn and non user replaceable ball joint, that might be able to do another year before it's too worn, or a niggly sensor error causing emissions to go through the roof. But can you really hand on heart say a ball joint with a decent amount of slop in it will do another year (is that 5k, 25k pa) before falling apart? Is it really appreciate to be driving around with massively more emissions than the car could put out because the garage cant get to the bottom of which sensor it is, or the sensor is £250 and the cars not worth it?

Daniel
The MOT is intended as a roadworthiness test. However, the way in which elements of it are carried out makes it inconsistent to the point that a roadworthy vehicle can fail it.

Ball-joint play is a prime example of a shortcoming in the MOT testing methodology because it comes down to the opinion of the tester on the day on what amounts to "excessive play". Ask any mechanic, and they will have come across testers who failed perfectly good cars because of "excessive play" in ball joints. I'm yet to hear of a tester breaking out the spec for the ball-joint and using a dial indicator to assess whether or not it is in tolerance, it's all done on feel and opinion and, frustratingly, is one of the few things that is difficult for most people to assess at home beforehand.

But, views on the MOT itself aside, I was just objecting to Chris suggesting that people are using the MOT extension simply to "save a few quid", and not because of the monumental ball-ache of finding themselves without transport if the MOT tester failed their car because he was using a longer prybar than usual and mistook the additional hand movement for excessive play (or alternatively, had a row with his missus before work).

The only time I've had a car fail an MOT was when I took it to a marque-specialist garage that also did MOTs. Despite the mechanic who knew that model inside and out giving it the thumbs up before it went in the bay, it failed on (you've guess it) ball-joints. rolleyes
Seems fair enough.

And I completely agree with you that, while it very much is a roadworthiness test, is is not perfect.

Ball joint play is one of the hardest things to assess, both as a customer ahead of the game, and to be honest for the MOT tester, who ultimately is a mechanic in a workshop checking over a two car covered in road grim, not a laboratory technician conducting an life-analysis on a bearing unit that's been on a rig.

My gut feeling is that almost any play, means it is shot and will not last long, modern sealed ball joints basically lasting forever until something goes wrong, usually the seal fails and grit gets in and the grease escapes. 8 years and 100k not an issue, no play, then the seal spits, and its toast within a year and 10k miles. That said, if the car only does 2k pa it might last about five years! But what if the the old lady sells it and a private courier picks it up and does 30k that year. Devils advocate hat on! The frustrating thing as well is that on a modern car its not £25 for a ball joint, its a £350 for the whole control arm!


Daniel

stoop44rio

100 posts

187 months

Monday 11th May 2020
quotequote all
In N.I. they're all government run centres. Normal car repair garages cannot MOT a vehicle.

MG CHRIS

9,077 posts

166 months

Monday 11th May 2020
quotequote all
dhutch said:
donkmeister said:
dhutch said:
The MOT test IS a roadworthiness test.

You might not like some of the definitions of roadworthiness, or at times how certain testers interpret them, but is is exactly that. I do feel the pain of people who have an expensive item on a car which has failed to the point it becomes deemed 'non-road-safe' in a way which you might dispute or might be difficult or non economic to repair, such as a £500 bill for a new wishbone/controlarm for a worn and non user replaceable ball joint, that might be able to do another year before it's too worn, or a niggly sensor error causing emissions to go through the roof. But can you really hand on heart say a ball joint with a decent amount of slop in it will do another year (is that 5k, 25k pa) before falling apart? Is it really appreciate to be driving around with massively more emissions than the car could put out because the garage cant get to the bottom of which sensor it is, or the sensor is £250 and the cars not worth it?

Daniel
The MOT is intended as a roadworthiness test. However, the way in which elements of it are carried out makes it inconsistent to the point that a roadworthy vehicle can fail it.

Ball-joint play is a prime example of a shortcoming in the MOT testing methodology because it comes down to the opinion of the tester on the day on what amounts to "excessive play". Ask any mechanic, and they will have come across testers who failed perfectly good cars because of "excessive play" in ball joints. I'm yet to hear of a tester breaking out the spec for the ball-joint and using a dial indicator to assess whether or not it is in tolerance, it's all done on feel and opinion and, frustratingly, is one of the few things that is difficult for most people to assess at home beforehand.

