MOT failure?

Post by **rsawatson** » Sun May 10, 2009 4:05 pm

My Minor unfortunately failed her MOT last Tuesday. We have now rectified the problems - apart from one thing. One of the failing points listed includes 'excessive corrosion to inner wheel arch in the area of the seatbelt mounting point'. The area it refers to is the meeting point between the inner and outer wings - what looks like a metal flange, has rusted away. It does not appear to be a structural part of the car at all, although when I said this to the bloke at the garage he disagreed. Besides, because of the age of the car, should they even be considering the rear seat belts in the MOT? The problem is that in order to rectify the problem, I will need to remove the outer wing which is a pig.

If you know, please advise - as I am going back to the garage on Monday for him to explain himself.

Thanks

Post by **PSL184** » Sun May 10, 2009 4:12 pm

Regardless of the year of the car, if seat belts are fitted they have to be tested. One way around it would be to remove the seat belt providing your car was first registered before 1965 then belts are not required. I can't comment on the area of corrosion as I'm not sure what you mean but if you put a picture up it will help.

Post by **Furrtiv** » Sun May 10, 2009 4:41 pm

If it's a rear seat belt, then they wouldn't have been standard on any car until well after 1965? If so, you could just remove the rear seatbelts as they are not a legal requirement in early cars and then you could rectify the problem at a later date when it's more convenient for you.
I'm going to be 34 in a couple of weeks, and I can still remember when rear seat belts where not around, so it must be much later than 1965 that they were first introduced.

Post by **rsawatson** » Sun May 10, 2009 4:57 pm

The car came without seatbelts before I fitted them earlier this year; it is a 1968. The thing I don't get is that the failure is on the join between the inner and outer wing on one of the rear wheel arches - it is not a structural part of the car, and has nothing to do with the security of the rear seat belt (even if they do have to be checked)! I will take a photo and post later - many thanks.

Post by **Gareth** » Sun May 10, 2009 5:25 pm

My interpretation of this (which is probably wrong) is that it doesn't matter whether the area is 'structural', 'load-bearing', 'stress-bearing' or anything else that sounds important. If there's rust within a certain distance of a seatbelt mounting point it is a guaranteed fail.

After all, there may be no load on the area now, but in the event of an accident, that little bit of rusty metal could be used to restrain a child, or a 15-stone scrum-half.

Post by **PSL184** » Sun May 10, 2009 6:29 pm

Definately if its a rear belt you can take it out - I think it was around 1985 that rears became compulsory....

Post by **rayofleamington** » Sun May 10, 2009 8:13 pm

The thing I don't get is that the failure is on the join between the inner and outer wing on one of the rear wheel arches - it is not a structural part of the car, and has nothing to do with the security of the rear seat belt (even if they do have to be checked)! I will take a photo and post later - many thanks.

I'd agree with Gavin on this one - there will be a prescribed distance around seatbelt mounting points. I'd guess it is 300mm same as other structural areas.

The rear inner wing seam is a common corrossion area - usually it is repaired just by bridging the gap by using a plate over the top.

I've seen some poor repairs (sometimes by seatbelt mounts) where one edge of the patch is hiden under other bodywork or trim, and has not actually been welded, but passed MOT's as it could not be seen.
As you say - to do it properly needs access by moving the wing (or 'rear arch' for the pernickety people)