I had a car advised for corrosion on front subframe but I'd already replaced it with a new one! When I queried this the tester said all old cars have to have some advisories so I should just deal with it! I took it for another test at a different garage and he remarked how good it was and passed it with no notes at all! The other place did vehicle repairs so I think they were just trying it on! I will never go back to them!
I had the same. Tester said as it was an old car (1987) if it has no advisories it would look suspicious. Only a brake pipe covered in grease etc, but still annoying. I cleaned it all off and painted it, but still got the same advisory from him the next year.
Having spent 40 years as a mechanic and latterly a workshop manager I find a tester like that lacks confidence in his own ability and is scared of missing something
No they do it as its well known to lessen the likelyhood of getting a MOT quality check.....As for this exact case and what all was noted and said its clear the tester either does not like him or is taking the...........
I had fun & games with an MOT station some time ago. The car I had was a diesel Focus and the engine management light had a habit of occasionally coming on for no apparent reason (no codes were ever stored) When it came to MOT time I thought this may cause me a problem if it were to come on during the test. However, in the then current MOT testers manual, due to the year of manufacture of the car, the EML wasn't to be included as part of the test & if it illuminated, it was to be ignored. When I went to collect the car after the test I was given the bad news of a failure and the reason being the EML illuminated. I asked if I could have a quick word with the tester about it - no problem and out to reception he came. In front of other waiting customers I asked if he would amend the certificate to a pass as it shouldn't have failed for the reason given. He said that once the certificate had been printed that it couldn't be changed, I then produced a copy of the relevant section of the manual and said this leaves you with a choice of 2 options, 1 - amend the certificate to a pass (which meant he would have to put the reason on record) or 2 - I send the certificate to DVSA and ask them to investigate. Needless to say, the tester's superior told him to amend it to a pass, I guess the garage didn't want DVSA sniffing around.
I go to a really good MOT garage. It's either a pass, fail, or advises me of something that will need looking at in the future. Some testers write, low fuel warning light on, wheel trim missing, damaged to paint work (scratches). It's a safety check, not a how nice it looks. Its either safe to be on the road or its not.
I would most definitely go to a different mot testing garage. Because if it's the same mot tester that you have been using, he or she seems to have a obsession with surface rust. Another great video james keep up the good work
Mot tester here.... Certainly, advising rust on cast components like hubs is over the top. However..... Most of the time, when we are presented with an older car that's had various components painted or undersealed, it's not because someone's trying to protect or preserve - but because they are trying to hide things..... Therefore, a degree of Arse Covering comes into play and advisories like these start being used. Dont forget, you get 28 days to make a complaint on an MOT test - but that raises to 3 months on corrosion. That's plenty of time for a load of paint, underseal or whatever to flake away from a terminally rotten subframe, wishbone or shock absorber that's been made to look pretty for a test. My advice is to present the car for test BEFORE you do any painting or undersealing, let the tester see the car in it's honest state.
You need another MOT tester this guy is over the top, yes important things like the power steering leak,,and water leak, certainly if he found any structural rot, but slight pitting and surface rust is taking things to far bloody hell he could even fail cars that were 2 years old.
You should have seen what my car failed on. I had an alternator fail a few days before the MOT was due, car was recovered in December. I ordered a brand new alternator, charged battery up and sent it to the garage for alternator + MOT. My car failed on... engine light on, rear brake discs corroded with advisories on rear subframe corrosion and sills. Previous MOT's were straight through. I asked the garage to clear codes after fitting alternator. Rear SOLID discs had surface corrosion from being sat around for a week, even the coating was still visible on the discs. MOT tester was adamant rear discs needed replacing. Rear subframe corrosion is impossible, it's made from aluminium. This from a garage I've used for a few years. Never again.
I'm a retired MOT tester, started my apprenticeship at Colliers Austin Rover dealership in 1982, and started doing mot's in 1991, but a lifetimes experience is still there. I give all of my vehicles a pre MOT myself,and do any remedial work,before they go for MOT. As a result, i haven't had a car fail its MOT, in over 25 years ! As you quite rightly said, you agree with some of his findings,but others are just plain nonesense. I would complain to the ministry of transport, MOT division. They take a very very dim view of this kind of behaviour,and will visit the MOT testing station in question. They may even book a "Test" vehicle of thier own in. To see the result of it's test. Yes, they do,do this from time to time.
Had advisory on damaged wheel rim (kerb damage) took the ruff edges off and touched it up with wheel silver never mentioned it next year, would mention that unable to check brake pipes as I always grease them up, then mentioned surface rust on front cross member which was the most solid part of the car. Found a new MOT station that was more sensible when carrying out the MOT and have used them since
Need a time machine for decent paint stripper, the recipe has been changed as the old ones were using Dichloromethane which is banned. The car I bought from a family member had a load of advisories from Halfrauds she'd used previously. I put it back through a local place they had no idea what Halfrauds were on about and said it was in good nick for the age, clear pass the only work they did was a a service and replaced a tyre.
There are entirely too many garages/repair centres that are all about ‘upselling’. This used to be the sort of thing you often saw at tyre places and certain chains of ‘repair’ places. The staff are on bonuses for selling you more stuff. Same practise as used by pressure salesmen throughout retail. As you need an MOT you are seen as a ‘captive customer’. This is why always dealing with a place with an impeccable reputation is essential.
2004 I put my immaculate 911/993 into Glenvargil Porsche for an MOT as I was living in Glasgow at the time. Failed on virtually everything, 'It needs shims too, it's failed on that also, it's going to be £3,490'. As an ex mechanic I knew the car was mint, and I knew we used to throw the shims out for pads, we never fitting them. Took it home to England and had it retested at JCT 600. Passed straight through, handbrake needed tightening, £55 all done.
I suggested checking the power steering pipes after your first video James. They can be had for around £75 from well known popular auction site. Easy job to fit them.
mot tester [retired ] i worked with some strange testers over the years , one chap tested the driver , if he didnt like you ,your car would fail ! some testers just love to put down anything that has rust on it ! any sensible buyer will look at and hopefully ignore it as superficial .
MOT tester is taking the piss. I had a garage say almost exactly the same. So I appealed it showing a picture of a brand new hub and the one the tester brought up. The MOt tester thought that I painted over a rusty hub, but it was a new one with a coat of two pack black over it. I had the pictures! I got a full refund and the test removed. The testers have gone stupid. I had a brake balancer get a bit sticky, so cleaned it up, prepped all the pieces and greased the joint as best I could the service manual, the mot tester said there was damp on the outside of the unit, so I got him to put it up on the ramp, and it turned out out to be a bit of grease! He was embarrassed. Change the garage!
This is a huge problem at the moment for small traders dealing in 10-12 year old cars. Surface corrosion advisory can ruin a sale & scare customers even though we know its perfectly normal & safe. I am all for an independent MOT as it covers us to an extent but you can see why some traders also have MOT stations. I have 2 MOT stations that I can trust but even those give the odd over the top advisory.
It’s an absolute fact that DVSA do not require a tester to add advice on an MOT test, pass or fail. There is only one exception to this, that is when an aysemtric tyre is fitted not in accordance with sidewall instructions. This fail is typical of a garage looking for work. Me, I’d call them up and casually ask for a VT17.
