Interested to hear from any MOT testers - booked my car in at my usual garage for MOT and a couple of repairs that I was told would need doing for the MOT at the service I had last month (rear spring and rear brake pipes corroded).
So I booked in car for MOT and this work doing. Paperwork shows a fail on these items and then a pass after repair.
Got me wondering why do it this way? Do garages like to "rack up" a certain number of fails for the records?? Of course I suppose they could need to see if there was anything else that might fail apart from the items known about. Last year failed on light alignment and again got a fail and then a pass (even though aim adjusted for free, presumably whilst doing test).
It's no skin off my nose and no qualms with the garage, just interested whether garages are audited on MOT pass/fails and so are looking for fails to put through.
Edited by ajsdoc on 04/03/2009 at 20:13
|
Did you take it to a proper MOT station, or a non MOT garage and ask them to do the MOT and work such that they take it elsewhere?
It is usual for garages who take it elsewhere to see what it fails on first before carrying out the work, and then after the work is done there is maybe some arrangement to make 'less of a check' than usual.
|
Did they tell you it was a fail then extra work incurred to bring it into line on your approval then re -test.?
dvd
|
No extra cost. I knew it would fail on the stated items from my service last month - they told me this work needed doing. I decided to wait the few weeks until the MOT was due and I could get MOT done at the same time as repairs, to save me having the car in on different days.
Just paid MOT fee and the agreed cost of repairs. Don't feel ripped off at all, just wondered why not do the repairs first then test rather than the hassle of putting it through knowing already that it will fail and then retest after.
Just get the feeling that some fails may be "good" for the garage to have on the books?
|
|
..proper MOT garage that does own MOTs. Decent garage too - good old school mechanic.
|
They followed the correct procedure.
Test the car, identify failed items, repair as requested.
They could have just done the work and then done the test, but the work found on service may not have been checked by the mot tester, so it is sensible to let the mot tester verify first.
Also, it then counts as a failure for the government records and then a pass. if it had counted as just a pass it would have given more ammunition to those that want an mot every 2 years (based on the findings of mot tests show cars are not failing etc). they often do fail but a "fast pass" test is able to hide the figures.
Nothing wrong done whatsoever!
Testing stations are also monitiored on their levels of fails v passes. Anything way out of the ordinary (or failing 1 type of item constantly ) will be checked by VOSA. If they follow the book procedure they cannot be penalised even if their rates of fails or passes are way different to the averages.
Edited by yorkiebar on 04/03/2009 at 23:17
|
So what would happen if they did the repair work first.
Then the MOT and founnd something else that would fail it.....
If they gave a free re-test then I think they did it the right way round.
|
If they are maintaining the fiction that the MOT testing and the servicing side are unconnected then theoretically the car could have passed the MOT first time.
After all, we have just heard that the man doing the servicing is not a trained tester, so could just as easily have been over-cautious as missing something else.
|
You may be misundertanding my comments CP.
The service should flag up any items that make the car not fully correct and highlight those that make it unroadworthy and/or mot failure items.
The mot is an inspection of those items and certifcation that the car has been checked and tested.
The same man could do both operations, but they are seperate jobs, and rightly so.
It is quite possible for a car to be mot (passed) but still have jobs identified that should/need doing for safety/car well being.
|
MOT testers do need to rack-up a certain number of failures
A friend of mine has recently become one, so this is from the horses mouth so to speak
MVP
|
Not quite fully true MVP.
Any tester that passes too many or fails too many will be flagged up for checking. But there is no set number/percentage required.
Failing cars just to meet a target would very likely find him banned from testing very quickly.
New testers especially are very likely to have test cars put on them without their knowledge.
There are bad examples in every tarde and section of it; but generally, mot testers are the better mechanics with experience.
|
Yorkie
You are correct
My friend is a very experienced and good mechanic ,but said as his work is almost all service/MoT combined, his high pass rate might cause a problem - I guess this is why the garage in question is failing then fixing cars.
MVP
|
A one-man-band repairer and tester would have virtually a 100% pass rate, clearly inviting inspection, unless he took steps to clock up some "fails" just for the record. One such I know personally told me this was the case, so he always went through the pantomime of "failing" a car before passing it if it needed any work. In my case he failed it on a blocked washer jet, poked it clear. then passed it. I asked him why he went to the trouble, and he explained it was to keep VOSA happy.
On the other hand I have been to very big garages where the repair staff have no connection with the testers, and indeed the testers seemed very jealous of their status and did not take kindly to assumptions by mere repairers as to what would, or would not, pass.
I also know a small local garage where the tester is in fact an independent contractor operating from the same garage and sharing facilities. He does no repair work, although to outward appearances the same garage is providing both services.
|
