Hi
I read somehere a while back (on here?) tat the new MoT system prohibited the repeat of an advisory from one year to the next, i.e. you had to get it done before the next MoT whether you'd like to or not. Is this true?
Seems a bit daft as I've been advised of corroded rear sills for 3 years (old system) and it's always passed.
Thanks
--------------
Mike Farrow
|
I don't believe half the stuff I read on here - mainly opinions rather than facts.
What about an advisory about worn brake pads and you only do 20 miles in your classic car between MOT's. I guess a computerised advisory will make the next tester look more carefully at something, but certainly not a fail. Plus how would they know it's been 'done' or not - tyres close to limit - yes, replaced, but next set getting close to limit as well.
Martin
|
|
|
I think it is a case that with the computerised system there is no possibility that the tester will forget what he advised last year & so repeats it.
I posted recently about my discs, very little extra wear since last years advisory on the thinness, but the (regular & very fair) tester failed it nevertheless.
I guess that with the MOT's monitered centrally repeated advisories would invite an inspection.
----------------------------------------------
One mans junk is another mans treasure
|
|
Remember that it can also be down to the individual tester - what one man may think is ok another tester may think excessive.
|
... New MoT = no repeat advisories ..
mfarrow:
the advisory form vt32 states:
" The items below do not constitute MOT failure items. They are drawn to your attention for advice only. They are the personal opinion of the Tester and are not standards set by the Vehicle & Operator Services Agency"
so nothing to worry about.
every year (for the past 4 years) they point out to me a small chip (outside the fail zone and much smaller than the fail size criterion)on my windscreen that has previously been "repaired" by autoglass.
|
Just had my MOT done and failed due to rear brake pads excessively worn - despite the fact that the car stops satisfactorily. This surprised me, as 2 years ago my 'classic' (1983) GTV6 passed with rear brakes in apalling physical condition but I was told, at the time, that all that matters is that the brakes produce the required stopping resistance (or force or whatever). Perhaps things have changed.
However, whilst looking for the old MOT, I noticed an advisory from a service 18mths ago that the front discs were excessively worn and due for replacement. They have not been replaced since but there was no mention of this on the new MOT! You have to wonder.......
|
|
|
|
Hi
Thanks for all the replies, I'm glad you've set the record straight now, as it did seem a little unfair to say the least!
--------------
Mike Farrow
|
|
|