I would go to a better MOT station. I've dealt with this type of tester in the past, they just love to give you agravation, so dont argue with them just dont go back. I once had a car that i couldnt get the tyre size required anywhere and fitted a matching pair but a different size to the rear ones and this was stated as an advisory. Im glad i dont need to see him again. Keep up the good work.
I had one quiry a leeking steering rack that had just been replaced, and there was some power steering fluid on the subframe from the previous rack, also told me there was a nail in the tyre, which went to the next MOT without being repaired,
I have a 12 year old car with little bits of light surface corrosion here and there which I have treated with wax. My MOT station has never mentioned it. Certainly I wouldnt expect them to comment on light surface corrosion to a hub! Sounds overly fussy or a misinterpretation of the rules to me.
DCM Dichloromethane is what is missing from modern paint strippers compared to the ones from years ago. Still available for professional and business use.
The first mot my 2005 Elise went through the tester struggled to find anything wrong, as you would expect ro a 3 year old car with less than 6k on the clock. He went to to the corner of the garage and then went back to the car carrying a 5 foot metal bar, he called me over and said that there was play in a front suspension joint while hanging off the end of the bar but he wouldn't fail it. I waited until he issued the cert and told him if he ever came near my car again I'd wrap that bar around his fxxxxxx head. I still have the car, the said joint has never been changed, wxxker.
My Mercedes’ E500 09 had an advisory of surface rust to rear subframe, at the Mercedes’ main garage the next year never mentioned it, had a Honda legend get advisory every year because undertrays were fitted obscuring some components. It leaves the factory this way but is judged as an advisory !
you have now found the reason I only use 1 mot station. i had a car on finance years ago, dealer didnt have time to put it through another mot so gave me 50 quid off and let it go with 2 months mot remaining. i took it to a nearby mot station that advertised 30 quid mot who said 'it has to have an advisory on it' and put rear subrame bush down (I was fuming). 6 months later an mot centre opened not far from that 1 that did not do any repair work so i took it to them for its next mot and without anything being done to the 'advisory' it scored a clean pass. Guess where any cars I own go when the mot is due ... a friend of mine had the same thing at a different mot centre. money making scheme?
I once had some work done on my transporter syncro and got the garage to also put an MOT on it as it was out of test. Turned out as they didnt do MOTs themselfs(which to be fair they told me) they took it to the local vauxhall main dealer who they usally use - obveously they wernt used to what was a 20 year old vehicle at the time as they give it advisories for everything not looking brand new and thrashed the shit out of it 6 times to get it through emissions. Lesson learned I’m more picky with testing stations now to know what sort of vehicles they are used to. A mate recently had a car fail for handbrake efficency and a blown front sidelight - both fair faults. Issue was the fails logged on the sheet were “handbrake below efficency on a single circuit system” (a 2004 bora is obveously duel circult brakes - did they use the right % figure?) and “front position lamp showing white light to rear” (how exactly does a blown bulb do that then?). To me it says the tester was sloppy and didnt really care whats on the fail sheet beyond the general item which isnt ideal on a perminant record.
I have had this as well as I mentioned in a previous video of yours. They wanted to do additional work on the car and I refused on the basis that they had virtually condemned the car and it would not be worth me paying them to do that. They can’t have it both ways and expect people to throw money at a car they have have just told you is basically falling apart due to “surface corrosion “
Having tried stripper, wire wheels etc on mag wheels - take the tyres + weights off and get them sandblasted. Cleans all the crud to metal and leaves a nice surface
My wife's car passed the MOT and all four discs were advised as rusty. Unreal, the braking surfaces were fine, it was the hub part. I understand your frustration. I am also amazed how many testers have calibrated eyes when assessing brake pads, including vehicles fitted with wheel trims!!! Very clever.
if its a garage and mot shop they sometimes put loads of stuff so they can fix it for more money from you , also the tester must have a certain percent of fails , prs and advisories to meet the dvla rules
The mot inspector probably saw your last video on how to polish a turd and make it shiny by spreading oil all over the paint with your old bath towels 😂😂😂😂
In the usa are states dot decides what is needed to pass and fail and there are no "advisery" past the inspector being nice and going xyz could use some atention if its not a safety concern which is also why pre purchace inspections are a must in the states.
Some MOT testers are getting worse. I keep all our vehicles in A1 condition and they don’t cover much mileage in a year. One of cars had an advisory this year that the underneath had been coated with waxoil. Yes I coated it to stop it rusting 😳. Great video as always.
Had a Prius years ago with a foot applied 'handbrake'. Low mileage and fully serviced. Took it for an MoT at a large garage, part of a chain, and got a fail due to handbrake not working. Turned out the tester prat had been jabbing at a button inside with P marked on it (can't remember now what it was actually for, something unimportant anyway). He was completely unaware that the parking brake was foot operated. I wasn't best pleased but they said they could not take it off the record, only a retest. I'm sure testers have been told more recently to hit older cars hard as part of the EV propaganda push, as my wife's old Fiesta was hit with the same 'surface corrosion but not structurally serious' although nothing has changed from previous years. Got an advisory also on 'brake pipes covered with grease or similar' which was actually Bilt Hamber Hydrate 80 corrosion preventer (fantastic stuff by the way).
There are a lot of manual advisories and incorrectly advised items on there, from my eyes, the tester has an issue with the MR2 or the owner, a lot of effort gone into bending the rules of an MOT test, anything non categorised (letters and numbers in brackets) are manual advisories, and the shock absorbers are incorrect categorised items. I would be fuming personally
if you are ever going to spray a wheel silver use moondust silver its a nice bright silver and always looks amazing :) I used to professionally spray wheels before opening a powder coating wheel refurbishment company
About 5 years ago my son's Shogun had the comment ' wide spread surface rust to chassis ' we didn't get around to doing anything about it and it's never been mentioned again on subsequent MOTs ?
Challenge the MOT Form VT17 "Before you appeal Discuss the test result with the MOT centre before you appeal. They can help you understand how they assessed your vehicle to the standards in either the: MOT inspection manual for cars and passenger vehicles MOT inspection manual for motorcycles Appeal if you still think the result is wrong after talking to the MOT centre. If you repair your vehicle before you appeal, it can affect the outcome of the appeal".
With Karcher pressure washers you can get a very long hose for the lance, saves any tripping over anything and they last about 8 years before wearing through so not bad.
@@ChopsGarage I've been valeting for 26 years this year and I started off with the expensive pressure washers, but bought a cheap Karcher when I need one really quick and never spent more than £50 on one since as they last just as long, extended hose was about £40 last time I bought one and the pressure is adequate for washing a motor down. Yearly cost on pressure washers down to £18 a year, can't be bad!
