MOT Forum - The MOT Testing Forum for the UK MOT Testing Industry Home


Search
   
Members

Calendar

Help

Home
Search by username
Not logged in - Login | Register 

MOT Test MOT Test MOT Test
Van MOT Should it have failed
MOT Test MOT Test MOT Test
 Moderated by: KevG  

New Topic

Reply

Print
AuthorPost
relisys
Member
 

Joined: Mon Aug 17th, 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 43
Status:  Offline
Mana: 
 Posted: Mon Oct 25th, 2010 05:45 pm

Quote

Reply
yep never got a chance to view, work and all that.

agree bull bar / sharp projections should have been a advisory.

loaded photos so not sure where they have gone unless they require moderator approval.

fedup
Member
 

Joined: Wed Sep 29th, 2010
Location:  
Posts: 49
Status:  Offline
Mana: 
 Posted: Mon Oct 25th, 2010 05:21 pm

Quote

Reply
You bought a vehicle without viewing it :shock:

Lots of questions to be answered there. wouldn't like to be the tester :D The bull bar being cut off leaving sharp edges is not a RfR but should have been mentioned on a VT32 as should the misting of oil on front shocks and the oil leak etc.

Quiet word in the ear of the VTS boss whilst dangling your smart card from your shirt pocket should see everything put right FOC ;)

Photos? can't see any sorry :(

relisys
Member
 

Joined: Mon Aug 17th, 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 43
Status:  Offline
Mana: 
 Posted: Mon Oct 25th, 2010 04:15 pm

Quote

Reply
I purchased a van last week but due to time constraints never had a chance to view it beforehand.  The van had a fresh 12 months MOT, with the VT 20 issued the day before I collected and having covered less than 1/2 mile between the VTS and sellers house.  So I drive off and soon realise there is a loud knocking noise from OSF suspension – sounds like a wish bone bush I think too myself.  3 miles down the road the oil light comes on. Pull over and check – oil pressure switch has a hole in it and oil everywhere.  So top oil up and get home. Next day put the van on the ramp and find oil everywhere, to be fair the sellers description did mention the oil leak but the VT 32 makes no mention of this. Not sure I would have been happy testing this van with such oil loss. Then I discover the front brake pipes are corroded, see photos. Again not even advised on VT32 though I think they were a fail. Near side rear tyre is advised as worn close to legal limit but see photo. I would suggest the tyre was a fail not pass and advise due to extent of wear on left shoulder especially. I also note centre exhaust rubber mount is missing but so is hanger/bracket and photo shows it has been missing for some time as mounting holes are rusted. Front bumper appears to have had a bull bar fitted in the past. This has been cut off leaving sharp edges protruding from the bumper. Again neither failed nor advised.  Both front shockers which have been advised in previous years as misted, are not mentioned this time though they are wet with oil. Finally there is no evidence of a opacity test, seller states he was never given one.

So as a tester myself I was going to call the VTS and ask for an explanation.  Before I give them an opportunity to put things right I would like the comments of fellow testers. 

Last edited on Mon Oct 25th, 2010 04:40 pm by relisys


 Current time is 12:21 am
Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2   




Powered by WowBB 1.7 - Copyright © 2003-2006 Aycan Gulez
Page processed in 0.1209 seconds (26% database + 74% PHP). 18 queries executed.