MOT Passed

[bmcecosse]

HDM 113 C has yet again managed to fool the Inspectors. Not even any advisories - and that with two Inspectors crawling over it, one was learning - not having seen such an old car before. Cost up to £40 though - ouch!
What happened to the plan to only have MOT every two years ??
<br><br>

Credit to Alex Holden for the picture!

[ASL642]

For a minute I thought you'd acquired another one

[bmcecosse]

No! That'a Alex's car when he visited at Bo'ness steam railway.

[MGFmad]

Good news on the pass BMC - you did well at £40, the standard fee is £53.

[bmcecosse]

Thanks MGF. Place in Larkhall offers to do them for £25. Pointed this out to the garage I have always used in Stonehouse - his answer " Well - go to Larkhall! They will fail you on the slightest little detail, and charge another £25 for the retest if you take the car away from their premises". Decided to take no chances - local place does free re-test for everything, way beyond what they have to do by the rule book.

[8009STEVE]

What happened to the plan to only have MOT every two years ??

The MOT rule is 3:1:1: They thought about 4:2:2, but that idea has recently been thrown out.

[aupickup]

my mot station charge me £41.00 and no retest fee, but they are a small local garage

[grumpygrandad]

rule 1 never argue with the man with the hammer.testing is a 2 opinion job, yours and his, at the end of the day he rules,,grandad

[Peetee]

Cool. Albert passed this morning too with no official advisories although it was suggested that the door catch was a bit, er, unreliable and could prove a bit of a distraction on a bumpy left hand bend.
Oh, and thanks to PaulK for the lightning-quick loan of Millie's horn.

[grumpygrandad]

HDM 113 C has yet again managed to fool the Inspectors. Not even any advisories - and that with two Inspectors crawling over it, one was learning - not having seen such an old car before. Cost up to £40 though - ouch!
What happened to the plan to only have MOT every two years ??
<br><br>

Credit to Alex Holden for the picture!

hello your answer to the 2 year mot is lower down borrowed horn dicky door catch . some of the cars i have seen and heard about should never be on the road some one the other week took his for test no sidelight faults in all light and much more , dont people check these sort of things before they go to test ,,,grandad

[Peetee]

hello your answer to the 2 year mot is lower down borrowed horn dicky door catch . some of the cars i have seen and heard about should never be on the road some one the other week took his for test no sidelight faults in all light and much more , dont people check these sort of things before they go to test ,,,grandad

Got to defend this.
1. The borrowed horn was as a direct result of me checking as you suggested. It was a last minute fix simply because I forgot cars horns were tested. In twenty years of driving I have used a horn probably twice. The way cars are insulated these days I wonder if they have any purpose other than to allow you to release your agression.
2. The dicky door catch came about because the stricker plate screws became loose. These came loose because I have had to slam the door shut on the two occasions I have driven the car since fitting a replacement wing which now interfers with the leading edge of the door.
Oh, and I didn't know about the catch till the car was returned because the tester took it away from my house.

I would imagine the frequency of owners pre-checking their cars is inversly proportional to those who check the legibility of their forum posts.

[bmcecosse]

I assume the 'two year plan' was thrown out after representations from the garage trade - cos MOT is a 'nice little earner' !

[grumpygrandad]

hello i was not trying to offend any one andi appreciate that repairs creep up on us especialy when we drive the cars every day , but i do think that the rate of first time failures may be the reason that the 2 year testing never got off the ground and yes its a good little earner for garage and goverment for the tax , and for us who do most of our serviceing some one else looking around her can be usefull,,grandad

[aupickup]

well i do tend to check lights etc on a weekly basis

i use my horn more than twice a year, going round blind bends in the country etc

this should be weekly, monthly checks on all vehicles, the same as water washer bottles

it does not take any time to check these

even rot, we all know our vehicles, well i do anyway

why wait until the night before to find out something does not work

[rayofleamington]

The MOT rule is 3:1:1: They thought about 4:2:2, but that idea has recently been thrown out.

someone's beaten me to it, but the answer was the high fail rates on the initial 3 year test. This gives no justification for an extended period on cars older than 3 years.

Plenty of cars do 50,000+ miles in 2 years - the risk of serious defects occuring in 50k miles is far too high.
Added to that I think the current 3 year exemption should be limited to 60,000 miles (and the annual MOT limited to 40k). I can't see how they can justify someone doing over 100,000 miles in a car without a safety check, but this again is far too common!

[bmcecosse]

What's the testing regime in the rest of Europe ? I thought our MOT was going to be going 2 years - to fall in line with the others ?

[d_harris]

hello your answer to the 2 year mot is lower down borrowed horn dicky door catch . some of the cars i have seen and heard about should never be on the road some one the other week took his for test no sidelight faults in all light and much more , dont people check these sort of things before they go to test ,,,grandad

Got to defend this.
1. The borrowed horn was as a direct result of me checking as you suggested. It was a last minute fix simply because I forgot cars horns were tested. In twenty years of driving I have used a horn probably twice. The way cars are insulated these days I wonder if they have any purpose other than to allow you to release your agression.
2. The dicky door catch came about because the stricker plate screws became loose. These came loose because I have had to slam the door shut on the two occasions I have driven the car since fitting a replacement wing which now interfers with the leading edge of the door.
Oh, and I didn't know about the catch till the car was returned because the tester took it away from my house.

I would imagine the frequency of owners pre-checking their cars is inversly proportional to those who check the legibility of their forum posts.

I'm going to add to this! I know Peetee Personally. he is NOT the kind who would knowingly drive a car that is not 100% fit for purpose & totally legal. Its also not a daily driver, so daily or weekly checks would not be as appropriate as for those who use their cars every day.

Peetees car, whilst not perfect, is in fantastic condition - and who said the horn didn't fail in the last week or so? We've all had stories of testing lights etc before we go to the MOT and then something not working correctly at the test centre!

So lets take it easy on the "could have, should haves" and be friends again. Heck, why not come to SADMOG, and I'm sure me or Pete would be happy to buy you a beer!

[aupickup]

france used to be every 2 years, that was 14 years ago when i lived there, not what it is now, i would asume the same

[Peetee]

why wait until the night before to find out something does not work

It is a statistical fact that the chance of your ticket winning the lottery as opposed to any other single ticket is 50:50.

Likewise the probibility of a componant failing an inspection on the day before a test as opposed to any other single day is the same.

[aupickup]