 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
Wesley
Trade Member
|
Posted: Thu Aug 13th, 2009 10:48 pm |
|
Dynamic Balance wrote: Wesley wrote: Dynamic Balance wrote: Tshirt wrote: So you are saying that we wont be able to fit a set of front pads, without first checking the entire braking system, following mot standard guidelines, it will be compulsory for the trained only technician to remove drums etc, do lock to lock, for hose stretching/fouling, assistant or pedal presser used for checking leaks/bulging and so the list goes on, sounds great in theory, but i think that time is a long way off yet.
That depends on how you interpret the rules. Take your example of the front brake pads for mot, the customer has replaced them and returned to your station for a retest, what are you going to check?
Front wheels security, tyres because they could have been changed due to say a punture, brake pads obviously, calipers and security, hoses condition and bulging under pressure, why because some mechanics drop the calipers when they remove them thus leaving them hanging on the hoses which could damage them, then there are leaks in the system, discs if they had been changed, brake performance test to ensure minimum standards correct at time of test. The list goes on.
These are not new standards in the mot scheme, they have always been there. The rest of the motor trade in their servicing and repairs are not exempt from similar systems when one understands the Road Traffic Acts, the customer has a lot of rights, which could put the garage in severe conseguencies if things went pair shaped. The standards have always been there, it was just a matter of time before ways of enforcement was possible, ie. licensing seems to be the answer.
And without that, no job mechanic or tester?
DB
Hi DB,
So What You Are saying is,
All Garages will eventually have to be BS or ISO Accredited as "Stealth" pointed out in another post?
Hi Wes,
Yes your right
Hi DB,
Cheers for that,
Had a presenter in a few years back now, previous employment.
Vehicle Failed on front brake pads, He managed to replace the Nearside Front pads Himself, but on the Offside, He Encountered an Issue with the pad retaining pins and one of the Techs At The Time, replaced the Offside pads for Him.
On the "Retest", The Nearside Front Wheel, Was. Insecure!
It Always Pays To Carry out a re-inspection correctly to "CYA"
Wes.
Last edited on Thu Aug 13th, 2009 10:52 pm by Wesley
|
Dynamic Balance
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Mana: |  |
|
Posted: Thu Aug 13th, 2009 07:29 pm |
|
Wesley wrote: Dynamic Balance wrote: Tshirt wrote: So you are saying that we wont be able to fit a set of front pads, without first checking the entire braking system, following mot standard guidelines, it will be compulsory for the trained only technician to remove drums etc, do lock to lock, for hose stretching/fouling, assistant or pedal presser used for checking leaks/bulging and so the list goes on, sounds great in theory, but i think that time is a long way off yet.
That depends on how you interpret the rules. Take your example of the front brake pads for mot, the customer has replaced them and returned to your station for a retest, what are you going to check?
Front wheels security, tyres because they could have been changed due to say a punture, brake pads obviously, calipers and security, hoses condition and bulging under pressure, why because some mechanics drop the calipers when they remove them thus leaving them hanging on the hoses which could damage them, then there are leaks in the system, discs if they had been changed, brake performance test to ensure minimum standards correct at time of test. The list goes on.
These are not new standards in the mot scheme, they have always been there. The rest of the motor trade in their servicing and repairs are not exempt from similar systems when one understands the Road Traffic Acts, the customer has a lot of rights, which could put the garage in severe conseguencies if things went pair shaped. The standards have always been there, it was just a matter of time before ways of enforcement was possible, ie. licensing seems to be the answer.
And without that, no job mechanic or tester?
DB
Hi DB,
So What You Are saying is,
All Garages will eventually have to be BS or ISO Accredited as "Stealth" pointed out in another post?
Hi Wes,
Yes your right
|
Wesley
Trade Member
|
Posted: Wed Aug 12th, 2009 10:10 pm |
|
Dynamic Balance wrote: Tshirt wrote: So you are saying that we wont be able to fit a set of front pads, without first checking the entire braking system, following mot standard guidelines, it will be compulsory for the trained only technician to remove drums etc, do lock to lock, for hose stretching/fouling, assistant or pedal presser used for checking leaks/bulging and so the list goes on, sounds great in theory, but i think that time is a long way off yet.
