Bizzare MOT Fail Reason
Discussion
So I had my car MOT'd on Friday - just a week after having a full pre-mot service & vehicle check.
The car was failed for the following reason 'Oil leaking onto exhaust. In my opinion the vehicle is dangerous to drive'.
So the car was taken back to where it was serviced the week before, the exhaust system was thoroughly checked by the garage (whom I trust with my car & have done for over 10 years) & they were unable to find any oil on the exhaust system.
The garage were also unable to find any oil leaks anywhere on the car & I have found no trace of an oil leak on the slabs where the parked is parked during the day.
To be on the safe side the whole of the exhaust system & underside of the car was steam cleaned before it was re-tested.
The car was taken back to the MOT test centre where it was tested by another tester who passed the car straight away!
He was asked about the earlier failure & he was mystified by the reason for failure.
I called the test centre yesterday & spoke to the tester regarding his initial failure of the car.
His response? 'I test dozens of cars ever week & I cannot recall every reason for failure & I cannot recall failing your car!!!'
So my car was failed for some spurious reason, it cost me £30.00 in labour charges for the so called 'oil leak' to be located & it was passed without any problems a couple of hours later.
Not much I can do but just a little bit irritated.
Anyone else had any bizarre reasons given for an MOT failure?
The car was failed for the following reason 'Oil leaking onto exhaust. In my opinion the vehicle is dangerous to drive'.
So the car was taken back to where it was serviced the week before, the exhaust system was thoroughly checked by the garage (whom I trust with my car & have done for over 10 years) & they were unable to find any oil on the exhaust system.
The garage were also unable to find any oil leaks anywhere on the car & I have found no trace of an oil leak on the slabs where the parked is parked during the day.
To be on the safe side the whole of the exhaust system & underside of the car was steam cleaned before it was re-tested.
The car was taken back to the MOT test centre where it was tested by another tester who passed the car straight away!
He was asked about the earlier failure & he was mystified by the reason for failure.
I called the test centre yesterday & spoke to the tester regarding his initial failure of the car.
His response? 'I test dozens of cars ever week & I cannot recall every reason for failure & I cannot recall failing your car!!!'
So my car was failed for some spurious reason, it cost me £30.00 in labour charges for the so called 'oil leak' to be located & it was passed without any problems a couple of hours later.
Not much I can do but just a little bit irritated.
Anyone else had any bizarre reasons given for an MOT failure?
My Dad's Romahome camper van, based on a Citroen Visa was failed at one place because the fuel filler pipe had been extended. Obviously this is to reach the new, wider body. We were pretty much mystified. It was 10 years old and Dad'd had it for 3-4 years so we didn't really know what to do. It wasn't leaking. This was just as computerised tests came in and we were worried the failure would be automatic at another place.
Took to our next preferred place and they passed it with no mention or even any advises.
Very strange.
Took to our next preferred place and they passed it with no mention or even any advises.
Very strange.
fatboy69 said:
Anyone else had any bizarre reasons given for an MOT failure?
MOT test centres have to make crap up to ensure that they are seen by VOSA to be making these checks (I was even told this by an MOT inspector). There was nothing wrong with your car.My car had an advisory because the front drivers side side indicator wasn't orange enough. Strangely enough, the following year it had become acceptable. I've also had other spurious things turn up on the certificate.
margerison said:
I think I would have been tempted to take it back to the test centre and get the tester to point out the leak before I had it steam cleaned.
I wasn't with the car - I was at work & I left it with the garage as I always do - & the driver didn't think at the time to ask where the leak was. He took it back to the garage to be checked over.Few years ago I dropped my car off for an MOT at a garage before work, and picked it up that evening. I had accidentally left the satnav mount sucker on my windscreen, and the tester failed it as the "driver's view was obstructed". Which meant I had to bring it back the next day for a retest (which was free, but it was a big inconvenience). Most testers would have used common sense, taken the sucker off the screen and issued a pass.
Also had my car failed due to sidelights being "too blue" when they were in fact white LEDs (ironically my headlights had a blueish tinge to them, but it seems they were ok!)
And I've had a car that failed (correctly) due to a small rust hole... but the tester wrote on the failure sheet "excessive croshion (sic) within 30cm of suspension mount". You'd think an MOT tester would be able to spell "corrosion", something that is a common cause of MOT failure...
Also had my car failed due to sidelights being "too blue" when they were in fact white LEDs (ironically my headlights had a blueish tinge to them, but it seems they were ok!)
And I've had a car that failed (correctly) due to a small rust hole... but the tester wrote on the failure sheet "excessive croshion (sic) within 30cm of suspension mount". You'd think an MOT tester would be able to spell "corrosion", something that is a common cause of MOT failure...
DubZeus said:
MJK 24 said:
Got a fail for the tax did being top left of the screen and not bottom left. It was a Mini and top left was outside the swept area of the wipers!
I had that on my old Polo, plus I had a £30 fine from a pedantic traffic warden for same thing on the same day.It would be interesting to know which part of the MOT manual was used to fail the OPs car, as I can't see anything relating to oil on exhausts. There is an advisory for an oil leak, for which the dangerous box can be ticked - still wouldn't generate a fail though.
If people are stupid enough to bring cars in for test with things stuck in the drivers view, have empty washer bottles and non working or wrong coloured lights, I'll fail them each and every time. I also won't lay myself open to claims of damaging the windscreen or whatever was stuck to it by attempting to remove it so that it can pass the test.
Athlon said:
What quota?
Exactly, I'm not aware of any quota system, though I do fail 40 to 50% of what I test.If people are stupid enough to bring cars in for test with things stuck in the drivers view, have empty washer bottles and non working or wrong coloured lights, I'll fail them each and every time. I also won't lay myself open to claims of damaging the windscreen or whatever was stuck to it by attempting to remove it so that it can pass the test.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff