My 1996 RAV 4 just passed it's MOT today. No advisories issued. Last years MOT from a different local garage listed 4 advisories none of which i have acted upon. Appreciate they are the"personal opinion of the Tester". Obviously highly subjective but surely this makes advisories a little misleading. Hence my question?
Would of thought the used car trade would hate advisory notices?
One of the pre printed notes on reverse of advisory form reads
You should obtain expert advise on any defects listed overleaf. Continued use of the vehicle (even though a test certificate may of been issued) may make you , liable for prosecution or invalidate your vehicle insurance.
All comments welcome
Mark
|
|
I'm surprised with the new computerised system that the tester does not get to see these flagged up on the screen so as to pay particular attention to them. Having said that, some advisories and failures I have received have been bunkem.
|
|
|
I think they are a good idea - some items are not covered by MOT, but if a tester notices a fault he may list it as an advisory. I will know to get it at least looked at. I am under no obligation to use the MOT tester for an advisory and last place I took car to for MOT did not pressurise to get these done by their garage.
Fiesta was picked up on a wear in sub frame bush..so checked them all myself and one will need replacing soon.
The only reason I can see for insurance invalidation is if an accident was caused by the advisory item . eg Pads are very worn, but still legal if after 1000 miles they fail due to being completely worn and you have an accident insurance company may check the MOT records.
|
|
Just had mine in for a test and had an advisory that the rear discs and pads need replacing sharpish. I already had an idea this might be the case but it saves me taking the wheel off to check.
|
|
i did an online check before my MOT and it had an advisory for corroded brake lines , took it in passed with flying colours .. i think it all depends on the testers frame of mind at the mot in my experience
|
|
re the insurance point. I think the advisories bring up points that will not fail the MOT at the present time, but are likely to fail before the next one. So "continued use" may well refer to a vehicle becoming unroadworthy (for insurance) maybe 10 months in the future.
|
They seem to cover a huge range of issues, many of them very minor that certainly wouldn't make the car unroadworthy. Last MOT of my old Astra. 'Rear number plate starting to delaminate' - well, yes, a triangular area 10mm base, 15mm high had been unstuck for the last couple of years. Didn't make the plate unreadable. 'Rear exhaust box slightly corroded' - Minor surface rust on a 6 year old exhaust. Hardly insurance threatening issues.
JS
|
I don't mind them. It seems quite a good way of formalising the old system of an informal bit of advice from a helpful tester, who may have spotted something that could become a problem, but not yet.
Sometimes there is still room for a bit of leeway as between fail/advisory, depending on the tester's judgement of how likely he thinks you are to take any notice.
At a test a few years ago by someone I have known and trusted for years, he said the handbrake efficiency was just on the boundary of fail/pass, and he thought the offside mechanism was probably partially seized. He could have failed the car, but instead gave an advisory because he knew I would immediately go home and fix it. That covered him against any possible comeback (eg accident soon afterwards) but also gave me proper notice that it really did need attention.
|
|
|
|
![2021 Nissan Qashqai 1.3 DiG-T 160 [157] Acenta Premium 5dr DCT](http://images.honestjohn.co.uk/imagecache/url/crop/90x60/https/assets.heycar.co.uk/t_default-export/f_auto/application_assets/vehicles/pictures/da990225dbcac5ecfadc85d8ad4e2654/690936625217cd1efba5c9cdd4bc42f1.jpg)
