The NEW Vehicle Inspectorate Computer MOT

[STORM 2 0]

OK, I don't know if this is a good idea or not but I thought it may be worth posting. Following my (1995) Corrado failure today, another 1995 VR6 failed on the same (seemingly trivial in the past) point.

Tempest, you got me thinking that this new MOT is much more thorough and has to be inputted into the computer records. The implications are obvious for owners of older cars.

Would it be worthwhile putting up reasons for failing the new test - so that other forum users can go in prepared - having sorted things that were tradtionally overlooked?

 

Anyway mine failed on:

 

1. Offside headlamp too dim (with headlight loom!!)

2. nearside headlamp too low when centre of headlight measured 850mm from ground

3. suspension ball joint (I would have expected this to fail on the old test)

 

Another forum user ( I hope you don't mind Rick) also failed his 1995 VR6 on point 2 as well today.

[kebabman 0]

I don't think the 'new' MOT is any more thorough than the old, as far as I'm aware the actual testers handbook hasn't changed at all, it's just it's now entered on a database so if you take it elsewhere they can see what it faild on so are likely to be looking closely at those things. ;)

[STORM 2 0]

I don't think the 'new' MOT is any more thorough than the old, as far as I'm aware the actual testers handbook hasn't changed at all, it's just it's now entered on a database so if you take it elsewhere they can see what it faild on so are likely to be looking closely at those things. ;)

 

You are probably right...still theyre picking up on stuff that you would have got away with before

[RW1 0]

I don't think the 'new' MOT is any more thorough than the old, as far as I'm aware the actual testers handbook hasn't changed at all,

 

Probably right. I think it stems from the available computer descriptions of faults that the MoT man has to select from to annotate your certificates.

 

Noticed on mine last month on my Scirocco for the exact same faults (warnings) last year that hey felt more severe, yet the car hadn't changed in those areas.

 

if you take it elsewhere they can see what it failed on so are likely to be looking closely at those things

 

They won't test it! It's failed! Thats one of the reasons for computerising it so that youCAN'T take it round the corner and get past by another garage.

 

.

[CoxyLaad 0]

is that right? surely as the owner of the car you have the choice of a second opinion from another garage if you feel that the one that just failed you was a pile of toss?

Its all about choice - as Tony Blair once said

[jenks 0]

Yeah the other garage will just do another mot. Up to you were and when you take your car to get mot's.

[davidwort 0]

I don't think the 'new' MOT is any more thorough than the old, as far as I'm aware the actual testers handbook hasn't changed at all, it's just it's now entered on a database so if you take it elsewhere they can see what it faild on so are likely to be looking closely at those things. ;)

 

One of the main reasons is to prevent MOT's being writtten out without testing the car, the timing slot for running the test is logged and the vehicle has to pass the emission tests etc in that time slot, very difficult to get a certificate without passing the emissions test, unless you use another car for the testing!

 

David.

[coolrado 0]

very difficult to get a certificate without passing the emissions test, unless you use another car for the testing!

 

David.

 

my last car (mk1 mr2) with shot piston rings and no cat strangely had the exact same emissions as the brand new 3 cylinder daewoo matiz that i was parked next to when the emissions where tested........how odd :lol:

[STORM 2 0]

Once its failed, the computer has a record of it and therefore as RW1 says you can't go elsewhere to a 'mate', bung him a few quid and get a certificate becuse the original entry in the database has to be amended.

The 'new' MOT certificate actually means less legally than before.

Its just a record or receipt for your benefit - the actual report is held by ?VOSA or Dept of Transport - its them you contact if you want to verify a cars had an MOT now, rather than just asking to see the certificate.

[RW1 0]

than just asking to see the certificate.

 

According to the paper work last month, the MoT paperwork is worthless. You have to prove the details held on the central computer are correct about the MoT. I printed a copy of that off as proof of the record at the time the MoT was done but if someone interfers with the datafile, I'm stuffed! The MoT details were on their website within the hour! So access to the database is live.

