|
Don't bother and move on.
The tester has to fail it as it is on the on line system from DVSA.
The Mot history will show it failed and passed on the same day with same mileage and reason for failure.
|
|
Would a rectified washer fault at MoT make anyone even hesitate buying a car second hand.
|
|
The emissions part of the test is time recorded from start to finish so would these times help establish the fail to pass period. If not then the date should suffice. Annoying I know but as the process is controlled by computer and input is by the tester human error does happen. How many cars have you jumped in and know every button? It will make no difference at sale time.
|
|
|
Would a rectified washer fault at MoT make anyone even hesitate buying a car second hand.
Nope
|
|
Especailly a 14 year old one which is getting to bangernomics territory,
|
|
|
|
My last MOT had an incorrectly recorded mileage. I noticed it before I left the garage. They were able to correct it and the incorrect figure has never appeared online. They must be allowed to make some amendments.
|
|
|
Would a rectified washer fault at MoT make anyone even hesitate buying a car second hand. --- Nope
I don't make a habit of looking at MoT histories, but having owned a series of elderly 205s over the years, I am accustomed to finding FAIL immediately followed by PASS at the same mileage and often the same day, for some trivial item such as the numberplate lamp already mentioned. It's no big deal unless the failure was for something fundamental.
|
|
|
|
|
The tester has to fail it as it is on the on line system from DVSA.
I have had 205s failed for a non-op rear numberplate lamp, which the tester (my trusted local indy) immediately replaced and retested for a Pass. He said it was part of 'the system' and didn't matter, despite seeming a bit silly. Correctly he might have asked for the car to come back for a 'repair' and retest, but that would have been sillier.
|
|
Same here Andrew. Our Mazda 3 failed for the high level stop light bulb. They replaced it and issued a fail then a pass. Probably helps their stats to show reasonable balance of .failures to passes. In any case there is no retest fee if you did it yourself and presented the car for retest so the garage saves itself the hassle and cost of a second unchargeable visit.
By the way the cost of the replacement fitted bulb was only a couple of quid. No doubt a main dealer would have charged a lot more.
As for “dudes” case, it’s an honest mistake at no cost. Unlike our previous indie who issued 4 advisories for 4 tyres on the limit and tried to sell me a full new set when they were actually between 3 and 6 mm (subsequently confirmed by a tyre fitting chain). That was a clear attempt to defraud me but I couldn’t be bothered to pursue it. But I have tipped off everyone I know who use him to watch out.
|
|
Thanks for all the feedback.
I was actually expecting more outrage on my behalf, but as most of you say I should move on, I will do just that! :>)
I'm not bothered about the Fail affecting a future sale, it's more that I dislike sloppiness. It's my opinion that if the tester can't find the switch to operate the front washers (and all Mercedes from the Naughties have a single stalk which operates everything), then you go and ask the customer, not give the ruddy car a Fail!
I've taken John F's advice and sent off the appeal form anyway, just for the devilment of it really. Will come back and update if anything happens....
|
|
All this could have been avoided if the mot station had carried out a Prs . Good luck with the Dvsa . Not too sure what you are trying to appeal. The car passed the mot .
|
|
|
I've taken John F's advice and sent off the appeal form anyway, just for the devilment of it really. Will come back and update if anything happens....
Presuming you're not going back there for MOT next year - they might be a bit more thorough after a complaint!
|
I've taken John F's advice and sent off the appeal form anyway, just for the devilment of it really. Will come back and update if anything happens....
Presuming you're not going back there for MOT next year - they might be a bit more thorough after a complaint!
That's the thing though John F, I've been going to the same place for several years but didn't know until afterwards that the usual tester was on holiday this week ??
May still take the SLK there next month.
|
|
Yes I think you have to cut them some slack when it’s not deliberate. Maybe you should take Mercedes to task for not having foolproof basic controls ;-).
|
|
Any tester with even a modicum of common sense would have asked the owner, he's bviously too proud.
It sounds like he didn't even realise that the rear washer was operating either?
|
|
Some years ago when I took the Caterham for its MOT I was surprised to see one of the workshop techs from a place I had worked at previously doing the test. The car was probably 20 years old by this time and never had an issue but he threatened to fail it on the switches on the dash. I explained that they were the standard factory fit ones that Caterham had used from the late 70's which were BL parts used on the Marina, Allegro etc. Caterham were still fitting those switches at that time, no idea if they still do. We had a "discussion" and he said he felt it should be failed since they would not comply with current regs, basically I said fine and would be referring it to the DVSA for them to sort. At that point the garage owner came over and asked about the issue and immediately instructed the chap to pass it, he refused so the owner issued the certificate. Been back every years since, never had an issue whoever has tested it since but it hasn't been that chap, this year it was the garage owner in a separate bay (covid rules?) but never saw the muppet again.