But, views on the MOT itself aside, I was just objecting to Chris suggesting that people are using the MOT extension simply to "save a few quid", and not because of the monumental ball-ache of finding themselves without transport if the MOT tester failed their car because he was using a longer prybar than usual and mistook the additional hand movement for excessive play (or alternatively, had a row with his missus before work).

The only time I've had a car fail an MOT was when I took it to a marque-specialist garage that also did MOTs. Despite the mechanic who knew that model inside and out giving it the thumbs up before it went in the bay, it failed on (you've guess it) ball-joints. rolleyes
Seems fair enough.

And I completely agree with you that, while it very much is a roadworthiness test, is is not perfect.

Ball joint play is one of the hardest things to assess, both as a customer ahead of the game, and to be honest for the MOT tester, who ultimately is a mechanic in a workshop checking over a two car covered in road grim, not a laboratory technician conducting an life-analysis on a bearing unit that's been on a rig.

My gut feeling is that almost any play, means it is shot and will not last long, modern sealed ball joints basically lasting forever until something goes wrong, usually the seal fails and grit gets in and the grease escapes. 8 years and 100k not an issue, no play, then the seal spits, and its toast within a year and 10k miles. That said, if the car only does 2k pa it might last about five years! But what if the the old lady sells it and a private courier picks it up and does 30k that year. Devils advocate hat on! The frustrating thing as well is that on a modern car its not £25 for a ball joint, its a £350 for the whole control arm!


Daniel
As a mot tester and only within a 12 month done my mot training course the testing standards is actually pretty low infact in my opinion way to low yes ball joints are done on play which is done on tester opinion but other option is out there. We do get guidelines on certain vehicles ie mer sprinters which are designed with a certain amount of movement up and down.

We are told if we are 100% sure its a fail its a fail if not at least pass and advice or put it as a minor fail at least then we can cover ourselves if anything goes wrong with that vehicle. Im employed to make sure that car meets a very low standard most cars should pass a mot with correct maintaince and servicing which will pick up any faults on the vehicle. 70% of my fail rate is on bulbs/wipers/washers/tyres/brake pads with suspension parts being less than 10% of my fail rate. Also in most cases a mot fail ball joint you can certainly hear going over bumps in the road.

Skyedriver

17,667 posts

281 months

Monday 11th May 2020
quotequote all
3 cars
Car 1) taxed, MOT was due May, Gov.uk now says November
Car 2) recently sold, was SORN when sold, MOT was August Gov.uk still says August
Car 3) currently SORN, was MoT early March, Gov.uk still says March

Car 3 was MoT before the ruling came into place so not eligible for the extension but is Car 2 not eligible because it is SORN?

Jimmy Recard

17,540 posts

178 months

Monday 11th May 2020
quotequote all
Skyedriver said:
3 cars
Car 1) taxed, MOT was due May, Gov.uk now says November
Car 2) recently sold, was SORN when sold, MOT was August Gov.uk still says August
Car 3) currently SORN, was MoT early March, Gov.uk still says March

Car 3 was MoT before the ruling came into place so not eligible for the extension but is Car 2 not eligible because it is SORN?
It should be. It will probably only update a few days before the day it says it's due

donkmeister

7,999 posts

99 months

Monday 11th May 2020
quotequote all
MG CHRIS said:
70% of my fail rate is on bulbs/wipers/washers/tyres/brake pads with suspension parts being less than 10% of my fail rate.
Unfortunately that doesn't surprise me! The fact that most cars will warn of failed bulbs and worn brakes, and wipers/washers/tyres are so easy to check must be perplexing when you see these!

Not long after I started going out with Mrs D, I was pleasantly surprised when she announced "I've booked an MOT next week, can you jump in and press the brake pedal / select reverse etc etc while I watch the bulbs?"... I knew it was meant to be biglaugh

unsprung

5,467 posts

123 months

Monday 11th May 2020
quotequote all
donkmeister said:
Not long after I started going out with Mrs D, I was pleasantly surprised when she announced "I've booked an MOT next week, can you jump in and press the brake pedal / select reverse etc etc while I watch the bulbs?"... I knew it was meant to be biglaugh
hehe a happy coincidence


unsprung

5,467 posts

123 months

Monday 11th May 2020
quotequote all


Now that coronavirus has invited us to question things about our lives...

