MOT advisory, not on the Supra....

[goldenvtr]

It is to cover the tester from the general public who dont maintain there cars & think the MOT is as good as proper servicing, ie a rotted brake pipe covered by a undertray splits & the driver has a accident. sues the tester/garage. The mot is very basic check, some of which has no relavance to safety. But untill they let the tester's take parts off to have a proper look?? what can you do? That would put the cost up & the general public would not like that.

 

 

nail on the head, so many people i deal with at work think oh its passed i'm good for another year, and ill get the advisories done when something breaks of fails rather than prevent it.

i can appreciate cars are expensive to maintain especially as they age but to the non enthusiast who see it as a means of transport are just too nieve to how to maintain a car properly.

 

 

i fully back my tester with his advisories as it covers his licence aswell as my job if shit goes wrong due to neglect,

[Scott]

It is to cover the tester from the general public who dont maintain there cars & think the MOT is as good as proper servicing, ie a rotted brake pipe covered by a undertray splits & the driver has a accident. sues the tester/garage. The mot is very basic check, some of which has no relavance to safety. But untill they let the tester's take parts off to have a proper look?? what can you do? That would put the cost up & the general public would not like that.

 

nail on the head, so many people i deal with at work think oh its passed i'm good for another year, and ill get the advisories done when something breaks of fails rather than prevent it.

i can appreciate cars are expensive to maintain especially as they age but to the non enthusiast who see it as a means of transport are just too nieve to how to maintain a car properly.

 

 

i fully back my tester with his advisories as it covers his licence aswell as my job if shit goes wrong due to neglect,

 

You guys really think that testers should be putting down that there's an undertray on the car as an advisory? Every single car I know has an undertray so I hope you have advisory's pointing this out on all your MOT's...... if not, it's a bit strange that you think it's doing the job right, even though they aren't doing the job right on your cars.

[Abz]

You guys really think that testers should be putting down that there's an undertray on the car as an advisory? Every single car I know has an undertray so I hope you have advisory's pointing this out on all your MOT's...... if not, it's a bit strange that you think it's doing the job right, even though they aren't doing the job right on your cars.

 

Exactly this, as Scott says.

 

It's the equivalent of putting down "car has airbags, could not test, can cause harm to passengers in an accident"

 

Or car has tyres, could cause accidents at high speed. We joke, but Scott's thread has an actual point.

[Benjy]

You guys are getting it all wrong.

 

Look at this from a testers point of view...

 

Car - 2005 Merc E class. You MOT'd it 2 weeks ago.

 

Under side is completely covered with under trays. You don't put it down as an advisory. One of the 10 year old brake pipes burst as the driver stamps on the pedal because the cars infront of him have stopped on the motorway and he didn't notice.

 

Nigh on 2 tonnes of Merc squash a little 206 and kill everyone inside.

 

DVSA and SOCO inspect the car. Because of the impact, the undertrays are all in pieces, and they find a burst, corroded brake pipe that, to them, is clearly visible as it runs along the floor pan.

 

DVSA and the police turn up to ask why you didn't notice the brake pipe that runs along the floor that was excessively corroded.

 

Technically speaking - that's you f*#$!d. An advisory on it would mean that you can print a duplicate MOT off and say "Well, I couldn't see it. It had undertrays fitted..." IF they even made it as far as to come and see you! It's all electronically logged these days, so a simple advisory covers your arse and totally removes you from the equation.

 

If any components are covered or obscured, pass and advise.

 

Not every tester advises everything they see. An advisory is NOT the opinion of DVSA - It is literally the opinion of the tester. But advisories are in place for 3 reasons.

 

1. Inform the customer of any potential work that it may require - I.e. Suspension, brakes, tyres etc etc.

 

2. So DVSA can see that you've noted something down as dubious should a test ever be taken to appeal.

 

3. To cover the testers arse. Because manufacturers don't like to help anybody out.

[Scooter]

What Benji has written is especially relevant for us given the small plastic cover at the rear of the Supra that obscures the fuel and brake pipes that are known to corrode unnoticed.

 

It would be ideal (i'm sure some do) to state exactly what can't be checked due to the undertray fitment ie brake pipes, fuel lines, sill for corrosion etc

 

They might raise a smile but where is the harm in advisories like this as a customer? laugh them off or if worried investigate either yourself or at a garage?

[Scott]

I accept in certain circumstances that it's completely relevant, here though?? My point is that there's no consistency. If an undertray is an advisory then it should be on every single MOT. Do you put that on all MOTs you do Benjy? Car in question is the 535d. Aftermarket undertrays etc I can see the point, undertrays that run the length of the vehicle... definitely. My MOT is more about the things the tester didn't check though, which is a real shame.

 

3 cars on the road right now and only 1 has an undertray advisory, all 3 have undertrays. The mondeo one is much larger too.

 

BTW, not sure if I said previously but the same tester failed my Wife's MOT because the wheels were too big. Not too wide, not scrubbing, just too big in his opinion (Fatboy Vitara). Took it to another garage who handed over an MOT no bother, once they stopped laughing.

[Benjy]

Advisories are only an opinion. We don't HAVE to give them, but it covers arses. If I try and inspect a component and I can't see, yes, I advise it, to cover me. But there doesn't have to be any consistency with advisories. DVSA's opinion and every single tester's in the UK will be different.