 

The next stage of this is static & mobile reg plate readers (already in place) referencing the database. Good news in a way as hopefully it will remove unisured, non-MoT'd etc vehicles off the roads and lower insurance premiums - one hopes!

 

This (MoTs) has all happened since 1st Jan 2006 (I think) so any experiences prior to that may not relate. I was left last month with a distinct feeling that the MoT has been made harder as the "licenced" MoT testers are more accountable (and that's my local friendly garage man!). ie. if it has failed and no work has been done, they are countering a "failed" condition and must have very good reason to change the standard already recorded, ie. they need to see visible rectification, etc..

 

And as usual for the change, there's more paperwork given to you. Left me quite depressed looking at the warnings............. :cry:

Their description being from a prescribed list was much more severe than the previous two years for the same warnings, ie. a small stone caused glass bubble in the windscreen away from the driver's sight line almost sounds like I need to change the windscreen yet it is well with the MoT test pass band.

 

.

[kebabman 0]

Once its failed, the computer has a record of it and therefore as RW1 says you can't go elsewhere to a 'mate', bung him a few quid and get a certificate becuse the original entry in the database has to be amended.

The 'new' MOT certificate actually means less legally than before.

Its just a record or receipt for your benefit - the actual report is held by ?VOSA or Dept of Transport - its them you contact if you want to verify a cars had an MOT now, rather than just asking to see the certificate.

 

Yes that's what I meant, just worded it badly. You can still take it for another test it's just very unlikely to pass (unless you've fixed the problems of course).

 

However, I had a 'new style' MOT failure on my VR for "cracked brake disks", took it around the corner and they passed it, this was because the first garage was speaking bollocks. I had to appeal to VOSA and have the car inspected to get my fee back though....which I did. Have it VW Motorworld. :lol:

 

IMO it's a good thing, I'm not bothered about getting a dodgy MOT, and think the roads will be safer with less cars that have just been passed without testing on the road. The convenience of being able to buy tax online is more important to me.

[corradokid 0]

Anyway mine failed on:

 

1. Offside headlamp too dim (with headlight loom!!)

2. nearside headlamp too low when centre of headlight measured 850mm from ground

3. suspension ball joint (I would have expected this to fail on the old test)

 

Another forum user ( I hope you don't mind Rick) also failed his 1995 VR6 on point 2 as well today.

 

So they are failing cars on headlight height, or aim? What about all the sports cars ect That are lower? What you going to do about the headlight brightness? how do they test this?

[kebabman 0]

It'll be the opinion of the tester. ;)

[MADDUB 0]

don't like this at all how will my raddo pass with bmw e36 headlights on it hm this could be fun lol have to see still got 5 months mot left

[Andy T 0]

So they are failing cars on headlight height, or aim? What about all the sports cars ect That are lower? What you going to do about the headlight brightness? how do they test this?

 

The test specs will be the same are the old ones where, the headlamp 'aim' is what they are testing, not the height. My C needed the headlamp aim adjusting after lowering, last year my MOT man adjusted it during the test for free, not every garage would do this though.

 

If they are being more strict with the new test, hopefully they will fail the newer RangeRovers with those badly angled HiD headlamps that completely blind you when they are in the rear view mirror!

[RW1 0]

The test specs will be the same are the old ones

 

Yeah, it's just "feels" tuffer cos of the prescribed faults the tester can list if there are warnings or failure. A car that passed last year should pass this year given it's the same and no deterioration.

 

. :-P

[dr_mat 0]

"passed", not "past", please!

4/10, please brush up your grammar! ;)

[Musicman 0]

If they are being more strict with the new test, hopefully they will fail the newer RangeRovers with those badly angled HiD headlamps that completely blind you when they are in the rear view mirror!

 

Please god, yes! I'm getting a crick in my neck trying to avoid being blinded by them :lol:

[chubbybrown 0]

My mitsi had an advise for slight corrsion on the rear wheel cylinders

hehe

testers are getting more panic stricken as its all on record to see