MOT Passed with no Advisories. Do Have a Question Though

steamship · #1 14th April 2018, 11:32 AM

So after changing the brake fluid myself the other day, with help from those here, I took the car for the MOT two days ago. It passed with no Advisories at all, so must have done the brakes properly, but I have a question.

It wasn't until much later in the evening/night that I realised that the tester did not follow procedure and test everything that he should have. Now he was a decent enough bloke and asked about the car, and I had no reason to complain about him, but I'm of the opinion that I should raise a complaint.

Now I suspect that there may be those out there that might say I was lucky that he didn't check everything, but that's not the point. I'd rather find out that my front wheel is about to fall off and have the car fail the MOT, than find out about it the hard way.

I don't know the MOT procedure in the rest of the UK, but in NI, it's all done by a government body, and is split into three sections in the building. The first section deals with visual checks of parts around the car, inside and out, the second section deals with brake and suspension effectiveness and the last is a visual inspection underneath the car. That's broadly speaking.

Everything that the tester missed was in the first section (while I was in the car). He never checked the ESP/ABS and traction control, wipers, windscreen washers, windscreen, horn, spare wheel or seat belts. The majority of these I check myself anyway, except the seat belts (I never have), so I know they're working. I hate it if the car fails the MOT because a single brake light or single indicator didn't work on the day (like last year with my nephews Defender), but set belts are a different kettle of fish. I could get into 'what ifs', and of course the MOT is only a 'snapshot' in time, but it is a concern.

So, what say you?

tintin · #2 14th April 2018, 12:13 PM

Sounds like your more conscientious than the test centre, so I'd leave it. Seat beats are highly unlikely to be faulty, but maybe I'm a bit more of a risk taker than some on here...

tc4332 · #3 14th April 2018, 12:49 PM

Well done Sean on the bleeding brake job. Sorry, it was the Leprechaun that made me mix the words up.

I lean towards Steve's (Tintin) reasoning.
You do your daily checks very well and you know as well as if not better than any tester when your front wheel is about to fall off.
Basically, not worth the paper work, unless you are the tester tester

Many years ago, about 1959, I was rushing to catch a ferry of Dover. Travelling from Folkestone down Dover Hill my rear nearside wheel came adrift but stayed within the wheel arch. I'd had the tyre repaired the day before. Luckily the wheel nuts stayed in the hub cap and no damage done. Refitted the wheel and continued on my way to Germany.
Made a memo to self, always check other peoples work.

47p2 · #4 14th April 2018, 09:09 PM

Seatbelt check is simple to do if you're concerned. 1st... Pull the belt out as far as it will extend, visually check the condition of the webbing for wear and cuts and then retract. 2nd... Pull out again and this time with a fast short sharp tug the belt should not be able to be pulled out, it should stop dead and the belt holds steady. 3rd... put seatbelt buckle into holder and ensure it holds and unclips properly

Job jobbed

steamship · #5 15th April 2018, 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 47p2

Seatbelt check is simple to do if you're concerned.

Not concerned about testing the seatbelt, more the fact that these people are employed to check these things and he didn't bother. Suppose there was a fault with the locking mechanism and the car was involved in a head on smash. Can't really just say 'whoops' to a grieving parent!

Ameiseuk · #6 15th April 2018, 06:30 AM

I would agree with the comments on here - an MOT (whether is is the govt based system we have here in NI or a local garage in the UK) is a snapshot of a vehicles road-worthiness at that minute in time.
It is done by one person. That person may not remember all his/her training, may not remember everything that has to be done etc. May be under pressure if the last MOT took to long etc etc.

I've put countless cars/vans/trucks through an MOT/PSV over here and I've noticed that sometimes one or two items will be missed. Not checked horn on one test, could be fog lights on the next.

Generally though everything is covered and you have paperwork to prove it's road worthiness.

At it's last MOT the examiner picked up on a knackered bush which was causing shudder in the S8 at 70mph.
Tyre garage and mechanic were both convinced it was a buckled rim - eagle eyed examiner found a split bush and yet another bodged job by the previous garage.

For this I do have to thank Mallusk MOT centre

steamship · #7 15th April 2018, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ameiseuk

For this I do have to thank Mallusk MOT centre

Exactly. Somewhere around 2000, I had an A4 Avant. Bought it new and had it serviced religiously by Audi. It went in for a big service with a £1,200 price tag. Can't remember what, but the subframe was removed. Just over a week later it went for the MOT and failed, because of the four bolts required to hold the subframe in place, there was only two. I was annoyed that the car failed, but even more annoyed with Audi. Had the service been carried out after the MOT, I could potentially have been driving the car for a year like that, or until something happened.

I just think it's my civic duty to at least inform the manager of the MOT centre of what happened, if not necessarily filing an 'official complaint' against him.

Djinny · #8 15th April 2018, 12:39 PM

If it really annoys you you could still address the examiner directly without involving the MOT station. That ought to be commensurate.

Official complaints have the potential to harm the material existence of that examiner and you don't want that, do you? Just for not having a proper look at a car which looked well maintained?

MikkiJayne · #9 15th April 2018, 01:49 PM

Well maintained is probably the key ^. In my experience if a car is presented well (clean and tidy) and has obviously been looked after then the examiner is less inclined to pick it apart and the test goes quite quickly. On the other hand, if you turn up in a rotten filthy farm truck then they will go through it minute detail.

steamship · #10 15th April 2018, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Djinny

If it really annoys you you could still address the examiner directly without involving the MOT station. That ought to be commensurate.

Official complaints have the potential to harm the material existence of that examiner and you don't want that, do you? Just for not having a proper look at a car which looked well maintained?

Strangely enough Vera, I never actually thought of speaking to the tester directly. Probably because it's a government body tied up with red tape, and might be seen as a 'no-no'. I've already decided against the formal 'complaint' procedure, for the reasons you mention.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikkiJayne

Well maintained is probably the key ^. In my experience if a car is presented well (clean and tidy) and has obviously been looked after then the examiner is less inclined to pick it apart and the test goes quite quickly. On the other hand, if you turn up in a rotten filthy farm truck then they will go through it minute detail.

Ironically, the car wasn't clean and tidy, but that's all down to health issues. Clean, but not Audi A8 clean!

As as aside, my brother (a bricklayer) has an old Toyota Avensis and an old Toyota Hiace van. Both have over 250,000 miles and wouldn't look out of place in a scrapyard, but somehow they have never failed a MOT. Can't fathom how that works out.