I had the same problem with my local MOT station last year . I have taken my ford c max (2007) to the same place every year it always passed without any advisories. The guy that done the MOT always said it was in very good condition underneath for a car of that year . I went back to the same place last year but it was a different MOT tester he failed it on the sills and both front and rear subframes along with both front wishbones. I asked him why the car passed all the other years without advisories then 1 year and 2000 miles later it suddenly had all these issues. His reply was every tester has different acceptance levels regarding corrosion. I had to scrap the car even after getting underneath giving it a good going over I couldn't see anything but surface rust . So there you go it depends on the tester which is wrong they should all be trained to the same level .
i had a 2 advisorys ,1 windscreen tint slightly dark ,its a factory tint lol ,2 suspension stiff ,its on coilovers .people that do MOT these days have hardly any mechanical experience
Hello James and fellow worker (sorry - missed your name!!) very interesting seeing what has been done in preparation for the MOT test. Well, some result that was to produce a "fail" - can I suggest a different MOT test station / engineer? Really do not know how you can rectify the "wheel hub" problem?? I do think that some testing station(s) are looking for extra work - and this is really NOT acceptable! Best wishes from Lincolnshire
There are two council/local authority MOT stations in Devon which don't do repairs and are supposed to be totally impartial but too far away from you (Paignton and Ivybridge) .
The comment about surface rust being a myth is correct as the corrosion is penetrating below the surface of the material through the intergranular cracks between the steel crystals. How deep it goes will depend on the material composition (alloy mix) and the level of exposure.
I had a fail on a motorhome which was in mint condition because the towing plug showed to be wrong even though it was originally fitted when the vehicle chassis was built by the manufacturer because the canbus system detected that it was not a proper loading. I then plugged in a trailer board which worked perfectly. They passed it but they had already recorded it as a fail and this could not be removed from the vehicle history.
You could have requested that the tester amended the certificate rather than issue a new pass certificate. They probably told you they had to leave it as already recorded as a fail because if the tester amends a certificate he/she has to record the reason on the system and they don't want these "mistakes" to show up on their testing record as DVSA have a habit of getting interested in certificate amendments.
Report the mot tester! I did this on my company vehicle & vosa re moted (which i charged back to company). It got a clean no advisory mot. No idea what happened to the kwik fift mot inspector...
You get suirface rust on those parts when a car is brand new! Which planet does that mot tester live on ? Clearly an mot test station to be avoided, he has given your car a criminal record for all buyers to see !
The hubs are manually written advisories by the tester , rather than actual tick box advisories in the mot manual ( hence no numbers or letters after the writing ) , not sure on the shock advisories without seeing the spring cups .. best idea is to find a test station that only does mot’s and NOT repairs, you will get an honest mot then.
I currently own an MR2 which unfortunately is an MOT failure. Interesting point here which I did not know, but MR2 actually stands for ( Midship Runabout )
Good point, my car came back with advisory of rusy rear coil springs, nope they were like new, i will never trust an mot station again and I'm ready to question any advisory.
I always used to take my car to Halfords for an MOT as was almost half the normal price. Had 8 Advisories Sorted 3 of them that I thought should be done. Took it to my local independent garage the next year & the other 5 had disappeared by Magic!😆😆😆
When you start removing parts and not replacing them some garage or customer may think you are trying to hide something. In my opinion if you are taking parts off due to rust please replace them with either new or used ones. The backing plate on the brakes is there to prevent grease and other road grime from damaging your brake rotors. Again this is just my opinion and that is what i would do.
I've noticed that unnecessary advisories have been on the increase for a few years now. My pet conspiracy theory is that the government want older cars off the road and everyone driving EV's so MOT stations have been instructed to advise on anything they perceive may fail within the next 100k miles. The resulting advisory list will scare the owner into selling the vehicle before the next MOT and put off potential buyers. The desired effect is to reduce resale values of older cars therefore increasing the number that get scrapped which they hope will boost sales of EV's. Last year the MOT station 'advised' that all 4 of my tyres were slightly perished, this year they did not - same inspector and same tyres! If I had been wanting to sell the car after last years MOT the buyer could have used those advisories to try and negotiate the price down by saying they will need to buy 4 new tyres.
Cheap project cars are always hard to pass up 😂❤ and I too would be looking for a new MOT station; someone is obsessed with noting every little bit of corrosion, and it's costing you money.
Tester is lifting your leg on this surface rust. My Fusion had surface rust, but was solid, so no advisories. Have you ever tried that Lanoguard stuff, I treat all my cars with it, and tester commented on how good underneath my 2010 107 is. Some testers are just being difficult.
Havent mot testers been instructed to advise on any surface rust even minor stuff. Government just want us driving around in brand new electric cars thus making it harder and harder to hang on to your earth destroying petrol vehicles. ⛽
No, we haven't, this is exceptionally harsh with the tester having an obvious issue with the car or the owner, especially the manual advisories........
@@PexTheStealthVan sounds like you maybe be a tester yourself, Could the tester concerned himself passed a car previously that should not of passed so vosa got involved, if so this is why he is covering his own back now or maybe a newly qualified tester just being too cautious ( im a ex mot tester myself )
@vincef836 no, this would go the other way from my point of view and, i may be wrong to other peoples oppinions, , first off the car is nearly 20 years old, the power steering leak I would have to see how bad the leak is for it to have failed, hence no comment, advising incorrect items and manual advisories are frowned upon, there are loads of "grey" areas when testing but I saw this as a bit harsh personally, that is going out of a testers was to advise as many items as possible 🙂
@@PexTheStealthVan Thanks for your reply i do think the tester was being a bit harsh with all those advisories and yes i have read the latest testers manual certainly some grey areas now im glad in a way im no longer a tester (just changed job career)
I was looking at the MOT history of a Ford Kuga diesel and the MOT advisory for the last 3 years reads " Exhaust Emissions were too clean to read during test" Is it a disgrace the car doesn't pollute enough?
Mot testers i find really hit and miss. After my tester retired i yook my volvo to a guy people recommended. I was expecting a fail to an inner rack end cause it was a stupid one i struggled to find. He failed it on a multitude of stuff including handbrake not working, lower ball joint, buckled wheel and "rust covering both subframes". Then saud they cant do the work for 2 weeks but it's booked in. I said ill be doing the work and he looked at me like i had 2 heads. Out of curiosity i tested the handbrake and they were both locked up when i pulled away. Shouted the tester about whats this about and he said it failed on the rollers. Anyway took it away. I replaced the inner tie rod, didnt touch the rest but took it to another tester. Give him the fail sheet and told him the story. After the test he shouted me over while its on the lift and showed me everything on the list. Not an issue only that there was excess play in the handbrake. And all the "rust". Was dried on mud. So it passed. So ive used him ever since. Hes not a puah over either, the wife took hers in ans he refused to teat it because it was so full of mud he couldn't see. She was fuming 😂😂
I took my old car to a local National tyres, the mot tester failed it on a few things including outer cv boots not secure, I called them out on that because the car had a history of that problem and I had been keeping an eye on it, including just before the test, the next excuse was because he saw oil so thought they were insecure, next excuse was they had cable ties to keep them on, I didn’t believe that excuse but pointed out it was their MOT tester colleague in the Halfords that had put them on the year before, ( and charged £20 to change an indicator bulb) National tyres had to fix properly with metal clips, the buggered up the inner cv boot repair so got to go back. The National tyres MOT tester did not fail the car on a perished steering boot that I told them before hand that it would fail on. The Moral to my experience is to Avoid National tyres and Halfords.
