Dodgy MOT - Tommk4

Earlier this year I bought a car that had a few months Tax on it and about 7 months MOT. I took a while inspecting it and did all the usual checks, I had a quick look underneath but didnt take too long, partly because it was freezing and lying on the floor wasnt very pleasant, but mainly because it had an MOT certificate with no advisories. It was painted with some sort of rust proofing and looked pretty solid.

However, Its MOT recently came up for renewal so I took it in and it failed spectacularly! Two pages of dangerous corrosion including a hole you can fit your fist through on the inside of one of the chassis legs and serious corrosion where the chassis mounts to the body, amongst other things.

I feel as though it is unlikely that such a level of corrosion has occurred in the 11 months since it was last MOT'd especially as there were no advisories. So I suspect that the previous owner has had a mate in a garage who has done him a favour so that he can sell a car that would otherwise be an MOT failure. What do you reckon? and should I inform VOSA of my concerns? or is it possible that the car has got into this state in under a year?

Dodgy MOT - Glenn 42

The phrase bent MOT comes to mind. Maybe the previous owner knew the car was in a bad state, but knew a dodgy garage that would issue him with a certificate for a bribe. The kind of place where the car probably needed £ 1000 of work, but for a backhander they would pass the car. I have heard of a few cases locally in the past where you could get a bent MOT for a fee.

Dodgy MOT - Dwight Van Driver

Does sound a bit iffy. Suggest you consider having a word with VOSA about your suspicions. Even if they don't take immediate action it will add to their 'intelligence' and possible check of the Garage. There again it may be a stolen certificate....

dvd

Dodgy MOT - LucyBC
It seems to be much less common than it used to be. VOSA seem to run quality checks and controls constantly and they also send out mystery shoppers.

Computerisation has meant that pretty much everything is transparent so it is not just the testing station that is known, the person conducting the test is identifiable too.

I cannot comment on your particular experience or whether the problem could have developed in the time period since the test. Others are better qualified to comment on that.

I do know that if major defects show up in a vehicle involved in an accident then loss adjusters and then accident investigators and (if there is a serious accident or fatal) vosa and the police will be micro-examining the cars. I assume that most testing stations (and their employees) would avoid taking the risk.