|
Apologies, I have tried to add the pictures through the post images website to support my post. Is there is any other way to do that? Thanks
|
|
|
|
They seem to be OK.
|
|
That looks like pretty severe and well established rust to me. A quick poke with a screwdriver should have revealed how bad it was.
|
|
I agree, it looks appaling. I appreciate it's an old car, however it should have been acknowledged and reported.
|
|
|
|
They seem to be OK
Ugh......what ugly pictures, sent me right back to the 1960's
Now perhaps some will stop crowing on about Japanese quality (doubtful it will)
Yes the MOT tester should probably have seen that it was an imminent failure, however because more than 3 months have elapsed, you've run out of time, but you could always try submitting a complaint (see below}
If you think your car has passed when it should not have
You’ll need to complain to DVSA if you do not think your car should have passed its MOT. Fill in the complaint form and send it to DVSA within the time limits below.
DVSA will contact you within 5 days to discuss your complaint.
If DVSA decides to recheck your vehicle, you’ll need to arrange a date. You will not need to pay the test fee again. They’ll send you an inspection report listing any vehicle defects.
Time limits
If your vehicle passed, you need to complain within:
- within 3 months of the MOT if it’s a corrosion-related problem
- within 28 days has passed for other defects
Edited by brum on 01/03/2021 at 18:24
|
Now perhaps some will stop crowing on about Japanese quality (doubtful it will)
Not a chance...lol...
that's just neglect, irrelevant of make.
|
|
I understood that an MOT is only to prove a vehicle is safe on the day of the test. I suspect the OP won't get anywhere by appealing to VOSA. The garage however may have some case to answer to the OP.
|
I understood that an MOT is only to prove a vehicle is safe on the day of the test. I suspect the OP won't get anywhere by appealing to VOSA. The garage however may have some case to answer to the OP.
So did I think that, but those pics look like its been like it for longer than a year and should have been picked up year before in my opinion?
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you brum, that is really helpful. I know that my car is not worth much, but it doesn't mean that garage can just neglect my safety.
|
|
There is a second argument here, that the driver of a car has a duty to ensure it's roadworthy; that duty applies to every journey. So if you have an MOT pass, but the car deteriorates such that it is unroadworthy, it's your responsibility to check and to get it fixed.
The MOT test checks that the car is roadworthy at the time of the test. Nothing more.
|
There is a second argument here, that the driver of a car has a duty to ensure it's roadworthy; that duty applies to every journey. So if you have an MOT pass, but the car deteriorates such that it is unroadworthy, it's your responsibility to check and to get it fixed.
The MOT test checks that the car is roadworthy at the time of the test. Nothing more.
This is true, but also not entirely realistic given the nature of the punter population.
Some of them are little old ladies who only use the car to go to church on Sunday, after all.
And the odd track day, of course.
|
|
|
|
I am a woman and I have no idea what exactly I need to check also I am unable to kneel or lay on the road and check underneath a car where I live. I blindly trusted my garage, but I didn't expect this twist
|
|
I think that outside of groups like this 90% of drivers never check underneath their cars. Even those of us who do probably don’t have it up on ramps, with lights to see what’s going on. Rust on heavy untreated components is often just on the surface but this is not the case here.
For severe corrosion like this your garage ought to have reported it.
Whether you want to take it further is up to you but the advice seems to be that your options are limited.
I’d be more concerned about the overall rustiness of the car as its unlikely that severe corrosion is confined to those failed components. You might want to get it checked over by a garage you trust and then decide if it needs further safety work on the structure. Those of us old enough to remember the prevalence of rust in cars in the past know it’s a never ending fight once it gets hold. It might even be time to get rid of it if it’s really badly affected elsewhere.
Sorry to add to your woes.
Edited by catsdad on 02/03/2021 at 08:21
|
|
Fair enough. Car is old that's a fact, however I had to be aware of the extreme corrosion , even if they just said: look, car is really corroded I would advise you to get rid of it as it isn't safe anymore. If they had said that, I would get rid of my car. The safety of me, my family and road users is first.
Car is unusable anymore and cannot be moved...
I've contacted the Trading Standards as I missed the deadline for MOT appeal deadline with DVLA.
I think I need to get more knowledge about the cars in case someone decides to neglect my current /future essential car checks, at the moment I lost the trust.
|
|
|
|
I am a woman and I have no idea what exactly I need to check also I am unable to kneel or lay on the road and check underneath a car where I live. I blindly trusted my garage, but I didn't expect this twist
Aleksa, no MoT tester will issue a written guarantee that if he passes your car, nothing on it will fail for 12 months - it's not realistic or fair, as he can't guess what you are going to do with it. All he can do is a thorough check following the official guidelines. It seems your last tester may have been hasty, but testers will vary, and they can have off-days or his phone may ring or ....
All you can reasonably check would be the items which are probably listed in your car's user manual - tho I suspect those give less info than they used to, because cars are less DiY-able, and it makes more work for the garages if they do it.
|
|
I suppose it is difficult to know what it looked like to the MOT tester.
They can't "poke it with a screwdriver" or indeed anything else - they can only look at it and have to determine whether surface rust or right through.
Was it not even an advisory? I am surprised a MOT tested did not at least try and cover themselves a bit.
|
|
I can understand why you are upset.