What do people think about the value of the MOT in general? (given that contemporary new cars are, in historical terms, exceptionally well engineered / safe / reliable)

What would people say, for example, to a revised MOT scheme that would see no MOT required for the first five years of ownership. Afterwards, only biennially. So: an MOT in years 6, 8, 10, 12, and so on.


Little Pete

1,513 posts

93 months

Monday 11th May 2020
quotequote all
unsprung said:
Now that coronavirus has invited us to question things about our lives...

What do people think about the value of the MOT in general? (given that contemporary new cars are, in historical terms, exceptionally well engineered / safe / reliable)

What would people say, for example, to a revised MOT scheme that would see no MOT required for the first five years of ownership. Afterwards, only biennially. So: an MOT in years 6, 8, 10, 12, and so on.
Safety-I assume you mean the way a vehicle is designed- and reliability have nothing to do with an MOT test. Modern vehicles are well engineered but are built to a cost. Components like springs and ball joints wear out and break much sooner now than when I started in the job thirty odd years ago.
A few years ago a 4-2-2 system was mentioned as a way of saving road users money and was abandoned, because various studies, including a government commissioned study, found that just changing to two yearly testing would lead to a considerable increase in road deaths.
Most failures on 3 and 4 year old vehicles are down to a local of maintenance, bulbs, tyres etc but we still get them with broken springs and brake pads with no lining left on them. I think your scenario would be a very bad idea.

Edited by Little Pete on Monday 11th May 20:56

ro250

2,734 posts

56 months

Tuesday 12th May 2020
quotequote all
unsprung said:
Now that coronavirus has invited us to question things about our lives...

What do people think about the value of the MOT in general? (given that contemporary new cars are, in historical terms, exceptionally well engineered / safe / reliable)

What would people say, for example, to a revised MOT scheme that would see no MOT required for the first five years of ownership. Afterwards, only biennially. So: an MOT in years 6, 8, 10, 12, and so on.
Tyres would be one reason alone to make annual tests still needed. As people have said on this and other threads, tyres are a common failure so it's clear many people don't bother to check them even just before an MOT!

anonymous-user

53 months

Tuesday 12th May 2020
quotequote all
Jimmy Recard said:
It should be. It will probably only update a few days before the day it says it's due
Mine is due on the 18th of May. I checked yesterday morning and it said 7 days remaining, I checked in the afternoon and it then said 191 days remaining.

So I assume it gets updated automatically when there is a week remaining.

dhutch

14,198 posts

196 months

Tuesday 12th May 2020
quotequote all
MG CHRIS said:
As a mot tester and only within a 12 month done my mot training course the testing standards is actually pretty low infact in my opinion way to low yes ball joints are done on play which is done on tester opinion but other option is out there. We do get guidelines on certain vehicles ie mer sprinters which are designed with a certain amount of movement up and down.

We are told if we are 100% sure its a fail its a fail if not at least pass and advice or put it as a minor fail at least then we can cover ourselves if anything goes wrong with that vehicle. Im employed to make sure that car meets a very low standard most cars should pass a mot with correct maintaince and servicing which will pick up any faults on the vehicle.

70% of my fail rate is on bulbs/wipers/washers/tyres/brake pads with suspension parts being less than 10% of my fail rate. Also in most cases a mot fail ball joint you can certainly hear going over bumps in the road.
Seems reasonable to me, and about what I was expecting, but really great to hear it first hand from someone with recent training.


Daniel

Welshbeef

49,633 posts

197 months

Tuesday 12th May 2020
quotequote all
So I’ve checked my car today mot due 20/4/20 originally but per the gov mot website it gives 20/10/20 who is correct.

Another car it’s MOT is due late May20 originally - still showing as the MOT expires on the same original date

Another car MOT due mid sept again it’s still showing the exact same date.