MOTs seem so be so inconsistent, I get advisories on my old vehicles one year and the next year the faults have magically disappeared. On the other hand l recently had a failure due to structural rot that needed welding which wasn't even mentioned as an advisory the year before.
In Northern Ireland we have a different system whereby it is Government run with testing staff carrying out tests on Hgvs light goods/ private m/c etc. It has in general a series of lanes leading to rolling brake testers, automated light testers, ramps, pits etc depending on the vehicle. Advantages- The guys are fairly decent imho and there is not really any financial incentive ie upselling etc. Disadvantages- Covid backlog and problems with the hydraulic ramps suppliers having structural damage has resulted in backlogs so it’s not as quick and that bad that there is a more relaxed approach to mot status if it’s expired and you have a date booked you are not likely to be prosecuted and insurers tend to cooperate. Having experienced both the English and NI system. I think I prefer the NI system but as a car dealer it might be a pain getting vehicles through the test.
That's a tidy MR2 James better than my old one which usually passed with no advisories.Your tester is far too cautious ,engine sounds sweet as a nut and from my experience with these it's one of the better ones, Mine would oftern fail on handbrake efficiency, I used to wind the pistons out slightley just before test day and it used to sail through, I've known people remove the fuel tank to fit new handbrake cables, then despair when they still fail!
I go to an mot station that only dose mot's, never had a problem in 30 years. Interestingly if you look up a cars mot history on the DVLA web site some cars have advisories going back many years for the same thing, then there might be a years or two's gap with no advisory and then again a year later the same advisory appears
@@paulf2529 if James has used the old pads, they'll need to bed in. as you say best to drive round a bit, I did all discs and pads a while ago and car wouldn't actually stop at the end of the road(!)
Northern Ireland (The UK bit) has a totally different MOT system, cars are taken to a dedicated government test centre that inspects cars quickly, effectively and without any incentive to fail or pass a car. They do not do any repairs or sell any parts. No private MOT stations exist in NI and the system is broadly similar to the system in Republic of Ireland (the non UK bit)
I had a 2009 Skoda Octavia fail on emissions. It was well within the governments limit but out of Skodas. All I had to do was remove a sticker so the tester could not see it and the car passed without any problems.
On one hand is that old Yaris with rotting sills that passed an MoT, and on the other is this MR2 with trivial surface rust that didn't. Consistency, where art thou?
In the end I don't think it will make much difference to buying intentions, you are either in the marker for a cheaper low end of the market car or you are not and if MOT testers are going to plaster tests with rust advisories they'll end up being expected / ignored by potential customers. The customer will actually be less aware of the significance or otherwise from the MOT test and have to make their own judgement.
I had a mk3 mr2 "track day" car that was a damn money pit. You have to upgrade everything or it'll just keep breaking. I thought a turbo, brakes and cross bracing the chassis and I'd be good to go and i was for about 2 laps then the drive shafts shat themselves. Long story short I spent about 25k on a 5k car that ended up on the scrapheap.
How was that rust treatment product any good? Vaporust is supposed to be the best but I don't know where you buy it from! just picked up a Mercedes SLK 170 compressor I've got a lot of surface rest underneath. Yeah there's been issues with paint removal some regulations but you can get the good stuff you need to go to a furniture suppliers, you could use lacquer thinner as well that should remove it but wouldn't be good for the rubber! I don't know why you didn't take the tyres off. I was interested in that Jaguar what happened to it you sold it? The one with the inlet manifold issue cracked I think. I like your scissor lift who's it made by? how much does it cost? and can it go to full height? If you're interested in corporate vans caddy vans to box vans I can help you out I'm dealing in corporate vans at the moment
I was in the trade and an MOT tester and have never heard of a steel hub ever failing from corrosion, EVER. What next, drivers hat insecure, walking stick in boot may have woodworm!
Had a van failed the MOT for "obviously blurred light leaving the headlight" , no idea what that was all about, looked fine to me , sure the tester just wanted a fail to balance his stats with VOSA.
After you've done the handbrake and pipes bud get Mrs James to drive it to an mot station you don't know, just a little garage, bet it goes St thru, just tell your normal one your not bothering with it, worth paying again for a clean ticket, people go nuts about advisories these days, everbody checks into it, back in the day just a handwritten ticket, no one asked about advisory or future problems, it was no history, one key, bit of rent on the screen and a full mot, wasn't that long ago tbh.
I had a car advised for corrosion on front subframe but I'd already replaced it with a new one! When I queried this the tester said all old cars have to have some advisories so I should just deal with it! I took it for another test at a different garage and he remarked how good it was and passed it with no notes at all! The other place did vehicle repairs so I think they were just trying it on! I will never go back to them!
That is the issue because it's a cash grab
I had the same. Tester said as it was an old car (1987) if it has no advisories it would look suspicious. Only a brake pipe covered in grease etc, but still annoying. I cleaned it all off and painted it, but still got the same advisory from him the next year.
there are a lot of un-trustworthy people in the motor trade thats for sure .
You need to name the garage so we can all avoid it.
I wonder if in the near future there will be some legislation sneaked through to remove cars with “too many” advisories. Worrying.
Having spent 40 years as a mechanic and latterly a workshop manager I find a tester like that lacks confidence in his own ability and is scared of missing something
Exactly this
No they do it as its well known to lessen the likelyhood of getting a MOT quality check.....As for this exact case and what all was noted and said its clear the tester either does not like him or is taking the...........
I had fun & games with an MOT station some time ago. The car I had was a diesel Focus and the engine management light had a habit of occasionally coming on for no apparent reason (no codes were ever stored) When it came to MOT time I thought this may cause me a problem if it were to come on during the test. However, in the then current MOT testers manual, due to the year of manufacture of the car, the EML wasn't to be included as part of the test & if it illuminated, it was to be ignored.
When I went to collect the car after the test I was given the bad news of a failure and the reason being the EML illuminated. I asked if I could have a quick word with the tester about it - no problem and out to reception he came. In front of other waiting customers I asked if he would amend the certificate to a pass as it shouldn't have failed for the reason given. He said that once the certificate had been printed that it couldn't be changed, I then produced a copy of the relevant section of the manual and said this leaves you with a choice of 2 options, 1 - amend the certificate to a pass (which meant he would have to put the reason on record) or 2 - I send the certificate to DVSA and ask them to investigate. Needless to say, the tester's superior told him to amend it to a pass, I guess the garage didn't want DVSA sniffing around.
Well played
I go to a really good MOT garage. It's either a pass, fail, or advises me of something that will need looking at in the future. Some testers write, low fuel warning light on, wheel trim missing, damaged to paint work (scratches). It's a safety check, not a how nice it looks. Its either safe to be on the road or its not.
Yes mine just tells me the advisories why write them on the MOT.
@@chrishart8548 To cover your arse when in doubt , pass and advise
seems as if some MOT testers are taking the Mickey reporting slight surface corrosion on a 2005 car's wheel hub.
I would most definitely go to a different mot testing garage. Because if it's the same mot tester that you have been using, he or she seems to have a obsession with surface rust. Another great video james keep up the good work
Thank you!