 

With regards to failure, it the protrude the wheel arch, the manual states that it should fail, but you can't make up fails. It will only fail if there is RFR, reason for rejection, for you to select. We can't do manual fails.

[Tony]

Some of the comments on here from people who have no real knowledge of how the mot system works, proves the point really. I say again people treat the mot as somthing more than it is. It is a very very basic check not a engineers report or even as good as a good service. It is a compromise between cost & road safety.

[Abz]

Some of the comments on here from people who have no real knowledge of how the mot system works, proves the point really. I say again people treat the mot as somthing more than it is. It is a very very basic check not a engineers report or even as good as a good service.

 

We clearly know how it works, put down advisories to cover your arse

[Tony]

We clearly know how it works, put down advisories to cover your arse

 

But do you understand why?

[Scott]

Some of the comments on here from people who have no real knowledge of how the mot system works, proves the point really. I say again people treat the mot as somthing more than it is. It is a very very basic check not a engineers report or even as good as a good service. It is a compromise between cost & road safety.

 

I understand how it works. My initial post isn't a rant, it's a poke of fun at the guy who did the test. I couldn't care less about the advisory that's on there, I just found it funny and thought others would see the same point of view.

 

The defence of him covering his arse is 100% spot on and I can totally see that's what he's doing. I still think it's a cop out from him though as there's covering your arse and there's going to the extreme of pointing out the obvious.

 

Then, there's people that think this guy did the right thing completely. Totally above board and to the lengths that such tests should be done. Strangely, I would guess that they don't have such advisories on their MOTs and yet don't feel the need to point out the inadequacies of their own tester at the time of their MOT tests.

[Tony]

I understand how it works. My initial post isn't a rant, it's a poke of fun at the guy who did the test. I couldn't care less about the advisory that's on there, I just found it funny and thought others would see the same point of view.

 

The defence of him covering his arse is 100% spot on and I can totally see that's what he's doing. I still think it's a cop out from him though as there's covering your arse and there's going to the extreme of pointing out the obvious.

 

Then, there's people that think this guy did the right thing completely. Totally above board and to the lengths that such tests should be done. Strangely, I would guess that they don't have such advisories on their MOTs and yet don't feel the need to point out the inadequacies of their own tester at the time of their MOT tests.

 

Trouble is you do have to point out the obvious to a lot of people who have little or no knowledge of cars. Plus we have to mot within the frame work of the DVSA who do not want us to use our mechanical knowledge or experience to mot a car but do it by there rules & way of testing.

[Tony]

Everybody wants a friendly mot tester when it suits them, but god help him if he does the job as laid down by the DVSA.

[Scott]

As Benjy says, he's covering his arse by writing down that he can't see past the undertray. I accept this reasoning and I believed that to be the case when I got it. It's nothing to do with the job laid down by the DVSA.

 

Why are you being so defensive of something that you appear to care so little about? If you felt so strongly about it you would be making sure your own tester was this anal.

[Abz]

But do you understand why?

 

If you read my comment you'd know I understand why, don't think you are getting the point

[Tony]

If you read my comment you'd know I understand why, don't think you are getting the point

 

Which is? (i'm feeling a bit slow tonight;))

[Tony]

As Benjy says, he's covering his arse by writing down that he can't see past the undertray. I accept this reasoning and I believed that to be the case when I got it. It's nothing to do with the job laid down by the DVSA.

 

Why are you being so defensive of something that you appear to care so little about? If you felt so strongly about it you would be making sure your own tester was this anal.

? Is this directed at me?

[Scott]

? Is this directed at me?

 

Indeed.

[Tony]

Well yes i do make sure all the tester's at my station do the job right, all eight of them.

[Scott]

Well yes i do make sure all the tester's at my station do the job right, all eight of them.

 

So every MOT at your station goes out with a "Undertray in place" advisory then? Cudos!

[Tony]

Yep i'm affraid so, anal as it is we have to cover ourselves from the blame game.

[Scott]

Yep i'm affraid so, anal as it is we have to cover ourselves from the blame game.

 

Fine by me. As I said, consistency is all I ask.

 

I understand the covering from the blame game now too as the UK is getting as bad as the yanks. That was as much my pun as anything.

[Tony]

Fine by me. As I said, consistency is all I ask.

 

I understand the covering from the blame game now too as the UK is getting as bad as the yanks. That was as much my pun as anything.

 

Yea i get it:D & i take your point about consistency but unless we move to a system where the DVSA run the mot stations as they do with the HGV testing stations it will be difficult to get that any better.

[Abz]

Which is? (i'm feeling a bit slow tonight;))

 

Tell me about it, you been on the whiskey again?!

 

I was just saying you guys shouldn't have to do that to protect yourself, the MOT body should be working with you guys, not scrutinising you to a state you are paranoid they'll shut you down over an accident.

 

An yes, I know most won't have a clue re what the MOT is for, which reminds me of the time I went to check a car for a friend (E46 coupe) and the lady had FSH. Oil was filthy and she shows me the MOT certificate

[Havard]

 

An yes, I know most won't have a clue re what the MOT is for, which reminds me of the time I went to check a car for a friend (E46 coupe) and the lady had FSH. Oil was filthy and she shows me the MOT certificate

 

Just having this with my daughter now. She has her first car and hasn't got a clue between servicing and MOT. She is learning fast as she starts paying for everything.