What An MOT Experience Today...

John, unless you're deliberatly baiting these tossers I should just ignore them! They really have no clue.

If you're winding them up for your own amusement then carry on and enjoy!

Danny, after having read so many posts from these guys, I agree with you they don't have any clue. They add little or nothing in relation to constructive comments which was the intention of the OP.

John

I DID ASK THE RIGHT QUESTION

For a very good reason. If the station was using computerisation then the Fail/Pass verdict on the brake efficiency is done by the VOSA computer. The tester just fills in the figures he obtained at the roller brake tester. The VOSA computer knows the weight and does the calculations. It decides on pass or fail.

Could you explain where you think the problem lies?

Do you think your car's emissions are that high? Do you think the MOT station's testing machine was knackered? Do you think the MOT test was incorrectly done? Do you think the emissions should not be part of the MOT test and thus the MOT tester should ignore them?

What will you do if your next MOT garage also reports high CO?

clive

John ( snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

John - a simple question for you...

You don't like the way this guy tested your car originally. You don't like the fact you got a fail. You've not done any work to it since. You recognise that you'll have to pay a full retest fee.

You think this guy is a "rip-off merchant" who's just after your money for repairs.

So why try to hand him another 44quid? Why not just take it *elsewhere*?

"Clive George"

Hope this goes some way to answering your questions Clive. I pointed out to the tester that the vehicle had remained in the car park for approximately 5 minutes with the engine switched off and also idling on the MOT inspection pit for approximately 10 minutes before the young girl carried out the first exhaust emissions test. I had taken the vehicle to the testing station at a time it had been requested. It is my opinion, in the time it remained switched off on the car park and then at idle on the inspection pit, the vehicle engine and exhaust system had cooled significantly from that temperature it would have normally been driven on the road. The tester commented incorrectly, that the engine oil temperature is only the requirement he has to follow prior to testing.

John

And the other requirements, prior to doing a petrol emission test, are what?

I think he realises that if he takes the car for a good run before the test it will sail through without and adjustment.

Perhaps you did not realise this is the commonest and most successful solution to the problem of failed emmisions!

John ( snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

And?

As I said - mine went in for MOT yesterday.

From cold, I drove it 10 miles to my mate's garage. It sat there for

Then it went up the road to the test centre - less than a mile.

The emissions printout is timed about 40mins after that.

The remaining range on the trip computer had barely changed - I know, because it was getting low - so it hadn't been left idling for very long, nor had it been driven far.

The CO reading was one fifth of yours - 0.1%, against your damn near 0.5%.

So what else do YOU think applies?

John wrote on Tue, 20 Sep 2005 13:14:06 GMT:

What constructive comments do you want?

Fix the car (yourself, at the original garage, or anywhere else), THEN get a re-test.

Or, get a re-test SOMEWHERE ELSE, to get a second opinion.

Taking the car back to the same garage unchanged will NOT get the result you presumably desire.

David Taylor ( snipped-for-privacy@yadt.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

For his car, the limit was a lot higher than for mine, too - mine specified .2% CO, his .3% - which he missed by a country mile.

John wrote on Tue, 20 Sep 2005 12:50:27 GMT:

How do you expect your car to pass the emissions test?

It's not like it was even a small fail that'd go away if you warmed it up properly, it was 60% over the limit!

John wrote on Tue, 20 Sep 2005 11:29:59 GMT:

Yes. Legally, it does. And you haven't got a leg to stand on.

John wrote on Tue, 20 Sep 2005 12:32:46 GMT:

You saved f*ck all. If it was up to you, you'd have donated another

This same garage saved you 44 quid by refusing to repeat the emissions test when you'd done nothing to improve the significantly too high CO figure.

As for "the odds", either your car has legal emissions, or not.

I think it highly unlikely that the garage performed the emissions test incorrectly, but there is always that chance.

In any event, wouldn't you rather get a second opinion from a different garage??

John wrote on Tue, 20 Sep 2005 12:59:23 GMT:

You might.

Everyone else goes in order to have their car tested to the necessary standard. Then IF it passes, they get the statuatory test certificate.

Your car failed -- you don't get the certificate.

If you have a problem with that, appeal to VOSA -- they have the authority to deal with it. We can only commiserate with or ridicule you, based on your posts.

How do you know? Have you tested it on a roller brake tester?

Sure.

If you can prove that your car IS indeed worthy of an MOT certificate in its current state, I will withdraw everything I have said, and apologise to you. I seriously doubt it is.

If he wanted to fail you on something, he'd fail you on something that involves the tester's opinion (and is more serious than a 10p bulb).

Trying to rip you off by failing you on machine/computer tested items would be idiotic.

"David Taylor"

David,

Evidence it may be, but evidence such as that that can be contested. Regulation 46(b) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 allows scope for the designated council to make provision under regulation 45 as to, conditions under which and apparatus with which examinations are carried out during statutory (MOT) testing. If those standards are not maintained by the testing station, then that testing station stands little chance of providing any suitable defence that will assist them in a court of law. In that respect David, I do still have both legs to stand on.

John

John wrote on Tue, 20 Sep 2005 14:34:46 GMT:

Your vehicle has failed its MOT test, this is indisputable. So the vehicle _is_ unroadworthy (in that it is not legally allowed to drive on the road until it passes).

The testing station have evidence to show that it was unable to meet the required emissions standard.

What evidence do YOU have to show that the vehicle IS able to meet the required emissions standard, and so the test result is incorrect?

The message from Jimmy contains these words:

I'm starting to smell a troll. It doesn't seem likely that a real person would fail to see that however poorly the procedures were adhered to the outcome of the test item wasn't in question and that the fail was justified.

The message from "John" contains these words:

They are - it's the recording of the items on the test schedule which is computerised.