That depends on how you interpret the rules. Take your example of the front brake pads for mot, the customer has replaced them and returned to your station for a retest, what are you going to check?
Front wheels security, tyres because they could have been changed due to say a punture, brake pads obviously, calipers and security, hoses condition and bulging under pressure, why because some mechanics drop the calipers when they remove them thus leaving them hanging on the hoses which could damage them, then there are leaks in the system, discs if they had been changed, brake performance test to ensure minimum standards correct at time of test. The list goes on.
These are not new standards in the mot scheme, they have always been there. The rest of the motor trade in their servicing and repairs are not exempt from similar systems when one understands the Road Traffic Acts, the customer has a lot of rights, which could put the garage in severe conseguencies if things went pair shaped. The standards have always been there, it was just a matter of time before ways of enforcement was possible, ie. licensing seems to be the answer.
And without that, no job mechanic or tester?
DB
Hi DB,
So What You Are saying is,
All Garages will eventually have to be BS or ISO Accredited as "Stealth" pointed out in another post?
|
Dynamic Balance
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Wed Aug 12th, 2009 10:00 pm |
|
Tshirt wrote: So you are saying that we wont be able to fit a set of front pads, without first checking the entire braking system, following mot standard guidelines, it will be compulsory for the trained only technician to remove drums etc, do lock to lock, for hose stretching/fouling, assistant or pedal presser used for checking leaks/bulging and so the list goes on, sounds great in theory, but i think that time is a long way off yet.
That depends on how you interpret the rules. Take your example of the front brake pads for mot, the customer has replaced them and returned to your station for a retest, what are you going to check?
Front wheels security, tyres because they could have been changed due to say a punture, brake pads obviously, calipers and security, hoses condition and bulging under pressure, why because some mechanics drop the calipers when they remove them thus leaving them hanging on the hoses which could damage them, then there are leaks in the system, discs if they had been changed, brake performance test to ensure minimum standards correct at time of test. The list goes on.
These are not new standards in the mot scheme, they have always been there. The rest of the motor trade in their servicing and repairs are not exempt from similar systems when one understands the Road Traffic Acts, the customer has a lot of rights, which could put the garage in severe conseguencies if things went pair shaped. The standards have always been there, it was just a matter of time before ways of enforcement was possible, ie. licensing seems to be the answer.
And without that, no job mechanic or tester?
DB
Edited to add;
Just imagine what will happen if VOSA get so good that they start to suspend testing based on your computerisation inputs, so your performance report shows your own standards are not following national?
DB
Last edited on Wed Aug 12th, 2009 10:07 pm by
|
Tshirt
Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 12th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 84 |
| Mana: |   |
|
Posted: Wed Aug 12th, 2009 09:32 pm |
|
So you are saying that we wont be able to fit a set of front pads, without first checking the entire braking system, following mot standard guidelines, it will be compulsory for the trained only technician to remove drums etc, do lock to lock, for hose stretching/fouling, assistant or pedal presser used for checking leaks/bulging and so the list goes on, sounds great in theory, but i think that time is a long way off yet.
|
Dynamic Balance
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Wed Aug 12th, 2009 07:49 pm |
|
Tshirt wrote: Dynamic Balance wrote:so no different to the mot scheme in a little while.
DB
I still think there is a big difference, i already consider myself accountable for the work i do, any enforcement planned for the future wont change that, it will just make the job take longer overall, and you would only be responsible for anything you have disturbed, unlike the mot.
I had already heard of that, may have been from you from previous post here.
Dont get me wrong, im not complaining at all, responsibility is very good for you, generally people who shirk responsibility seem to be the plodders in life, im certainly not that.
Its actually much better now, we have a new tester, he prefers doing the tests, and i prefer the spanners, its handy being back on the tools in the know, so to speak. 
