Ferfuxxake, they can't even bodge things properly

The RX-7 convertible just "virtually"[1] failed its MOT because the bodyshop couldn't even bodge the sill repair within the MOT guidelines, let alone repair it in the quality I wanted.

Anybody know what the deal is with driving a car that failed its MOT with the express purpose of getting it to someone to repair it properly? It's going to be some distance (100+ miles) so transporting it would cost a bit...

[1] I pointed the repair out to the tester and asked him to look at it, which he did before starting the test. He was kind enough to point out that it's a surefire fail and hence didn't charge me anything. Top marks.
Reply to
Timo Geusch
Loading thread data ...

You abused the first bodyshop yet?

Reply to
Doki

Not yet, they're closed on weekends.

They'll get plenty of abuse on Monday, trust me.

Reply to
Timo Geusch

"Timo Geusch" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@nermal.unix-consult.com:

Timo, you might be better pointing this at uk.rec.cars.maintenance, there's a couple of mot peeps on there I believe. I think you can drive it with the express condition of an MOT repair, and then from there to the testing station, but I wouldn't be 100% sure.

Reply to
Tunku

Depending on how much work you want doing to it.... is it just the sill, or are there other things that need doing.... the bloke doing my 75 is supposedly good and he's certainly cheap. His normal speciality is s**te old Jap motors, too.

He's near Shrewsbury, though, but he will collect for 50p / mile one-way.

Reply to
SteveH

I don't care about cheap as this car is a keeper - the point is that I want it sorted out *properly* whereas the (recommended) bodyshop couldn't even *bodge* it properly.

It'll likely go either to where Owen works or Beav's shop. Once I figure out how to get it there, that is.

Reply to
Timo Geusch

Thanks Tunku, that's a jolly good idea.

Could someone in the assembled multitude of ukrcm(s) comment on the legality of this?

Reply to
Timo Geusch

you can drive to an mot testing station for a pre-arranged test & that has to be within a reasonable distance, but you have to have the test time, date, car reg & your name logged with the testing station. but as for driving 100 miles+ for repairs, theres no deal, you cant, you would be driving illegaly without an mot certificate, your vehicle insurance would become void.

Reply to
kronenburgh

Depends where you got stopped. 10 miles away you might be OK, 90 miles away you wouldn't.

John

Reply to
John Greystrong

"Timo Geusch" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@nermal.unix-consult.com:

Lets wait for tomorrow.

Reply to
Tunku

Yeah..you can't.

You're gonna have to.

Reply to
Conor

One of my customers got away with this. He was bringing his car to me for MoT as necessary, he lives 80 miles away. He was stopped and a prosecution for no MoT started. At court, pre trial he produced a letter from me, in it I stated that I had carried out all his car repairs for the last 20 years and that he used to live near me (he did) and that he trusted no-one else to do his work, and that was why he was not going to a more local repairer when he was stopped. The prosecution was dropped, but not before everyone was at court, what a waste of time.

I also understand that if you can show that the nearest specialist in your model is a long way off there is a similar get out.

Mrcheerful

Reply to
MrCheerful

I guess it's dependent on how seriously the car failed the MOT though. Mind you, that'd come under the "car is too dangerous to drive away" box that they tick if need be, thinking about it.

Reply to
AstraVanMan

How many Insurance Policies prohibit the use of a car without MOT? The usual line in Insurance Policies is that 'the car must be roadworthy'. If it was the case you suggest, then a car without MOT would not be able to go on the road under its own power to attend a pre-arranged MOT. Yes, there may be odd Ins. Cos. showing such wording, but I have never seen such clauses, and in many Usenet discussions, no proof has been given - a few have come on and said theirs does have it, but no scans of the document have been forthcoming. Alan.

Reply to
A.Lee

& it would then have been in contravention of the policy before it failed the MOT.
Reply to
Duncan Wood

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

In which case you'd be stuffed for driving an unroadworthy vehicle even if the car HAD a valid MOT.

Reply to
Adrian

Just chance it, you're incredibly unlikely to get caught if you're not speeding these days anyway.

Reply to
Iridium

Unless you drive past a VOSA van.... with a couple of fully liveried T5s in the next layby.

They've been really hot on tax and MOTs around here recently.

Reply to
SteveH

One of those would have been me.

And nobody ever asked for scans... but since you have now, here you go:

formatting link
"This Contract of Motor Insurance does not cover claims arising from:

  1. Any accident, injury, loss or damage that happens while the Insured Car is being:

  • Kept or used in an unsafe or unroadworthy condition

  • Kept or used without a current Department of Transport Test (MoT) certificate if one is needed."

So, if you were driving within the law but without an MOT, i.e. to a prebooked test, you're covered. Driving to a repair place or anywhere else when you legally need an MOT but don't have one, you can add driving uninsured to the list of charges.

That was from the Highway Insurance 'Highway Choice Private Car' Policy document, which is a pretty common policy offered by many underwriters.

Feel free to ask for more proof if you need it...

Reply to
PC Paul

It's bodywork so theoretically could just go to a local bodyshop. Well, I did and now I need to get the car to a _decent_ bodyshop instead.

I won't chance it, I got a reasonable quote for transporting it to my preferred bodyshop (still a fuckload of money, but hey...) so on the back of a flatbed it goes.

Reply to
Timo Geusch

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.