I had that “rust on hub” on my daughter’s car. Spoilt an otherwise great MOT history for no good reason.
Nitromors paint stripper james
Mot tester here.... Certainly, advising rust on cast components like hubs is over the top. However..... Most of the time, when we are presented with an older car that's had various components painted or undersealed, it's not because someone's trying to protect or preserve - but because they are trying to hide things..... Therefore, a degree of Arse Covering comes into play and advisories like these start being used. Dont forget, you get 28 days to make a complaint on an MOT test - but that raises to 3 months on corrosion. That's plenty of time for a load of paint, underseal or whatever to flake away from a terminally rotten subframe, wishbone or shock absorber that's been made to look pretty for a test. My advice is to present the car for test BEFORE you do any painting or undersealing, let the tester see the car in it's honest state.
Yeah we seen the amount corrosion come off components, so yeah it’s only fair to advise corrosion. On a 19 year old car you expect that advisory…
You need another MOT tester this guy is over the top, yes important things like the power steering leak,,and water leak, certainly if he found any structural rot, but slight pitting and surface rust is taking things to far bloody hell he could even fail cars that were 2 years old.
I was a tester in Glasgow 80s i was fair,honesty is the best policy, gave the working man a true opinion.
Some of these unnecessarily advisories can make a car very hard to sell as some buyers check the mot history online and think the car is a nail.
Absolutely, I check every detail and if it’s list after list of advisories it tells me it’s been run on a shoestring and to stay clear of it!
All buyers are doing it now it's normal. Most cars I see on auto trader have a shocking mot history. Says a lot if every year it has bold tyres.
@@ClassicalEnthusiastexactly my way. I don't put car in for test unless I'm confident it will pass.
You should have seen what my car failed on. I had an alternator fail a few days before the MOT was due, car was recovered in December. I ordered a brand new alternator, charged battery up and sent it to the garage for alternator + MOT. My car failed on... engine light on, rear brake discs corroded with advisories on rear subframe corrosion and sills. Previous MOT's were straight through. I asked the garage to clear codes after fitting alternator. Rear SOLID discs had surface corrosion from being sat around for a week, even the coating was still visible on the discs. MOT tester was adamant rear discs needed replacing. Rear subframe corrosion is impossible, it's made from aluminium. This from a garage I've used for a few years. Never again.
I'm a retired MOT tester, started my apprenticeship at Colliers Austin Rover dealership in 1982, and started doing mot's in 1991, but a lifetimes experience is still there. I give all of my vehicles a pre MOT myself,and do any remedial work,before they go for MOT. As a result, i haven't had a car fail its MOT, in over 25 years ! As you quite rightly said, you agree with some of his findings,but others are just plain nonesense. I would complain to the ministry of transport, MOT division. They take a very very dim view of this kind of behaviour,and will visit the MOT testing station in question. They may even book a "Test" vehicle of thier own in. To see the result of it's test. Yes, they do,do this from time to time.
Thanks David
Absolutely do this!
I'm doing this to a Kwick Fit
this is definitely one that should be appealed, the tester should be sent for retraining
Had advisory on damaged wheel rim (kerb damage) took the ruff edges off and touched it up with wheel silver never mentioned it next year, would mention that unable to check brake pipes as I always grease them up, then mentioned surface rust on front cross member which was the most solid part of the car. Found a new MOT station that was more sensible when carrying out the MOT and have used them since
Nice one
Need a time machine for decent paint stripper, the recipe has been changed as the old ones were using Dichloromethane which is banned. The car I bought from a family member had a load of advisories from Halfrauds she'd used previously. I put it back through a local place they had no idea what Halfrauds were on about and said it was in good nick for the age, clear pass the only work they did was a a service and replaced a tyre.
There are entirely too many garages/repair centres that are all about ‘upselling’. This used to be the sort of thing you often saw at tyre places and certain chains of ‘repair’ places. The staff are on bonuses for selling you more stuff. Same practise as used by pressure salesmen throughout retail. As you need an MOT you are seen as a ‘captive customer’. This is why always dealing with a place with an impeccable reputation is essential.
Just goes to show. Find an independent. Good & Fair testing station and stick with them. Cheers 👍👍
2004 I put my immaculate 911/993 into Glenvargil Porsche for an MOT as I was living in Glasgow at the time. Failed on virtually everything, 'It needs shims too, it's failed on that also, it's going to be £3,490'. As an ex mechanic I knew the car was mint, and I knew we used to throw the shims out for pads, we never fitting them. Took it home to England and had it retested at JCT 600. Passed straight through, handbrake needed tightening, £55 all done.
I suggested checking the power steering pipes after your first video James.
They can be had for around £75 from well known popular auction site. Easy job to fit them.
Cheers
mot tester [retired ] i worked with some strange testers over the years , one chap tested the driver , if he didnt like you ,your car would fail ! some testers just love to put down anything that has rust on it ! any sensible buyer will look at and hopefully ignore it as superficial .
And here's one of the biggest reasons why A LOT of classic car owners don't bother getting a voluntary MOT on an exempt car
MOT tester is taking the piss. I had a garage say almost exactly the same. So I appealed it showing a picture of a brand new hub and the one the tester brought up. The MOt tester thought that I painted over a rusty hub, but it was a new one with a coat of two pack black over it. I had the pictures! I got a full refund and the test removed.
The testers have gone stupid. I had a brake balancer get a bit sticky, so cleaned it up, prepped all the pieces and greased the joint as best I could the service manual, the mot tester said there was damp on the outside of the unit, so I got him to put it up on the ramp, and it turned out out to be a bit of grease! He was embarrassed.
Change the garage!
This is a huge problem at the moment for small traders dealing in 10-12 year old cars. Surface corrosion advisory can ruin a sale & scare customers even though we know its perfectly normal & safe. I am all for an independent MOT as it covers us to an extent but you can see why some traders also have MOT stations. I have 2 MOT stations that I can trust but even those give the odd over the top advisory.
It’s an absolute fact that DVSA do not require a tester to add advice on an MOT test, pass or fail. There is only one exception to this, that is when an aysemtric tyre is fitted not in accordance with sidewall instructions. This fail is typical of a garage looking for work. Me, I’d call them up and casually ask for a VT17.
I would go to a better MOT station. I've dealt with this type of tester in the past, they just love to give you agravation, so dont argue with them just dont go back. I once had a car that i couldnt get the tyre size required anywhere and fitted a matching pair but a different size to the rear ones and this was stated as an advisory. Im glad i dont need to see him again. Keep up the good work.
I had one quiry a leeking steering rack that had just been replaced, and there was some power steering fluid on the subframe from the previous rack, also told me there was a nail in the tyre, which went to the next MOT without being repaired,
I have a 12 year old car with little bits of light surface corrosion here and there which I have treated with wax. My MOT station has never mentioned it. Certainly I wouldnt expect them to comment on light surface corrosion to a hub! Sounds overly fussy or a misinterpretation of the rules to me.
DCM Dichloromethane is what is missing from modern paint strippers compared to the ones from years ago. Still available for professional and business use.
Cheers
"Paramose" is the brand to look for, you need to be a registered business to buy it but shouldn't be a problem for James.