Ie two cars here don’t have the 6 months grace added.

Is it a case of the new date only appears once you pass the original due date? I didn’t check mine before so cannot compare.

SS2.

14,455 posts

237 months

Tuesday 12th May 2020
quotequote all
The website only updates a week or so before the current MOT is due to expire.

Welshbeef said:
So I’ve checked my car today mot due 20/4/20 originally but per the gov mot website it gives 20/10/20 who is correct.
The website.

Fady

342 posts

203 months

Tuesday 12th May 2020
quotequote all
unsprung said:
Now that coronavirus has invited us to question things about our lives...

What do people think about the value of the MOT in general? (given that contemporary new cars are, in historical terms, exceptionally well engineered / safe / reliable)

What would people say, for example, to a revised MOT scheme that would see no MOT required for the first five years of ownership. Afterwards, only biennially. So: an MOT in years 6, 8, 10, 12, and so on.
Tricky one that. May be well engineered etc. but as is noted, you have still got to account for mileage-dependent wear and tear. So bald tyres, brake lights out, ineffective wiper blades and so on. At least the current system compels these to be addressed on an annual basis once car is no longer 'new'.

Welshbeef

49,633 posts

197 months

Tuesday 12th May 2020
quotequote all
Fady said:
unsprung said:
Now that coronavirus has invited us to question things about our lives...

What do people think about the value of the MOT in general? (given that contemporary new cars are, in historical terms, exceptionally well engineered / safe / reliable)

What would people say, for example, to a revised MOT scheme that would see no MOT required for the first five years of ownership. Afterwards, only biennially. So: an MOT in years 6, 8, 10, 12, and so on.
Tricky one that. May be well engineered etc. but as is noted, you have still got to account for mileage-dependent wear and tear. So bald tyres, brake lights out, ineffective wiper blades and so on. At least the current system compels these to be addressed on an annual basis once car is no longer 'new'.
It really is a very basic safety test and your car should be able to pass it on any day without prep.

It is the bare minimum of safety requirement.

MG CHRIS

9,077 posts

166 months

Tuesday 12th May 2020
quotequote all
Welshbeef said:
Fady said:
unsprung said:
Now that coronavirus has invited us to question things about our lives...

What do people think about the value of the MOT in general? (given that contemporary new cars are, in historical terms, exceptionally well engineered / safe / reliable)

What would people say, for example, to a revised MOT scheme that would see no MOT required for the first five years of ownership. Afterwards, only biennially. So: an MOT in years 6, 8, 10, 12, and so on.
Tricky one that. May be well engineered etc. but as is noted, you have still got to account for mileage-dependent wear and tear. So bald tyres, brake lights out, ineffective wiper blades and so on. At least the current system compels these to be addressed on an annual basis once car is no longer 'new'.
It really is a very basic safety test and your car should be able to pass it on any day without prep.

It is the bare minimum of safety requirement.
This in fact its shockingly low standard i.e one line above scrap yard level. A tyre can be bold on both edges no tread at all but as long as the 3 main tread groves or 3/4 of the tread has 1.6mm of tread its a pass you can even have chunks missing out of the side wall but if no cords are showing is a pass.

Wills2

22,669 posts

174 months

Tuesday 12th May 2020
quotequote all
unsprung said:
Now that coronavirus has invited us to question things about our lives...

What do people think about the value of the MOT in general? (given that contemporary new cars are, in historical terms, exceptionally well engineered / safe / reliable)

What would people say, for example, to a revised MOT scheme that would see no MOT required for the first five years of ownership. Afterwards, only biennially. So: an MOT in years 6, 8, 10, 12, and so on.
It's a stretch to shoe horn the MOT into the ramifications of CV-19 but well done for trying....quite bizarre!



LukeyP_

400 posts

53 months

Tuesday 26th May 2020
quotequote all
So our family car was due it's 1st MOT on Sunday coming, got it's 6 month extension as promised.

Now I realised, if you don't have an MOT already - you get a stupid history stamp like the below (OCD annoyance lol)



Compare that against my Dad's car which is already a few years old and was due MOT on 19th May, just got extension