Any tester with even a modicum of common sense
He clearly had no common sense.
|
|
MoT requirements are rarely retrospective - if the vehicle equipment met original standards there's no requirement to meet present standards
|
|
It doesn't look good if an MoT tester passes every car first time.
A few "failures" keeps the authorities happy....
|
It doesn't look good if an MoT tester passes every car first time.
A few "failures" keeps the authorities happy....
Ooohh a little conspiracy theory :-)
I'm sure MOT testers have more than enough cars that they can fail without having to make any up.
|
|
No this came from my mechanic of 20 years.
Most of their customers have a service and MoT together so they have an almost 100% pass rate.
|
Most of their customers have a service and MoT together so they have an almost 100% pass rate.
'Servicing' and passing a MoT don't overlap a great deal, unless the instruction includes fixing any failure points, or 'servicing' includes a 100-point check. Changing oil and checking fluids has little to do with roadworthiness.
|
|
When a car is taken to a garage for a service and MOT test the MOT test is carried out first. That is the way that the DVSA say it must be done in order to give the government information about the general standards in condition of vehicles being presented for testing.
Several years ago I presented my car to my usual garage for a service and MOT test. I knew that it had a broken front spring which, quite obviously, would need to be replaced before the car would pass it's test. I'd asked them to replace the spring, carry out the service and MOT test my car. All this work was carried out and, after the required payment, I was given an appropriate receipt and new MOT pass certificate.
However, when I looked online at my car's MOT history I saw that the car was tested first and actually failed it's MOT test due to a broken front spring. I was never given a failure certificate, only the pass one, but I know this is the way that the DVSA ask for their service to be carried out so it's correct.
|
|
When a car is taken to a garage for a service and MOT test the MOT test is carried out first. That is the way that the DVSA say it must be done in order to give the government information about the general standards in condition of vehicles being presented for testing.
I don't know how this relates to the BMW dealership near me. They send all their cars outside to a third party MOT station so I cannot see them sending their cars here first and then having them back for servicing The MOT certificate is in the name of the third party obviously. Another MOT station has also got arrangements with other dealers. A technician working in a dealership would if he were doing his job rectify any faults before sending the customers car to the MOT. Surely the customers contract with the garage is to put his car in a roadworthy state before an MOT..
Many service centres even advertise a free Pre MOT to encourage custom
|
When a car is taken to a garage for a service and MOT test the MOT test is carried out first. That is the way that the DVSA say it must be done in order to give the government information about the general standards in condition of vehicles being presented for testing.
Several years ago I presented my car to my usual garage for a service and MOT test. I knew that it had a broken front spring which, quite obviously, would need to be replaced before the car would pass it's test. I'd asked them to replace the spring, carry out the service and MOT test my car. All this work was carried out and, after the required payment, I was given an appropriate receipt and new MOT pass certificate.
However, when I looked online at my car's MOT history I saw that the car was tested first and actually failed it's MOT test due to a broken front spring. I was never given a failure certificate, only the pass one, but I know this is the way that the DVSA ask for their service to be carried out so it's correct.
If you really did ask them to 'repair' the car before they 'tested' and then 'serviced' the car, it should not have 'failed' its MoT. Yours pedantically,....
|
When a car is taken to a garage for a service and MOT test the MOT test is carried out first. That is the way that the DVSA say it must be done in order to give the government information about the general standards in condition of vehicles being presented for testing.
Several years ago I presented my car to my usual garage for a service and MOT test. I knew that it had a broken front spring which, quite obviously, would need to be replaced before the car would pass it's test. I'd asked them to replace the spring, carry out the service and MOT test my car. All this work was carried out and, after the required payment, I was given an appropriate receipt and new MOT pass certificate.
However, when I looked online at my car's MOT history I saw that the car was tested first and actually failed it's MOT test due to a broken front spring. I was never given a failure certificate, only the pass one, but I know this is the way that the DVSA ask for their service to be carried out so it's correct.
If you really did ask them to 'repair' the car before they 'tested' and then 'serviced' the car, it should not have 'failed' its MoT. Yours pedantically,....
Please read what I've said! Yes, my car should have initially failed the MOT Test because, as ordered by the DVSA (It was actually VOSA at the time), cars presented for a service and MOT test should to be tested first before any further work is carried out.
|
..... I'd asked them to replace the spring, carry out the service and MOT test my car. All this work was carried out and, after the required payment, I was given an appropriate receipt and new MOT pass certificate.
However, when I looked online at my car's MOT history I saw that the car was tested first and actually failed it's MOT test due to a broken front spring. I was never given a failure certificate, only the pass one, but I know this is the way that the DVSA ask for their service to be carried out so it's correct.
If you really did ask them to 'repair' the car before they 'tested' and then 'serviced' the car, it should not have 'failed' its MoT. Yours pedantically,....
