Daft question - I feel silly asking.

[cobra kid]

A chap at work asked me if it's the law that you have to carry a spare wheel/foam. Is it the case??

[sparkyhx]

nope

[Dr Interceptor]

Nope...

[cj2013]

For MOT purposes, if you have a spare then it is testable and thus needs to have legal levels of tread present.

There's no need to have spare wheels or foam for MOTs or otherwise; case in point would be the BMW produced MINI - run flats as standard with no alternative foams or spare (available as options, though). There's no testable or legal requirement for the car to have run flats either.

Thought I'd add a bit more than just 'no'

[BoRED S2upid]

If your going to France I had a can of tyre foam rattling around in the boot of the mx5 for years after a European trip.

[cobra kid]

BoRED S2upid said:

If your going to France I had a can of tyre foam rattling around in the boot of the mx5 for years after a European trip.

He bought a scrapper that he restored. It came without one and was just wondering. Cheers all!

[Howard-]

cj2013 said:

For MOT purposes, if you have a spare then it is testable and thus needs to have legal levels of tread present.

This is incorrect. The spare wheel is not part of the MOT test. There's no real reason for the tester to even look in the boot.

[Spangles]

Howard- said:

cj2013 said:

For MOT purposes, if you have a spare then it is testable and thus needs to have legal levels of tread present.

This is incorrect. The spare wheel is not part of the MOT test. There's no real reason for the tester to even look in the boot.

Suspension mounts. But you're correct about the spare wheel.

[Howard-]

Spangles said:

Suspension mounts

I doubt that, since in most cars you'd need to dismantle/remove a lot of boot trim and carpet in order to access them internally. These things are usually checked for excess wear and movement externally.

[ging84]

cj2013 said:

For MOT purposes, if you have a spare then it is testable and thus needs to have legal levels of tread present.

There's no need to have spare wheels or foam for MOTs or otherwise; case in point would be the BMW produced MINI - run flats as standard with no alternative foams or spare (available as options, though). There's no testable or legal requirement for the car to have run flats either.

Thought I'd add a bit more than just 'no'

This is another motoring myth
the MOT test the road wheels only, if a spare wheels is present and it is is noticed that it is defective than it should be noted as an advisory, but it is not an item which needs to be checked and should never be a cause to fail.

[cj2013]

ging84 said:

This is another motoring myth
the MOT test the road wheels only, if a spare wheels is present and it is is noticed that it is defective than it should be noted as an advisory, but it is not an item which needs to be checked and should never be a cause to fail.

Fair enough.

I did have one fail a few years back, so I just removed it from the boot.

Of course there's no standard for MOT testers in reality; some are fussy and seem to add in custom 'fail' reasons that perhaps don't exist in reality.

Funniest advisory I saw was from KwikFit on a 10 year old Corsa: 'Chassis Corroding'.

[Howard-]

cj2013 said:

Fair enough.

I did have one fail a few years back

..


some are fussy and seem to add in custom 'fail' reasons that perhaps don't exist in reality.

You need to report these testers to VOSA if you believe the failures to be unjust.

[cj2013]

Howard- said:

You need to report these testers to VOSA if you believe the failures to be unjust.

Going back probably 5 or 6 years ago now.

Had a run in with KwikFit, mind.

The one on the Corsa; my brother in law had taken the car for an MOT on his lunch break (12:30) and drive literally around the corner for the MOT. The car failed on emissions and they told him he had to buy a cat and various other things from them. I had a look at the emissions test and it was timestamped 12:34.

I rang and complained on his behalf (he was being soft) and explained that a maximum of 4 mins (more likely less than 2) wasn't sufficient to test the Cat/Emissions of the car and it ended with their 'area manager' ringing me up and handing out abuse. He asked why it would be in the tech's interest to make it fail the test, to which point I pointed out their 'bonus' culture. He denied their techs get bonuses, despite me looking at one of their job descriptions at the time explaining a bonus structure. He hung up on me.

Took it to another testing station myself and it passed emissions easily. I didn't report the whole thing as I thought at the time it was pretty common knowledge as to what those types of franchise are like.


Sorry for going a little O/T!

[PositronicRay]

cj2013 said:

Of course there's no standard for MOT testers in reality; some are fussy and seem to add in custom 'fail' reasons that perhaps don't exist in reality.

made my day

[Sheepshanks]

There's a £50 surcharge if you have a flat in one of the Mersey Tunnels and don't have a spare tyre. Not sure that's ever been updated for squirty foam equipped cars.

[cj2013]

PositronicRay said:

made my day

Not sure if you meant that in a derogatory way, but the intent was that there is an MOT Standard that testers are supposed to inspect to, but there's no standard for the actual MOT tester.

Can be easily seen from place to place, as a lot is based on judgement and one man's fail is another's pass.