Are MOTs worthless?

RobKeeble

Guest
Hello all,

As a member of the general public with no intimate knowledge of the motor trade, I have always taken it for granted that a few months left on the MOT certificate was a reasonable indication of a roadworthy vehicle. So many vehicles are put up for sale with recent MOTs to give potential buyers some confidence in the vehicle. I was only looking at motorhomes with a longish MOT for that very reason, so having bought one with over 10 months MOT left, I felt quite happy that I had a good one. How wrong was I?

My 1989 Ford Transit motorhome had passed it's MOT test only 7 weeks earlier, and after a good look round the vehicle followed by a test drive, all seemed well so I bought it from the private seller and took it home. I put it into my local garage for a once-over and service, only to be told that the chassis was rotten in many places especially around the suspension mountings and it was not roadworthy - aaaarrgghh!

I called VOSA to ask what my options were and I couldn't believe what I heard. The first thing the lady told me was that an MOT certificate was no indication that the vehicle was roadworthy. WHAT? Apparently, the MOT test simply shows that the vehicle passed the minimum legal requirements on the day of the test. And what's more, the MOT tester is not allowed to hammer or prod away at suspect rust spots, or scrape away any underseal or grease that may be hiding the offending area, any of which would have shown up the rust-riddled chassis that I have bought.

I checked the Directgov website where it states the MOT test checks "The body and vehicle structure - Is free from excessive corrosion or damage in specific areas and there are no sharp edges likely to cause injury." What a ridiculous beaurocratic shambles we have that forces the MOT tester to carry out these tests with his hands virtually tied behind his back, and then to put his name to the certificate. What you get is an unroadworthy vehicle on the road with an MOT certificate valid for 12 months. It's a disgrace.

This isn't just a moan, but I thought there must be other members who wouldn't be aware of the worthlessness of the MOT certificate. I certainly won't hold it in high regard in future when I come to purchase a vehicle. Instead I will check the actual MOT history for failures and advisories on the website shown on the back of all MOT certificates.

Regards
Rob
 
I understand that it is going to be changed to 2 years soon and a compulsary MOT before sale. It is something to do with EEC. Personally I think a stricter MOT by someone like RAC or AA should be during or after the sale with a guarantee of your money back if it fails. But I don't know much about vehicles or buying or selling them. Whenever I have bought a second hand vehicle I have had the RAC look at it first. well worth the money, as never been dissapointed with a buy so far and have rejected quite a number on RAC report..
 
The MOT implies the vehicle is in a roadworthy condition at the time of inspection. Problems arise when peolple rely on an MOT pass rather than regular servicing.
The MOT test is in fact the opinion of the tester and should be taken as a subjective opinion. I would guess that to get an objective test would require some form of destructive testing. We wouldn't want that now would we?:)
 
realy and truly its virtualy worthless as soon as you leave the mot station .as its only one mot testers oppinion of the minimum level of safety on that viehcle at that time it could be the biggest death trap there is on the road . and if you are buying a viehcle with a full mot its not even forced to be that viehcle that was tested .even with the computerised system we have now but we need one by law so we will have to have one .
 
yes they are . google dft form. v112g then you can see how usefull they arent. havent had one for ten years . cheers alan.
 
Some many years ago (1980s) the Australian State of Victoria commissioned a study into the usefulness of annual MOT/roadworthy tests versus various other options - none, test on sale, on road inspections.

The study went through a lot of data for injury/fatality accidents nationally and the UK, German, Swedish, Canada and USA data was supplied (amongst others I'm sure) and the "mechanical failure" was a miniscule cause of accidents - speed, alcohol, drugs, fatigue being (and still are) the causes. I think local insurers also had to cough up data.

The government of the day kept its policy of "test on sale/purchase" and several other States followed suit with some beefing up of on road inspections with instant "off the road" for some failures if detected. New South Wales (with a strong lobby group of mechanics) kept annual roadworthies and has over the years demonstrated that they have a higher rate of mechanical failure as a cause of accidents - mainly boy racers modding cars and then putting them back to standard for the annual test.

Heavy vehicle operators can participate in a quality assurance scheme for maintenance management which has a few benefits for operators, no annual testing, servicing can be conducted based on engine revolutions instead of Kms travelled, increased weight limits are the carrot for getting in right. If a vehicle is detected with a serious fault, the whole fleet can be penalised - which sharpens the minds of the drivers/ops managers.

Of course the annual testing is based upon 1950/60s technology when brakes were horrible, Lucas made lights that did n't work, semaphore indicators were in vogue, etc etc - typically a case of technology leaping so far ahead over legislation.

I read about a Jap car that now has self testing circuits and will warn the driver of light failures and require the driver to cancel the warning every so often, same with brake wear indicators - no longer an excuse of "I did n't know officer".

So from the intention of providing safer roads does an annual MOT pass - no.
 
how many times have we heared or had this conversation .my mot is due where is the best place to take it .dont go to joe blogs motors he is too keen .but i always use billy blobs motors he is ok if he finds owt he will tell you get it done hes not that keen ,but here is you test cert anyway . when i had my bedford van i used to take it to the same mot station every year ,and to tell you the truth the mot guy only used to give it a quick look over he never tested the lights or wipers horn .just the brakes and a quick look at the steering . oh and a gas test .mind you he knew i used to keep it in good condition all the time and if i found any probs would rectify them at once and that the van was able to pass the mot at any time in his opinion ,not necceserily another mot testers one though .but that is not the way to carry out an mot and untill they are done at a place just used for mot use only and the same quality mot is carried out on all viehcles we will always have an mot system not realy up to scratch .just one other thing where we used to live there was one garage that did mots you could get one done anytime with no booking in and that mot tester was a nightmare unless the car was perfect you got a fail you know the type side light out fail insted of put you a bulb in ok .another one down the road you had to book a week in advance as he was always fully booked up and only failed if they realy needed to
 
I do not have an MOT station although the workshop is fully fitted for one, rolling road, brake test, headlights alignment test etc etc.

