Car failed MOT

[Arbs]

My MX5 track car has just failed its mot. It failed on the passenger seat and seat belt missing. I have removed all the interior and seat and seatbelt completely. I always thought that if it wasn't there it couldn't be tested? Is this correct?

[Dr Interceptor]

It's a 2 seater... therefore it should have two seats and three point belts on both.

[Toaster Pilot]

Odd - I didn't know it would fail in this circumstance either.

[sebhaque]

Wasn't this changed as part of March 2013's MOT shake-up?

In fact, this document sounds like it covers belts. Specifically:

DVLA said:

SRS components including airbags, seat belt pre-tensioners, seat belt load limiters and SRS malfunction warning lamp

I think the mentality to use now is that if it was fitted at manufacture, it needs to work.

[Dr Interceptor]

Well, now I've read the MOT testing manual, I think you're in a grey area.

Basically the MOT tester has to interpret the rule, and apply it as he see's fit, and can justify if he gets hauled up on it.

You can read the manual here: http://www.transportoffice.gov.uk/crt/doitonline/b...

Now it does say that the seat and seat belt must be inspected for front driver and passenger seats, and then for every other seat fitted. If they're not present, what does he do, fail it or ignore it?

I'd call VOSA directly and ask them how you stand.

[mcford]

It shouldn't have failed on the missing seat belt as there was no seat for it. The tester should follow the flow charts as to the seat belt requirements which state that the specified front passenger seat should have a 3 point belt, as there's no specified front passenger seat, there's no requirement for a belt.

If the car left the factory with a SRS system including seat belt pretensioners, the car should have failed on a missing seat belt pretensioner that was fitted as standard, however upon querying it with the VOSA help desk and the fact that it's a proper track car, it may be permitted to advise it.

[jagracer]

I test to what is there, or not there, if there is no seat then you don't need a seat belt and as for all the SRS ETC. stuff read section 5 here http://www.motinfo.gov.uk/htdocs/m4i00000502.htm

[Athlon]

jagracer said:

I test to what is there, or not there, if there is no seat then you don't need a seat belt and as for all the SRS ETC. stuff read section 5 here http://www.motinfo.gov.uk/htdocs/m4i00000502.htm

Agreed, I test several rally cars and track day cars and work to this.

[lexusboy]

Also if it's a track car then it is classed as modified so it comes under a slightly different set of rules.

I personally would've passed it

[Buff Mchugelarge]

Common sense.
A thing of the past, or are VOSA so wrapped up in red tape they cannot fathom it themselves and will come down with an iron hammer on any tester who dares to?

[Who me ?]

Certain garages make me think so. I've had advisories for "WORN" front disks, that tester had no powers to access to measure, and which came well within makers specs. I've also had an advisory "rear heatshield on exhaust box corroded " .The "heatshield " turned out to be the second skin of a VAG back box. With reports as such, can we expect this sort of garage not to be seen as looking to perhaps profit from their lack of expertise.

[MG CHRIS]

Go back to the station and tell them to pass it as it isn't a fail. If it hasn't got a seat it cant be failed. There is a section for exemptions and a track car comes under it.