Please read what I've said! Yes, my car should have initially failed the MOT Test because, as ordered by the DVSA (It was actually VOSA at the time), cars presented for a service and MOT test should to be tested first before any further work is carried out.
I did. You said clearly that you asked them to replace the spring........and then present it for service and an MoT. In that order. Yours extrapedantically....
Glad you managed to get the result you should have had in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
Lets face it-most sensible car owners know well before a test if their car is going to pass. Yes-there are some who put their bangers in on a wing and a prayer--but folk like you are clearly conscientious.
Indeed, wing and a prayer has always been my automotive MO.
The omniscience alternative apparently used by "most sensible car owners" would have required me to, for example, buy an exhaust gas analyser, and perhaps take an advanced psychology degree to predict the various subjective biases and rule-breaking of some testers.
I did once have an attack of conscientiousness though, pointing out a shiny nail in a tyre to the MOT tester because it seemed to be getting longer, and was a bit close to the back of his head.
He was distracted, being too busy clouting my flange-welds with a BFH (against the rules, and without effect, cos they were STRONG) to, like, do his job.
No good deed goes unpunished.
Edited by edlithgow on 01/02/2021 at 11:54
|
|
|
Lets face it - most sensible car owners know well before a test if their car is going to pass. Yes-there are some who put their bangers in on a wing and a prayer--but folk like you are clearly conscientious.
I suspect quite a lot of simple-minded or very busy owners expect their car to visit a garage once a year for a medical check-up, which they hope will prevent anything going wrong for another 12 months. Some will ask for a basic 'service' too. Thoughtful ones may ask for a test reminder so they don't completely forget everything ?
|
|
Update: Received an email from DVSA last Tuesday saying they had received my complaint and it would be passed to the local office.
Missed a phone call while I was at work on Thursday from the local office, wishing to discuss the matter. Haven't been able to reach him since so will try tomorrow morning.
|
|
After a pleasant chat with the DVSA guy, he has spoken to the garage and the tester, who have confirmed that my account within the complaint is true and accurate.
The incorrect Fail will be removed from the MOT history on the gov.uk website.
Unprompted, he also said "I can't divulge what action will be taken against the garage", so it sounds as though there may be consequences for the tester's lackadaisical attitude.
As far as I'm concerned, this is the result I wanted.
|
|
May you never have areal problem in your life, just hope the Tester's boss is more realistic than you!
|
|
The tester will get a telling off . It’s the mot station that will get any penalty points if the Dvsa sees it that way. You say that you’ve had a good relationship with the mot station in the past . Looks like you’ve blown that . Time to look elsewhere for a test in the future .
|
|
|
|
Thanks sammy1, much appreciated. I've had some big problems and bad luck in my life, so stop with the judgemental comments.
Sloppy work needs consequences or we end up in a never ending spiral of complacency.
Thanks to @John F for the advice to download the VT17.
Still thinking I'll book the SLK in for its MOT there this month. Perhaps the usual tester will be back and he'll be as good as ever. Certainly wouldn't expect any ill will, that would be really unprofessional.
|
|
Sloppy work needs consequences or we end up in a never ending spiral of complacency.
I would hardly call the MOT station sloppy. From your very first post you say that the garage called you to explain their situation with the operating procedure of the cars washers. How many MOT stations would do this or indeed should they legally do this. I thought you had a right to observe your MOT taking place but not to interfere. You have exercised your right to appeal. Mountain out of a mole hill, you got a pass without any subsequent visit
|
Sloppy work needs consequences or we end up in a never ending spiral of complacency.
I would hardly call the MOT station sloppy. From your very first post you say that the garage called you to explain their situation with the operating procedure of the cars washers. How many MOT stations would do this or indeed should they legally do this. I thought you had a right to observe your MOT taking place but not to interfere. You have exercised your right to appeal. Mountain out of a mole hill, you got a pass without any subsequent visit
I'm not sure where you got this from.
I was in the showroom while the car was being tested. They couldn't find the front washers despite all Mercedes over a 15 year period having them on the multi function stalk, which you push inwards.
Instead of admitting that he didn't know how to operate the front washers and coming out to ask me, or sending the service advisor out, he failed the car for front washers not working, left and right.
So either he's never tested ANY Mercedes during his time as an MOT tester, or he failed to see the washer icon on the stalk, or he's sloppy.
Yes the car passed but only after an incorrect Fail.
The garage and the DVSA agree this shouldn't have happened and apparently now so does the tester. Not sure why you think this is a mountain out of a molehill, I've never implied it was a major life event.
|
|
If events are as described then it shouldn't have happened. The tester may need some refresher training over following testing instructions or variations between models/manufacturers but that's a matter for his bosses.
If we then move to what loss did the OP suffer the answer is nil. Even if it was a three year old car with a failed pump (rather than an empty reservoir) it'd have diddly effect on the car's value at trade in. .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