Hi Tshirt,
It's a little bit more involved than "you would only be responsible for anything you have disturbed" You see anything that relates to the "Safety" of the vehicle which could be considered to affect "Road Safety", even if you have not touched it, but have worked on the vehicle, you could still be held liable for.
Now although mechanics/technicians/engineers, call us what you will may not agree with what I have just said above, makes no difference, if a fatality arisen and you had worked on that vehicle, and that vehicle had been recovered to either VOSA or the Police Examiners, they are not looking to help you, and they are also considered to be "Experts", so out here in the real world to look after yourself I aways think along the lines of;
For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction?
Think about what your doing, and about what effect that will have, and whatever else that effect will have an effect on?
By example.
In our workshops some time back I tested a van, the brake efficiency was if I remeber correctly 57%. I issued a Vt30 because the front brakes pads were metal to metal and was starting to scored the discs. The customer left it for repair and service. Later than afternoon just prior to closing time, my last job was to retest this van. I visually checked the braking system and I could quite easily see that the parking brake cable adjusting device had never been touched as apart of the service, and that the rear brake back plates had finger marks all over them clearly indicating that somebody had been pushing the brake drums back on?
I roller tested the brakes and the service brake efficiency was down to 47%?
The van failed the retest. The mechanic pointed out that during the service of the van he had not touched the rear brakes, but had only fitted new discs and pads to the front, and in any event I was being picky and that there was nothing wrong with the brakes?
The following morning after I had adjusted the rear brakes the braking efficiency was recorded at 60%.
Had any tester decided to lock out a back wheel on the computer to pass it and then the van brakes fail in service, which if there had been another defect in the rear brakes not picked up, then would the mechanic have been liable?
He says not because he has serviced the van, but had not touched the rear brakes?
The Court of law would not have agreed with the mechanic.
DB
|
Tshirt
Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 12th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 84 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Wed Aug 12th, 2009 06:50 pm |
|
Dynamic Balance wrote:so no different to the mot scheme in a little while.
DB
I still think there is a big difference, i already consider myself accountable for the work i do, any enforcement planned for the future wont change that, it will just make the job take longer overall, and you would only be responsible for anything you have disturbed, unlike the mot.
I had already heard of that, may have been from you from previous post here.
Dont get me wrong, im not complaining at all, responsibility is very good for you, generally people who shirk responsibility seem to be the plodders in life, im certainly not that.
Its actually much better now, we have a new tester, he prefers doing the tests, and i prefer the spanners, its handy being back on the tools in the know, so to speak.
|
Wesley
Trade Member
|
Posted: Tue Aug 11th, 2009 10:18 pm |
|
martins wrote: Wizard prang! in the briny! bent the fan! Good show!
What Oh, "Biggles",
You Totally lost Me On That One,
Please fill us in with the Details.
"See You Soon Old Boy"
|
Dynamic Balance
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue Aug 11th, 2009 09:21 pm |
|
Tshirt wrote: DB, im not talking about what vosa would think, and im certainly not saying i would do a better test if i was earning more money!
I just sometimes look over and remember the days when i could join in, and was no worse off for it.
Don't worry to much about the shop floor enjoying themselves with "Big Brother" watching, as he is on his way, where in a little while when approval has been granted each technician will have to sign off the work completed and be held accountable for the job done.
If the job goes pair shaped for any reason or for some other reason the technician is found to be, lets say, less than the required standards being applied, then punishment for them will also be given, so no different to the mot scheme in a little while.
DB
|
KevG
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Tue Aug 11th, 2009 06:33 pm |
|
| Whatto Martin old boy! Gingers gone for a Burton, saw a Jerry on his six and he went down in the drink.
|
martins
Administrator
|
Posted: Tue Aug 11th, 2009 06:28 pm |
|
| Wizard prang! in the briny! bent the fan! Good show!
|
KevG
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Tue Aug 11th, 2009 06:23 pm |
|
Lets do the Banter right here!!!!
