Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[JamesV6CDX]

Took my 180k 20 year old L322 V8 LPG Rangie for it's MOT a couple of days ago.

I was (joyfully) amazed that it only failed on an offisde front lower suspension arm balljoint.

The year before, I had loads of advisories for almost all the front bushes and balljoints (both sides) play in track rods, CV Joint / Boot, leak of exhaust gasses, brake discs, corroded brake pipes, etc etc.

I've not done any of those items since the 2021 test, and have done 7k miles since that MOT.

Yet, none of those items were picked up on the new test - not even as advisories.

How can there be so much inconsistency between MOT garages? I can only think different testers have different thresholds for what constitutes "play" or "wear" etc?

[YZ250]

I’ve taken my vehicles to the same garage every year for the last thirty odd years and some of my vehicles have been self healing apparently. The same chap did the mot for most of those years. My Omega got flagged up for faded indicator lenses two years on the trot when it was around six years old, but that advisory never appeared again for the remaining years until I sold it in 2019. My A6 had an advisory for slight play in the front arm lower rear joint both sides last year, but flew through the mot with no advisory this year. I’d covered around three thousand miles in it.

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

Depends on who tests it, and what mood they are in.

[cam.in.head]

just take it to kwik fit. they will all majically reappear again.plus more !

[dave the builder]

An MOT pass just means the car met minimum safety standards at the time of the test .
and the standards are pretty low 
Many people get an MOT and that's it for another year , no maintenance and take NO notice of any advisories on the MOT.
they only go back to a garage before the MOT is due again if the car is not getting them from A to B as it should .
many drivers are not mechanically minded enough to realise the knocks from suspension,engine,moving parts etc may be a sign of imminent failure .
many NEVER check their tyres , lights ,screen wash or even oil 

Many NTs (MOT testers) fail to read the manual or understand it 

some NTs rush a test ,risking missing things , other NTs list everything , no matter how minor ,either to cover their arse , OR for the work ££££

I used to take my cars to the nearest station and get annoyed with fails and advisories i knew where BS .

about 15 years ago I had to get my 1993 carlton tested ,but it didn't have it's C20NE engine ,that had sh*t it's pot full 
It had a 20SEH (cav SRi) lump 

I spoke to 7 MOT stations ,who all said it needed a full CAT emissions test 
I'd read the MOT manual ,knew it should be a BET test .
finally found a test station who said " I'll phone VOSA and ask" he did , BET test done , MOT passed 

I've been taking all my cars there since , NOT because it's a MOT station that "turns a blind eye" or CBA to test properly .

the tester is very strict , also a police special , so he does an honest MOT, that motivates me to make sure everything is in order BEFORE I present a car for test .

It is however good to have a second set of eyes check the cars over too, i case i miss something ,which, I admit ,in the past , I have 

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

An MOT pass just means the car met minimum safety standards at the time of the test .
and the standards are pretty low 
Many people get an MOT and that's it for another year , no maintenance and take NO notice of any advisories on the MOT.
they only go back to a garage before the MOT is due again if the car is not getting them from A to B as it should .
many drivers are not mechanically minded enough to realise the knocks from suspension,engine,moving parts etc may be a sign of imminent failure .
many NEVER check their tyres , lights ,screen wash or even oil 

Many NTs (MOT testers) fail to read the manual or understand it 

some NTs rush a test ,risking missing things , other NTs list everything , no matter how minor ,either to cover their arse , OR for the work ££££

I used to take my cars to the nearest station and get annoyed with fails and advisories i knew where BS .

about 15 years ago I had to get my 1993 carlton tested ,but it didn't have it's C20NE engine ,that had sh*t it's pot full 
It had a 20SEH (cav SRi) lump 

I spoke to 7 MOT stations ,who all said it needed a full CAT emissions test 
I'd read the MOT manual ,knew it should be a BET test .
finally found a test station who said " I'll phone VOSA and ask" he did , BET test done , MOT passed 

I've been taking all my cars there since , NOT because it's a MOT station that "turns a blind eye" or CBA to test properly .

the tester is very strict , also a police special , so he does an honest MOT, that motivates me to make sure everything is in order BEFORE I present a car for test .

It is however good to have a second set of eyes check the cars over too, i case i miss something ,which, I admit ,in the past , I have 

The MOT was introduced in 1960.

I wonder how difficult it was to obtain a pass back then.

[dave the builder]

The MOT was introduced in 1960.

I wonder how difficult it was to obtain a pass back then.