The first mot my 2005 Elise went through the tester struggled to find anything wrong, as you would expect ro a 3 year old car with less than 6k on the clock. He went to to the corner of the garage and then went back to the car carrying a 5 foot metal bar, he called me over and said that there was play in a front suspension joint while hanging off the end of the bar but he wouldn't fail it. I waited until he issued the cert and told him if he ever came near my car again I'd wrap that bar around his fxxxxxx head. I still have the car, the said joint has never been changed, wxxker.
The mot tester is taking the piss I wouldn't have advisors the hubs
Seems harsh yes
My Mercedes’ E500 09 had an advisory of surface rust to rear subframe, at the Mercedes’ main garage the next year never mentioned it, had a Honda legend get advisory every year because undertrays were fitted obscuring some components. It leaves the factory this way but is judged as an advisory !
you have now found the reason I only use 1 mot station. i had a car on finance years ago, dealer didnt have time to put it through another mot so gave me 50 quid off and let it go with 2 months mot remaining. i took it to a nearby mot station that advertised 30 quid mot who said 'it has to have an advisory on it'
and put rear subrame bush down (I was fuming). 6 months later an mot centre opened not far from that 1 that did not do any repair work so i took it to them for its next mot and without anything being done to the 'advisory' it scored a clean pass. Guess where any cars I own go when the mot is due ... a friend of mine had the same thing at a different mot centre. money making scheme?
I once had some work done on my transporter syncro and got the garage to also put an MOT on it as it was out of test. Turned out as they didnt do MOTs themselfs(which to be fair they told me) they took it to the local vauxhall main dealer who they usally use - obveously they wernt used to what was a 20 year old vehicle at the time as they give it advisories for everything not looking brand new and thrashed the shit out of it 6 times to get it through emissions. Lesson learned I’m more picky with testing stations now to know what sort of vehicles they are used to.
A mate recently had a car fail for handbrake efficency and a blown front sidelight - both fair faults. Issue was the fails logged on the sheet were “handbrake below efficency on a single circuit system” (a 2004 bora is obveously duel circult brakes - did they use the right % figure?) and “front position lamp showing white light to rear” (how exactly does a blown bulb do that then?). To me it says the tester was sloppy and didnt really care whats on the fail sheet beyond the general item which isnt ideal on a perminant record.
I have had this as well as I mentioned in a previous video of yours. They wanted to do additional work on the car and I refused on the basis that they had virtually condemned the car and it would not be worth me paying them to do that. They can’t have it both ways and expect people to throw money at a car they have have just told you is basically falling apart due to “surface corrosion “
Having tried stripper, wire wheels etc on mag wheels - take the tyres + weights off and get them sandblasted. Cleans all the crud to metal and leaves a nice surface
My wife's car passed the MOT and all four discs were advised as rusty. Unreal, the braking surfaces were fine, it was the hub part. I understand your frustration.
I am also amazed how many testers have calibrated eyes when assessing brake pads, including vehicles fitted with wheel trims!!! Very clever.
lol
Powers that be want cars of the road ,and will use any means to do so, so expect things out to get a lot worse
if its a garage and mot shop they sometimes put loads of stuff so they can fix it for more money from you , also the tester must have a certain percent of fails , prs and advisories to meet the dvla rules
The mot inspector probably saw your last video on how to polish a turd and make it shiny by spreading oil all over the paint with your old bath towels 😂😂😂😂
In the usa are states dot decides what is needed to pass and fail and there are no "advisery" past the inspector being nice and going xyz could use some atention if its not a safety concern which is also why pre purchace inspections are a must in the states.
Some MOT testers are getting worse. I keep all our vehicles in A1 condition and they don’t cover much mileage in a year. One of cars had an advisory this year that the underneath had been coated with waxoil. Yes I coated it to stop it rusting 😳. Great video as always.
They do that if something cannot be fully inspected. For example undertrays, wax or paint.
Had a Prius years ago with a foot applied 'handbrake'. Low mileage and fully serviced. Took it for an MoT at a large garage, part of a chain, and got a fail due to handbrake not working. Turned out the tester prat had been jabbing at a button inside with P marked on it (can't remember now what it was actually for, something unimportant anyway). He was completely unaware that the parking brake was foot operated. I wasn't best pleased but they said they could not take it off the record, only a retest. I'm sure testers have been told more recently to hit older cars hard as part of the EV propaganda push, as my wife's old Fiesta was hit with the same 'surface corrosion but not structurally serious' although nothing has changed from previous years. Got an advisory also on 'brake pipes covered with grease or similar' which was actually Bilt Hamber Hydrate 80 corrosion preventer (fantastic stuff by the way).
Think ou should have a word with transport ministry and ask them to check over the car for an independent assesment
There are a lot of manual advisories and incorrectly advised items on there, from my eyes, the tester has an issue with the MR2 or the owner, a lot of effort gone into bending the rules of an MOT test, anything non categorised (letters and numbers in brackets) are manual advisories, and the shock absorbers are incorrect categorised items. I would be fuming personally
if you are ever going to spray a wheel silver use moondust silver its a nice bright silver and always looks amazing :)
I used to professionally spray wheels before opening a powder coating wheel refurbishment company
Totally agree moondust is best
About 5 years ago my son's Shogun had the comment ' wide spread surface rust to chassis ' we didn't get around to doing anything about it and it's never been mentioned again on subsequent MOTs ?
Annoying eh
Not valid comments by the inspector.
They don't have the required code numbers after them.
definitely name and shame that MOT station, so we can all avoid it.
Challenge the MOT Form VT17
"Before you appeal
Discuss the test result with the MOT centre before you appeal. They can help you understand how they assessed your vehicle to the standards in either the:
MOT inspection manual for cars and passenger vehicles
MOT inspection manual for motorcycles
Appeal if you still think the result is wrong after talking to the MOT centre.
If you repair your vehicle before you appeal, it can affect the outcome of the appeal".
With Karcher pressure washers you can get a very long hose for the lance, saves any tripping over anything and they last about 8 years before wearing through so not bad.
Going well
@@ChopsGarage I've been valeting for 26 years this year and I started off with the expensive pressure washers, but bought a cheap Karcher when I need one really quick and never spent more than £50 on one since as they last just as long, extended hose was about £40 last time I bought one and the pressure is adequate for washing a motor down. Yearly cost on pressure washers down to £18 a year, can't be bad!
I had the same problem with my local MOT station last year . I have taken my ford c max (2007) to the same place every year it always passed without any advisories. The guy that done the MOT always said it was in very good condition underneath for a car of that year .
I went back to the same place last year but it was a different MOT tester he failed it on the sills and both front and rear subframes along with both front wishbones. I asked him why the car passed all the other years without advisories then 1 year and 2000 miles later it suddenly had all these issues.
His reply was every tester has different acceptance levels regarding corrosion. I had to scrap the car even after getting underneath giving it a good going over I couldn't see anything but surface rust . So there you go it depends on the tester which is wrong they should all be trained to the same level .