But you need to ask yourself what you are hoping to achieve by putting energy and emotion into this - eg: exact revenge for their apparent negligence - extract cash, damage their reputation, make them feel bad etc.
It may be better to put the whole thing behind you and get on with life.
Just my view - others may differ.
|
I can understand why you are upset.
But ............
..........It may be better to put the whole thing behind you and get on with life.
I agree. As far as I know, no garage will take any steps to either prevent or halt the progress of corrosion during a 'service'. It is up to the owner/keeper to inspect and deal with it, either themselves or by directing/contracting others to do so.
|
I agree. As far as I know, no garage will take any steps to either prevent or halt the progress of corrosion during a 'service'. It is up to the owner/keeper to inspect and deal with it, either themselves or by directing/contracting others to do so.
It depends what is agreed in the "service". Most people never ask. The more diligent may ask for "a good service" which means nothing. The manufacturer will have a service schedule with all the checks and intervals. Read and agree with the mechanic whats to be done and document it.
|
|
No it wasn't on the advisories unfortunately.
|
|
Thank you all for your views & advise
|
|
It does make you wonder what you are paying for when you put your car in for service as the lady says she has been completely in the hands of the garage for the last 3 years. If as she says there has been no prior notice of rust on service and MOT how is she expected to know the car is potentially unroadworthy. She has not said if the same staff has looked after the car but regardless of a service the last MOT should have flagged up corrosion.. Have you tried talking to the garage?
The car is 11 years old and I wonder if its life has been by the sea, a salty environment has been known to accelerate rust in cars. The part that broke may well have had a flaw in manufacture which could not have been spotted.
|
It does make you wonder what you are paying for when you put your car in for service as the lady says she has been completely in the hands of the garage for the last 3 years. If as she says there has been no prior notice of rust on service and MOT how is she expected to know the car is potentially unroadworthy. She has not said if the same staff has looked after the car but regardless of a service the last MOT should have flagged up corrosion.. Have you tried talking to the garage?
The car is 11 years old and I wonder if its life has been by the sea, a salty environment has been known to accelerate rust in cars. The part that broke may well have had a flaw in manufacture which could not have been spotted.
It is considered a 'proper' garage, they fix & sell cars also do MOT's. I believe multiple mechanics checked and looked(or not) after my car, but I might be wrong.
When I rang they would not give me an email address where I can complain and insisted to do it over the phone which I refused. To be honest I am giving up, it's not worth it.
First owner was from Wales, it might be possible if it was near seaside.
|
|
Maybe the MOT test doesn't allow it to be poked, but if I was the servicing garage as well I would certainly think it deserved a closer look bearing in mind that the OP had entrusted the car to my care.
|
|
Depends on the OPs servicing garage. What if it's one of these fit quick tyre places?
|
Depends on the OPs servicing garage. What if it's one of these fit quick tyre places?
my niece had her Fiat done at a place like that and every time they failed it, 3 times, she got them to fix it and it failed again on the part they replaced.
after an argument from me they refunded half payment and she had to scrap the car due to the amount of rust underneath which they didn`t spot, or didn`t want to see, imo.
|
Depends on the OPs servicing garage. What if it's one of these fit quick tyre places?
my niece had her Fiat done at a place like that and every time they failed it, 3 times, she got them to fix it and it failed again on the part they replaced.
after an argument from me they refunded half payment and she had to scrap the car due to the amount of rust underneath which they didn`t spot, or didn`t want to see, imo.
It seemed to be a reputable garage, however I just remembered last time I had an MOT, there was a young lady waiting for her MOT done aswell. When they announced that she failed due to some parts were fitted incorrectly/had some trouble with it and blamed the 'other garage whoever had done it', the girl then said that her car was bought off them by her dad a year ago.
I was thinking to myself :hmm that's awkward...
I will let DVLA to do their job and for me it's not worth it doing much about. I had a shock and realisation that I could of killed my family. Don't want anymore stress right now.. Car is unusable and I will need to scrap it.
|
Depends on the OPs servicing garage. What if it's one of these fit quick tyre places?
My second car is a 1994 Pug 306. Its previous owner missed one year's MoT and took it to a 'fit quick' place for the next one. They replaced enough parts to run up a bill of £1200+, and that was after a 'discount'. They can be very thorough, but that may not be the same as efficient of course ....
|
|
Fit quick places fail cars on the stuff they can do at a quick profit, not what is actually needed for the benefit of the car and owner. Never go to one for an MOT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post Image is a bona fide site - I've used it for years with no problems.
|
|
No excuses for the tester not failing this car with that corrosion damage three months before the components failed.
From the Mot inspection manual appendix A -structural integrity.
www.gov.uk/guidance/mot-inspection-manual-for-priv...n
"The severity of corrosion in highly stressed components, such as steering and suspension arms, rods and levers, can be assessed by lightly tapping or scraping with the corrosion assessment tool.
In places that cannot be reached by the corrosion assessment tool, an alternative blunt instrument may be used.
A highly stressed component should be rejected if corrosion has resulted in serious reduction in the overall thickness of the material or has caused a hole or split."
The approved corrosion assessment tool:-
www.prosol.co.uk/product/mot-approved-hammer-corro...l.
Edited by focussed on 03/03/2021 at 08:58
|
|
|
|
|