Why you asking me 
I wasn't even born till 1970 

[Nick W]

An MOT pass just means the car met minimum safety standards at the time of the test .
and the standards are pretty low 
Many people get an MOT and that's it for another year , no maintenance and take NO notice of any advisories on the MOT.
they only go back to a garage before the MOT is due again if the car is not getting them from A to B as it should .
many drivers are not mechanically minded enough to realise the knocks from suspension,engine,moving parts etc may be a sign of imminent failure .
many NEVER check their tyres , lights ,screen wash or even oil 

Many NTs (MOT testers) fail to read the manual or understand it 

some NTs rush a test ,risking missing things , other NTs list everything , no matter how minor ,either to cover their arse , OR for the work ££££

I used to take my cars to the nearest station and get annoyed with fails and advisories i knew where BS .

about 15 years ago I had to get my 1993 carlton tested ,but it didn't have it's C20NE engine ,that had sh*t it's pot full 
It had a 20SEH (cav SRi) lump 

I spoke to 7 MOT stations ,who all said it needed a full CAT emissions test 
I'd read the MOT manual ,knew it should be a BET test .
finally found a test station who said " I'll phone VOSA and ask" he did , BET test done , MOT passed 

I've been taking all my cars there since , NOT because it's a MOT station that "turns a blind eye" or CBA to test properly .

the tester is very strict , also a police special , so he does an honest MOT, that motivates me to make sure everything is in order BEFORE I present a car for test .

It is however good to have a second set of eyes check the cars over too, in case i miss something ,which, I admit, in the past , I have 

I can't fault any of that , although I don't worry about fussy advisories. I do fix the ones that matter, or will become a problem before the next test. It does help to know the code - like sill covers fitted actually means 'we've welded enough of these to know they're rotten, but aren't allowed to remove the covers and prove it.'


I use the garage 100m down the road from home for all of the reasons you use yours, plus the convenience(they often park the car in the same space it came from) and they still give me the trade rate. I've never had a car fail on anything I disagree with, and they know the only extra money they will get from me will be for tyres. The owner has mentioned that a couple of cars I've presented 'look shit, but are good underneath unlike a lot we see.'


I vehemently disagree with the MOT exemption for older cars because many owners only ever fix stuff that fails an MOT, and there are lots of  people working on cars whose judgement and workmanship is appalling. No industry allows safety critical inspections to be done by the user or person who did the work for that last reason.

[JamesV6CDX]

Changed the OSF and NSF lower arms yesterday as per the MOT failure for the OSF one. I knew I was changing the correct one, because the tester marked it, and also pointed it out to me on the ramp. I only changed both sides because that’s good practice.

Absolutely nothing wrong with them. Bushes firm and intact, balljoint without play.

It was clear from just jacking and shaking the wheel, that the balljoint which has *actually* failed is the one where the upper front arm meets the hub - not the lower one. 

How can a VOSA trained tester get something so simple, so fundamentally wrong?

Also, the NSF upper balljoint is shot, tonnes of play when shaking the wheel - wasn’t even picked up. I only noticed it because I always do suspension components in pairs!

[countrywoman]

VOSA do not train testers for wear, just to do the procedure correctly. It's down to the persons experience/knowledge or the insufficient training course that some do if they have no mechanical knowledge. You could be a shelf stacker from Tesco's and have never touched a spanner, go on the course and a few weeks later be a NT.     

[dave the builder]

There is also an allowed /permitted amount of wear / play to "pin and bush" depending on the "pin" size
I agree that standards vary massively 
I'd rather have a strict tester who spends the full 45 minutes looking and pay the full £55
than have some spotty youth on an ATL(automated test lane ) do a 20 minute glance and miss something

[JamesV6CDX]

Ok let me be more direct.

The upper front ball joints on both sides are bloody dangerous.

And both we’re missed.

Yet the balljoint it failed on is like new.

Tester is an old guy and doesn’t look like a rookie.

I’m not wanting to kick up any fuss. I’m taking the easy repair as a win I’m just baffled.

[Doctor Gollum]

I always watch the test, and the garage I normally go to allows me to observe directly as they find each item. Also allow the opportunity to carry out a thorough check of the underside whilst it's in the air.

[dave the builder]

Ok let me be more direct.

The upper front ball joints on both sides are bloody dangerous.

And both we’re missed.

Yet the balljoint it failed on is like new.

Tester is an old guy and doesn’t look like a rookie.

I’m not wanting to kick up any fuss. I’m taking the easy repair as a win I’m just baffled.

I'm not disagreeing with you 
testing standards vary massively .

was it a single NT with no "helper" to operate the controls/rock the steering etc ? on an ATL with shaker plates ?

[JamesV6CDX]

Ok let me be more direct.

The upper front ball joints on both sides are bloody dangerous.

And both we’re missed.

Yet the balljoint it failed on is like new.

Tester is an old guy and doesn’t look like a rookie.

I’m not wanting to kick up any fuss. I’m taking the easy repair as a win I’m just baffled.

I'm not disagreeing with you 
testing standards vary massively .

was it a single NT with no "helper" to operate the controls/rock the steering etc ? on an ATL with shaker plates ?

Yep, he did it on his own