Why didn't you take it somewhere else before scrapping it.. would probably have passed ..
i had a 2 advisorys ,1 windscreen tint slightly dark ,its a factory tint lol ,2 suspension stiff ,its on coilovers .people that do MOT these days have hardly any mechanical experience
Hello James love the MR2 me and the the wife’s favorite car in our younger days. Nice to see the depth of detail you go into. Great work mate😂
"Frost" strip gel paint stripper is the best out there. All Frost's body products are amazing.
I have advisories of "Surface Corrosion - Not seriously weakened" on virtually every component of My Suspension Subframes etc nearly two pages worth!!
Hello James and fellow worker (sorry - missed your name!!) very interesting seeing what has been done in preparation for the MOT test. Well, some result that was to produce a "fail" - can I suggest a different MOT test station / engineer? Really do not know how you can rectify the "wheel hub" problem?? I do think that some testing station(s) are looking for extra work - and this is really NOT acceptable! Best wishes from Lincolnshire
There are two council/local authority MOT stations in Devon which don't do repairs and are supposed to be totally impartial but too far away from you (Paignton and Ivybridge) .
That is nuts. I have never seen rusty hubs mentioned as an issue.
The comment about surface rust being a myth is correct as the corrosion is penetrating below the surface of the material through the intergranular cracks between the steel crystals. How deep it goes will depend on the material composition (alloy mix) and the level of exposure.
I had a fail on a motorhome which was in mint condition because the towing plug showed to be wrong even though it was originally fitted when the vehicle chassis was built by the manufacturer because the canbus system detected that it was not a proper loading. I then plugged in a trailer board which worked perfectly. They passed it but they had already recorded it as a fail and this could not be removed from the vehicle history.
annoying!
You could have requested that the tester amended the certificate rather than issue a new pass certificate. They probably told you they had to leave it as already recorded as a fail because if the tester amends a certificate he/she has to record the reason on the system and they don't want these "mistakes" to show up on their testing record as DVSA have a habit of getting interested in certificate amendments.
Report the mot tester! I did this on my company vehicle & vosa re moted (which i charged back to company). It got a clean no advisory mot. No idea what happened to the kwik fift mot inspector...
You get suirface rust on those parts when a car is brand new!
Which planet does that mot tester live on ?
Clearly an mot test station to be avoided, he has given your car a criminal record for all
buyers to see !
Yep
@@ChopsGarage Surely not, they're only advisories not fail items?
@@1701_FyldeFlyer first thing people message , if they message at all, have the advisories been done
The hubs are manually written advisories by the tester , rather than actual tick box advisories in the mot manual ( hence no numbers or letters after the writing ) , not sure on the shock advisories without seeing the spring cups .. best idea is to find a test station that only does mot’s and NOT repairs, you will get an honest mot then.
I currently own an MR2 which unfortunately is an MOT failure. Interesting point here which I did not know, but MR2 actually stands for ( Midship Runabout )
Anothert point MOTs should be done at goverment run centres like HGVs,and then repaired at a garage.this would stop these adviseries .i think?
yea but if your hgv fails it gets sectioned and it has to get towed
They could never cope with the volume of tests!
just like in most of european countries
Yeah because the Governor are great at testing millions of things fairly and consistently 🙄🙄
HGVs are not done anymore at a government run station , all done by HGV garages or haulage companies
Good point, my car came back with advisory of rusy rear coil springs, nope they were like new, i will never trust an mot station again and I'm ready to question any advisory.
I always used to take my car to Halfords for an MOT as was almost half the normal price. Had 8 Advisories Sorted 3 of them that I thought should be done. Took it to my local independent garage the next year & the other 5 had disappeared by Magic!😆😆😆
Never use Halfords, Tried to charge 600 quid for a vw golf seizing caliper ,which just needed a clean and grease of the sliders and a handbrake cable
When you start removing parts and not replacing them some garage or customer may think you are trying to hide something. In my opinion if you are taking parts off due to rust please replace them with either new or used ones. The backing plate on the brakes is there to prevent grease and other road grime from damaging your brake rotors. Again this is just my opinion and that is what i would do.
I've noticed that unnecessary advisories have been on the increase for a few years now. My pet conspiracy theory is that the government want older cars off the road and everyone driving EV's so MOT stations have been instructed to advise on anything they perceive may fail within the next 100k miles. The resulting advisory list will scare the owner into selling the vehicle before the next MOT and put off potential buyers. The desired effect is to reduce resale values of older cars therefore increasing the number that get scrapped which they hope will boost sales of EV's.
Last year the MOT station 'advised' that all 4 of my tyres were slightly perished, this year they did not - same inspector and same tyres! If I had been wanting to sell the car after last years MOT the buyer could have used those advisories to try and negotiate the price down by saying they will need to buy 4 new tyres.
Correct anti car agenda continues at a pace!
You did a really good job. Love your videos.
Glad you like them!
Cheap project cars are always hard to pass up 😂❤ and I too would be looking for a new MOT station; someone is obsessed with noting every little bit of corrosion, and it's costing you money.
Tester is lifting your leg on this surface rust. My Fusion had surface rust, but was solid, so no advisories. Have you ever tried that Lanoguard stuff, I treat all my cars with it, and tester commented on how good underneath my 2010 107 is. Some testers are just being difficult.
Havent mot testers been instructed to advise on any surface rust even minor stuff.
Government just want us driving around in brand new electric cars thus making it harder and harder to hang on to your earth destroying petrol vehicles. ⛽
Poss true
No, we haven't, this is exceptionally harsh with the tester having an obvious issue with the car or the owner, especially the manual advisories........
@@PexTheStealthVan sounds like you maybe be a tester yourself, Could the tester concerned himself passed a car previously that should not of passed so vosa got involved, if so this is why he is covering his own back now or maybe a newly qualified tester just being too cautious ( im a ex mot tester myself )
@vincef836 no, this would go the other way from my point of view and, i may be wrong to other peoples oppinions, , first off the car is nearly 20 years old, the power steering leak I would have to see how bad the leak is for it to have failed, hence no comment, advising incorrect items and manual advisories are frowned upon, there are loads of "grey" areas when testing but I saw this as a bit harsh personally, that is going out of a testers was to advise as many items as possible 🙂
@@PexTheStealthVan Thanks for your reply i do think the tester was being a bit harsh with all those advisories and yes i have read the latest testers manual certainly some grey areas now im glad in a way im no longer a tester (just changed job career)
Love that MG! Looks tough and modern
I was looking at the MOT history of a Ford Kuga diesel and the MOT advisory for the last 3 years reads " Exhaust Emissions were too clean to read during test"
Is it a disgrace the car doesn't pollute enough?
Mot testers i find really hit and miss. After my tester retired i yook my volvo to a guy people recommended. I was expecting a fail to an inner rack end cause it was a stupid one i struggled to find. He failed it on a multitude of stuff including handbrake not working, lower ball joint, buckled wheel and "rust covering both subframes". Then saud they cant do the work for 2 weeks but it's booked in. I said ill be doing the work and he looked at me like i had 2 heads. Out of curiosity i tested the handbrake and they were both locked up when i pulled away. Shouted the tester about whats this about and he said it failed on the rollers.