Why, because I sell vehicles and prefer to have an independent outside test and examination done by a third party.

We would not send a vehicle for a test that has not been fully serviced and checked.

My own personal cars are tested localy where I live and on a number of ocasions faults have been found which I was totally unaware off and on two occasions were major safety issues and I am not talking about ten year old high mileage cars.

Thank God for the annual MOT's

Peter
 
As someone ex motortrade, The MOT is no more than a snapshot of a vehicles condition in relation to the current legislation at the time of test.

It never has been and never will be an indicator of a vehicles reliability, servicability or potential durability.

A reputable dealer will allow an independent inspection of a vehicle before sale normally by MIMI accredited motor engineers.

If a dealer is reluctant of an independant test then walk away.

Channa
 
As an MOT tester I can say that it states on the back of the certificate what you've been told, however whilst it's a 'visual inspection' we are supplied with a very small CAT tool (Corrosion Assesment Tool) - alloy hammer which can be pushed and proded about that should show up excessive corrosion around suspension and seatbelt mounting points, so if there's hole etc within these areas you DO have a valid claim and SHOULD appeal via VOSA as this corrosion will NOT have happened over night.

However I have to agree that the current MOT is not worth the paper it's written on, and anyone thinking of purchasing a vehicle with no real knowledge of vehicles should at least see it on a ramp, and better still have an independant inspection from the likes of the AA etc.

A purchase from a private seller with a current MOT will be difficult to contest, but one from a trader will be covered by the sale of goods act and must be "Of merchantable quality".
 
channa said:
As someone ex motortrade, The MOT is no more than a snapshot of a vehicles condition in relation to the current legislation at the time of test.

It never has been and never will be an indicator of a vehicles reliability, servicability or potential durability.

A reputable dealer will allow an independent inspection of a vehicle before sale normally by MIMI accredited motor engineers.

If a dealer is reluctant of an independant test then walk away.

Channa
Click to expand...

Couldnt agree more although the RAC and AA write war and peace on a vehicle to cover their own backs!

Peter
 
Any one out there know of MOT testers in the Rosyth or Leicester areas as I will most likely be around one these areas when my MOT needs renewing, and the bloke I used to take my car to only MOT's cars and bikes not vans? As it will be the first MOT with the van and I would like to use a garage that comes with a recomendation rather than some cowboy who will try and rip me off for work that is not required.

Any info would be greatly appreciated.

Squibby.
 
JohnsCrossMotorHomes said:
Couldnt agree more although the RAC and AA write war and peace on a vehicle to cover their own backs!

Peter
Click to expand...

Yes Peter, reading a paragraph of an AA/RAC report commenting on how a radio aerial is slightly bent ( yet still functions perfectly) is frustrating to say the least.'{ or it was to me).


My advice would be to hire an independant engineer ( insurance companies can help with this in the respect the same people often do work for them) Alternatively local Trading Standards will reccomend an engineer.( more often than not the same person)

They will give an unbiased opinion of the vehicles state, often identify body repairs the untrained eye wont see, And quickly identify lack of previous servicing maintenance and give a considered opinion of what bills:/:problems to expect in the immediate future. Perhaps more importantly not become sucked into the futile bent aerial sceanrios of the AA /RAC reports( cynical I know)

It can be an expensive excercise for sure.

But remember buy in haste repent at leisure

Channa
 
i always thought that an mot was agood indication that the vehicle i was driving was safe! a couple of years ago the motorhome sailed through its mot then not long after it went to the garage for a service. luckily our mechanic spotted that the front crossmember was badly corroded (fiat)
 
RobKeeble said:
few months left on the MOT certificate was a reasonable indication of a roadworthy vehicleRob
Click to expand...
Well a few years ago my car passed the MOT test, I left for home and about 200 hundred metres down the road the rear exhaust box bracket snapped and left the exhaust rattling. But I was in a large one way system and didn't want to risk any further damage, so realising the MOT station would only say 'well it was ok here', I called into a near exhaust centre and had it replaced. But they also said I needed two rear shockers, until I explained what happened!
 
yorkslass said:
i always thought that an mot was agood indication that the vehicle i was driving was safe! a couple of years ago the motorhome sailed through its mot then not long after it went to the garage for a service. luckily our mechanic spotted that the front crossmember was badly corroded (fiat)
Click to expand...

The front crossmember on mine is corroded but it sailed through its MOT today. :cool1:

The crossmember is not part of the MOT but a good tester will either point out the corrosion or even give you an advisory.
 
i had a car once, a late 70's Celica, i just used it for winter snow driving, off roading etc and it looked a complete mess, just about every panel had dents etc...

i had a copper say it was dangerous, so i took it for a MOT (it wasnt due for a long time)failed its MOT, the guy said it was totally dangerous and shouldnt be driven, so i went to VOSA? well the people you apeal to, and next day it was inspected but someone else, with a fine toothcomb and it flew through (which i knew it would) the MOT guy was forced to take his tests again.

i used to get pulled all the time by cops saying it looked a mess, which it did, but where it counted it was totally safe.

just look at how many cars that look ok, yet full of faults....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who viewed this discussion (Total:0)

Back
Top