Aren't MOT's amazing

Try the Middle East, friend of mine had a 110 stage 1 and the MOT was more involved with it's looks than any mechanics. Dirty car fails !!

Blimey, holes would give them apoplexy.

Ah yes... It's only reminding you that you shouldn't take your eye off the ball, Larry!

As far as I'm concerned, the MOT is a mere trivial indication (scuze pun) of a vehicle meeting the barest of safety standards. I know I'll not make any friends by saying it's a totally inadequate way of judging a safe vehicle and in some ways, it encourages a false sense of security.

Still, an earthing problem isn't going to kill you (often) :-)

Unless you get struck by lightening!!!

Nifge

I'm so glad someone actually see's it like that! As a tester myself I'm constantly irritated by the crap I have to pass, I know even though I advise items 95% of people will not have the faults rectified! The MOT should be a trivial matter if you keep your car in any sort of reasonable condition. Roll on stricter testing... sooner or later it will be here!

Dunno how you would test a typical series landies electrics, they are prone to all kinds of trouble which is why I always carry spare wire and connectors. In this case it was the indicator lamp on the side that got hit by the joyriders. It was never in the best of condition, I intend to replace the whole lamp when I get round to it.

-- Larry Series 3 rust and holes

Too right, after buying Monty the RRC I decided to take it to a very well known LR specialist rather than a 'normal' car type effort. It failed as I knew it would, but I need to know the absolute base area to start the rebuild. MOT's are a joke as you can pass any old rust heap that could fall apart on impact or fail a virtually new car for a small technicality. I needed to know what I had bought for my own piece of mind & a 12 month ticket on someone else's car just does not inspire me with any kind of confidence. I would rather buy without or close to the limit for the basic safety issues, but my RRC will have miles more done to it to make it safer for me & other road users.

The main thing for me is, why do they allow bullbars for road use??? On the other hand they will gladly fail your car for a sharp bit of rusty metal? It's a very poor system for testing vehicles, but it is a starting point!

I can see it getting more stringent, but mainly in the emissions area, which is gonna hurt a good few folk on here!

Nige

In message , Mother writes

I can only assume you are too young to remember the state of some cars on the roads b4 the MOT was introduced.

It is interesting to note that the state I live in has annual testing - the adjoining state does not, but has generally lower accident statistics than this state (probably explained by the higher population density means better roads). But the annual test would seem to have very little influence on safety. (emissions may well be another story)

There are two reasons for this - in the first place, only a very small proportion of accidents are contributed to by vehicle condition, and - in most of these cases the problem is either one that will not be detected by a typical annual test, or more commonly, the problem is one that cannot be expected to stay fixed for a year.

On this last point, a survey of roadworthiness of cars at random was carried out several years ago in a supermarket car park. From memory about half the cars involved failed, and of these about 90% were failed on tyres, and most of these were either underinflation or cuts to the tyre.

This is supported by the suggestion that in most accidents where vehicle defects are identified, the defect is tyres. JD

You expect the MoT tester to have checked and cleaned up all the earthing points for you?

Steve. Suffolk. remove 'knujon' to e-mail

No but It just goes to show that the MOT is only a test of roadworthiness at the time of testing and should not be relied upon for 12 months of "my car's OK it's got a MOT certificate"

Andy

I've had people bring their cars in for test with brand new shiny tyres on two days later I've seen the cars parked up with bald tyres when I questioned the one youth he said he borrowed the wheels and tyres from his mate just to get it through the test

Andy

IIRC it was a Mitsubishi Shogun, you are of course right that if you hit anyone in anything at speed it's instant death. But, the bars would make a real mess of a kids head at even low speeds, a flat front might not be quite as bad.

Crikey, I'm sure it would!

Nope.

I think a sensible test would warn you or any impending problems, like if your tread were close to the limit or your brakes only had a few hundred miles left in them.

-- Larry Series 3 rust and holes

Absolutely

Steve. Suffolk. remove 'knujon' to e-mail

Some testers are happy to issue an advisory of that sort. However in the end it is up to the owner / user of the vehicle to ensure that it is roadworthy at all times.

Steve. Suffolk. remove 'knujon' to e-mail

The UK mainland still uses private garages who do the repairs first and then issue a pass cert.... isn't that at least close to right?

In Northern Ireland we have Govt run testing centres. No negociation, no warning, just a list of things to fix if it fails.

No incentive for the tester to fail you so thay can sell you the parts, or to pass you coshe's done a shoddy job!!

IME they do. Last MOT I had I was advised that rear discs were low, and also that exhaust tail pipe was split, but because it was behind rear box was not a failure. Subsequently I've dealt with both, at my leisure.

Hugh

In message , Larry writes