Anyway took it away. I replaced the inner tie rod, didnt touch the rest but took it to another tester. Give him the fail sheet and told him the story. After the test he shouted me over while its on the lift and showed me everything on the list. Not an issue only that there was excess play in the handbrake. And all the "rust". Was dried on mud. So it passed.
So ive used him ever since. Hes not a puah over either, the wife took hers in ans he refused to teat it because it was so full of mud he couldn't see. She was fuming 😂😂
I took my old car to a local National tyres, the mot tester failed it on a few things including outer cv boots not secure, I called them out on that because the car had a history of that problem and I had been keeping an eye on it, including just before the test, the next excuse was because he saw oil so thought they were insecure, next excuse was they had cable ties to keep them on, I didn’t believe that excuse but pointed out it was their MOT tester colleague in the Halfords that had put them on the year before, ( and charged £20 to change an indicator bulb) National tyres had to fix properly with metal clips, the buggered up the inner cv boot repair so got to go back. The National tyres MOT tester did not fail the car on a perished steering boot that I told them before hand that it would fail on. The Moral to my experience is to Avoid National tyres and Halfords.
Please don't crawl underneath any vehicles with just a jack supporting it couldn't see any axel stands under the aygo
It's a bit like saying the ship can't sail as the cast iron ancor has rust on it 😂😂😂
I had a mot inspector write down the colour of a car as 'rust' once, but he did eventually pass it! A long time ago now before the world went stupid
MOTs seem so be so inconsistent, I get advisories on my old vehicles one year and the next year the faults have magically disappeared. On the other hand l recently had a failure due to structural rot that needed welding which wasn't even mentioned as an advisory the year before.
I have 2 testers. One always notes tyres, the other exhaust mounts. Same mounting still on car 10 years later. 😂
In Northern Ireland we have a different system whereby it is Government run with testing staff carrying out tests on Hgvs light goods/ private m/c etc.
It has in general a series of lanes leading to rolling brake testers, automated light testers, ramps, pits etc depending on the vehicle.
Advantages- The guys are fairly decent imho and there is not really any financial incentive ie upselling etc.
Disadvantages- Covid backlog and problems with the hydraulic ramps suppliers having structural damage has resulted in backlogs so it’s not as quick and that bad that there is a more relaxed approach to mot status if it’s expired and you have a date booked you are not likely to be prosecuted and insurers tend to cooperate.
Having experienced both the English and NI system. I think I prefer the NI system but as a car dealer it might be a pain getting vehicles through the test.
yes someone recommended local place that does mots only
@@ChopsGarage you do realise it’s all your own fault you should always polish your vehicle hubs daily to prevent any rust build up 😂
my stepdad put his van in for a mot and was told he needed two front tyres the same garage had fitted two new front tyres 3 weeks earlier
I have just had to replace front hubs on a Volvo because the abs ring was corroded and caused the abs light to come on
That's a tidy MR2 James better than my old one which usually passed with no advisories.Your tester is far too cautious ,engine sounds sweet as a nut and from my experience with these it's one of the better ones, Mine would oftern fail on handbrake efficiency, I used to wind the pistons out slightley just before test day and it used to sail through, I've known people remove the fuel tank to fit new handbrake cables, then despair when they still fail!
Latest one is unable to inspect due to protection covers in place 🙄 do they not think before they write this bile?
MoT bloke was being a knob - possibly fresh on the job or had an inspector breathing down his neck.
I go to an mot station that only dose mot's, never had a problem in 30 years. Interestingly if you look up a cars mot history on the DVLA web site some cars have advisories going back many years for the same thing, then there might be a years or two's gap with no advisory and then again a year later the same advisory appears
Trying one of those this week in fact
Agree on the surface rust comment...Surface rust is stuff you catch in time 😮
Yep
I always try to move wheels by hand when I've done a brake job, maybe pads bedding in or cables.
Agree, if possible I like to drive on my new brakes for a few days after changing them prior to any mot.
Yeah did ask Pete to check
@@paulf2529 if James has used the old pads, they'll need to bed in. as you say best to drive round a bit, I did all discs and pads a while ago and car wouldn't actually stop at the end of the road(!)
@@ChopsGarage great bud
Cables cause poor handbrake. Genuine Toyota cables are the answer, not cheap though. My next job on my mk3 MR2.
Looks to be what we in New Zealand call an mr-s. The MR2 is quite a different Toyota.
Northern Ireland (The UK bit) has a totally different MOT system, cars are taken to a dedicated government test centre that inspects cars quickly, effectively and without any incentive to fail or pass a car. They do not do any repairs or sell any parts. No private MOT stations exist in NI and the system is broadly similar to the system in Republic of Ireland (the non UK bit)
And system is completely overloaded
Its not really a incentive problem. The tester is just a bellend.
I had a 2009 Skoda Octavia fail on emissions. It was well within the governments limit but out of Skodas. All I had to do was remove a sticker so the tester could not see it and the car passed without any problems.
On one hand is that old Yaris with rotting sills that passed an MoT, and on the other is this MR2 with trivial surface rust that didn't. Consistency, where art thou?
In the end I don't think it will make much difference to buying intentions, you are either in the marker for a cheaper low end of the market car or you are not and if MOT testers are going to plaster tests with rust advisories they'll end up being expected / ignored by potential customers. The customer will actually be less aware of the significance or otherwise from the MOT test and have to make their own judgement.
I had a mk3 mr2 "track day" car that was a damn money pit. You have to upgrade everything or it'll just keep breaking. I thought a turbo, brakes and cross bracing the chassis and I'd be good to go and i was for about 2 laps then the drive shafts shat themselves. Long story short I spent about 25k on a 5k car that ended up on the scrapheap.
How was that rust treatment product any good? Vaporust is supposed to be the best but I don't know where you buy it from! just picked up a Mercedes SLK 170 compressor I've got a lot of surface rest underneath. Yeah there's been issues with paint removal some regulations but you can get the good stuff you need to go to a furniture suppliers, you could use lacquer thinner as well that should remove it but wouldn't be good for the rubber! I don't know why you didn't take the tyres off. I was interested in that Jaguar what happened to it you sold it? The one with the inlet manifold issue cracked I think.
I like your scissor lift who's it made by? how much does it cost? and can it go to full height?
If you're interested in corporate vans caddy vans to box vans I can help you out I'm dealing in corporate vans at the moment
I was in the trade and an MOT tester and have never heard of a steel hub ever failing from corrosion, EVER.
What next, drivers hat insecure, walking stick in boot may have woodworm!
Lol
Woodworm is a serious matter!
Had a van failed the MOT for "obviously blurred light leaving the headlight" , no idea what that was all about, looked fine to me , sure the tester just wanted a fail to balance his stats with VOSA.
Looking forward to watching.
Hope you enjoy!
@@ChopsGarage very good as usual.
After you've done the handbrake and pipes bud get Mrs James to drive it to an mot station you don't know, just a little garage, bet it goes St thru, just tell your normal one your not bothering with it, worth paying again for a clean ticket, people go nuts about advisories these days, everbody checks into it, back in the day just a handwritten ticket, no one asked about advisory or future problems, it was no history, one key, bit of rent on the screen and a full mot, wasn't that long ago tbh.