Does an MOT not mean anything these days?

roc-a-rhol

roc-a-rhol

A2OC Donor
Wales
so many times iv seen adverts for cars where the seller / dealer will say, "ill even stick a fresh mot on it for the year..." like it's just a box ticking exercise.

it doesn't fill me with confidence that the car for sale is going to get a genuine mot inspection.

how do people get away with it?
 
Because generally it's just that, a box ticking. An MOT only inspects safety related and emissions components and is only valid for the day of the test although does give some comfort to a buyer that at least it's not falling apart or dangerous.
When I bought my absolutely spotless FSI the seller said he would put an MOT on then on the day I went he said he hadn't had time. I insisted he got it tested and low and behold it failed on a caliper costing him £120 so.....
 
roc-a-rhol said:
so many times iv seen adverts for cars where the seller / dealer will say, "ill even stick a fresh mot on it for the year..." like it's just a box ticking exercise.

it doesn't fill me with confidence that the car for sale is going to get a genuine mot inspection.

how do people get away with it?
Click to expand...
I suspect it translates as "... don't want to spend any money on it, until I've got the promise of a sale, with a margin that'll not be dented much by any work required..."
A dealer will be looking to make a good profit, and a couple of hundred will not upset him much. He'll have an arrangement with am MoT provider, that in return for regular work, will give him a discount on each test, and a tester who will not look too hard for "minor" defects
Mac.
 
PlasticMac said:
I suspect it translates as "... don't want to spend any money on it, until I've got the promise of a sale, with a margin that'll not be dented much by any work required..."
A dealer will be looking to make a good profit, and a couple of hundred will not upset him much. He'll have an arrangement with am MoT provider, that in return for regular work, will give him a discount on each test, and a tester who will not look too hard for "minor" defects
Mac.
Click to expand...
yes, it kinda stinks of back-handers
 
roc-a-rhol said:
yes, it kinda stinks of back-handers
Click to expand...
I think MoTs you get done your self, are, (mostly), genuine, but any business that relies on a steady stream of repeat jobs is bound to be "charitable" to those customers.
A small garage near me does MoTs, (The FSI, and TT have been done there for a few years now), but the used car business, on the same site goes elsewhere, because they wouldn't give them a discount, couldn't afford to, if the test is done properly they said.
Mac.
 
The fact that they have made cars over 40 years old exempt answers your question. I was following a Morris 1000 the other day which (by the registration) looked to be pre-1964. Every time it hit a speed bump it bounced up and down like crazy! It clearly had no effective dampers. This would have failed an MOT (unless it was his mate).

He also had almost flat offside tyres.

It is clear that some people (regardless of how old the car) have no regard for the safety of the car. However, we'll all recall that the government did not mind MOT's being suspended during 2020...
 
I recently had an over 65 driver's assessment, via county council,as there's a lot of driver ageism, (other isms are available).
Previously had one in 2019. Apart from, (obviously), his fulsome praise on my driving prowess, he said that only the older drivers who care have the assesment, but the ones who don't care, and most need it, don't.
Mac.
 
I had a ROSPA defensive driving day in the early 90s and sat in a car with a ROSPA person giving me ear ache for an hour. To be fair, most of the criticisms were not about things that are taught when you are trying to pass your test and indeed when I passed these techniques on to my grandson a couple of years ago, he was told to do the opposite by his driving instructor.

My company forced us all to do the ROSPA course, as they were trying to get the accident rate down for the company cars. I hated the idea of it but it was well worth it in the end. Apart from a sight test, it would be my next choice as compulsory every ten years for licence renewal.
 
Any tester knows that if any vehicle is to cause them a future headache it's a vehicle presented by a trader and so the fine tooth comb should be deployed!
 
Providence said:
The fact that they have made cars over 40 years old exempt answers your question. I was following a Morris 1000 the other day which (by the registration) looked to be pre-1964. Every time it hit a speed bump it bounced up and down like crazy! It clearly had no effective dampers. This would have failed an MOT (unless it was his mate).

He also had almost flat offside tyres.

It is clear that some people (regardless of how old the car) have no regard for the safety of the car. However, we'll all recall that the government did not mind MOT's being suspended during 2020...
Click to expand...
this is something iv always been perplexed about.
a modern(ish) car can fail on the dipped beam slightly off, yet older cars can be held together by a shoestring and be on the road!?

it seemingly makes no sense
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top