Kev
|
Wesley
Trade Member
|
Posted: Mon Aug 10th, 2009 10:14 pm |
|
Tshirt wrote: DB, im not talking about what vosa would think, and im certainly not saying i would do a better test if i was earning more money!
I just sometimes look over and remember the days when i could join in, and was no worse off for it.
DB, Its sometimes good to have a break and get out on the shop floor, crank afew spanners, change a couple of Tyres, or have a little plug in and diagnose.
ps; I miss the banter too.
Last edited on Mon Aug 10th, 2009 10:18 pm by Wesley
|
big..E.
Trade Member
|
Posted: Mon Aug 10th, 2009 10:05 pm |
|
I miss the Banter.. ..
|
Tshirt
Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 12th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 84 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Aug 10th, 2009 09:59 pm |
|
DB, im not talking about what vosa would think, and im certainly not saying i would do a better test if i was earning more money!
I just sometimes look over and remember the days when i could join in, and was no worse off for it.
|
martins
Administrator
|
Posted: Mon Aug 10th, 2009 09:46 pm |
|
| No evidence to support their findings? Interesting.
|
Dynamic Balance
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Aug 10th, 2009 08:36 pm |
|
Tshirt wrote: Dynamic Balance wrote:you may not want to come back to be judged a second time, thus leaving you the golden opportunity to better your job status.
DB
Or just the quality of your working day, to be honest, i used to have much more 'fun' at work before, and it pains me to see others (non testers) still having this 'fun', while im pondering through the manual trying to get a better idea on a decision to be made, that could cost someone their life or me some disciplinary action, especially when the money is the same.
I don't think VOSA would take into consideration the amount of money a tester is or is not paid when making decisions on mot's. Aparently they say that there is no evidence to support their findings.
DB
|
Tshirt
Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 12th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 84 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Aug 10th, 2009 08:26 pm |
|
Dynamic Balance wrote:you may not want to come back to be judged a second time, thus leaving you the golden opportunity to better your job status.
DB
Or just the quality of your working day, to be honest, i used to have much more 'fun' at work before, and it pains me to see others (non testers) still having this 'fun', while im pondering through the manual trying to get a better idea on a decision to be made, that could cost someone their life or me some disciplinary action, especially when the money is the same.
|
Dynamic Balance
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Aug 10th, 2009 05:18 pm |
|
RFR wrote: Dynamic Balance wrote: Wesley wrote: Dynamic Balance wrote: I think a lot rests of the understanding of the VE's and what they choose to report back on. The local offices and Bristol only know what they are told from the reports "You VE's" send in. Some VE's are more experienced than others, and this will make all the difference.
DB
Hi DB,
You recently enquired, "How come You Guys think you are VE`s"? or something alike.
How Do "You" Know?
Psychology
Hi DB,
reverse psychology I think, for you paint the picture of being a tester, and having dificullty sometimes grasping the manual, to then being very informed on the finer points of the mot scheme and seem to be on the ball with any new changes, very confused. How can this be?????,
so is the "you VE's" just a smoke screen.
"Psychology"
rfr
I am somewhat a bit of a romancer myself, but occassionally I do like listening to an "Expert", please do carry on
"psychology"
DB
|
RFR
Member
|
Posted: Mon Aug 10th, 2009 02:23 pm |
|
Dynamic Balance wrote: Wesley wrote: Dynamic Balance wrote: I think a lot rests of the understanding of the VE's and what they choose to report back on. The local offices and Bristol only know what they are told from the reports "You VE's" send in. Some VE's are more experienced than others, and this will make all the difference.
DB
Hi DB,
You recently enquired, "How come You Guys think you are VE`s"? or something alike.
How Do "You" Know?
Psychology
Hi DB,
reverse psychology I think, for you paint the picture of being a tester, and having dificullty sometimes grasping the manual, to then being very informed on the finer points of the mot scheme and seem to be on the ball with any new changes, very confused. How can this be?????,
so is the "you VE's" just a smoke screen.
"Psychology"
rfr
|
Current time is 08:29 am | Page: 1 2   |
|
|
|
|
