Cracked Tyre Wall

From the OP:

"I'd rather not have to jack up the heavy VW LT35 if I don't have to."

Chris

Ah right. Ta for the reminder.

On the back of the VT30 Refusal of an MOT Test Certificate

1. It is generally an offence to use on a public road, a vehicle of testable age that does not have a current test certificate, except when

- Taking it to a test station for a test BOOKED IN ADVANCE

- Bringing it away from a test station after it has failed the test, to a place of repair

-Taking it to or bringing it away from a place where by PREVIOUS ARRANGEMENT repairs are to be, or have been, made to remedy the defects for which the vehicle was failed.

Even in the above circumstances you may still be prosecuted for driving an unroadworthy vehicle if it does not comply with various Regulations affecting it's construction and use. Additionally the insurance may not be valid [/quote]

The tester has the right to put a prohibition order on a car which means it cannot leave the test centre, or at least cannot be driven away from the centre if they believe it is so dangerous. So if they haven't done that then driving to get tyres, ball-joints or whatever is allowed.

Alan Smith gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

I haven't seen many of those...

Yep.

Yep. Directly to.

So after the fail, taking directly. Fair enough.

Yes, but...

No. I've seen cars fail on illegally bald tyres and not be flagged as dangerous, f'rexample. Are you suggesting that means that if it's tugged two miles down the road on the way to Kwik-Fit, they won't prosecute for bald tyres? I doubt it... There's a lot of "unroadworthy" failures which wouldn't get flagged as dangerous.

Can you point to the relevant legislation to back this up?

I just loved this bit.....

Note: It cannot be assumed that there is a difference in the nominal sizes of tyres because either twin wheel is not in contact with the ground.

Steve

there isnt any, MOT tester's cannot issue prohibition notices only VOSA or the police can. we can issue a dangerous notice for an item via the vt30 or vt32 but the customer can still drive the vehicle away from the test station.

That was what I understood.

That hasn't always been the case though. At one point in time, testing stations could prevent the vehicle from being driven away.

Chris

I was also under that impression but will stand corrected. I had been told by somebody who had a car with a plastic petrol tank, the exhaust had been pushed up onto the tank & had melted. This was allowing petrol onto the exhaust, he claimed he took it for MOT & they refused to allow him to drive it away. I was always sceptical as I saw the car the day before & there was no petrol smell.

You didn't comment on the insurance bit. I have had an insurance policy that required the car to be roadworthy *and* required it to hold a current MOT certificate. Just because it may be legal to drive it to an MOT or place of repair doesn't necessarily mean your insurance will cover you to do it. Most policies probably do, and if you are getting it done before the old MOT runs out you're still OK, but there is that window of opportunity for untold pain.

I've been stung by insurance small print before. I watch out for it now, call it a pet peeve...