|
| Moderated by: Stealth, MOTman, martins, KevG, bimmer | Page: 1 2   |
|
|||||||||||||
| retest/corrosion | Rate Topic |
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted: Thu Aug 9th, 2012 02:31 pm |
|
1st Post |
|
Favell Trade Member
|
That is horrendous
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Aug 9th, 2012 01:37 pm |
|
2nd Post |
|
KevG Super Moderator 
|
Just seen the pic. Shock.
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Aug 9th, 2012 12:05 am |
|
3rd Post |
|
Wesley Trade Member
|
I hope your original question refers to someone else? Last edited on Thu Aug 9th, 2012 12:23 am by Wesley |
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Aug 9th, 2012 12:05 am |
|
4th Post |
|
Wesley Trade Member
|
afiafi1 wrote: Have seen car now, there is damage on axle as if it hit a speed bump. Also corrosion holes have been made worse, the holes are same size of sharp end of toffy hammer( toffy hammer end fits perfectly in hole). "But" as a "Good Will Gesture", We, have offerd to replace axle. But my original question was Who would get in trouble the nt who tested or the nt who did the retest , considering car failed on nothing that meant checking rear of car. That would be, the original NT, and The AE!  lets not forget, "points" make "prizes"  
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Wed Aug 8th, 2012 11:33 pm |
|
5th Post |
|
Wesley Trade Member
|
kev1975 wrote: afiafi1 wrote: is he called "steevie wonder", by any chance?? Last edited on Wed Aug 8th, 2012 11:38 pm by Wesley |
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Mon Aug 6th, 2012 12:21 am |
|
6th Post |
|
kev1975 Trade Member
|
afiafi1 wrote:Have seen car know, there is damage on axle as if it hit a speed bump. Also corrosion holes have been made worse, the holes are same size of sharp end of toffy hammer( toffy hammer end fits perfectly in hole)But as a good will gesture we have offerd to replace axle. But my original question was who would get in trouble the nt who tested or the nt who did the retest , considering car failed on nothing that ment checking rear of car. if there was nothing in the original failure documents regarding the rear of the car then it is the original tester that will take the rap for it as it is the original tester that should have spotted the corrosion .
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sun Aug 5th, 2012 10:43 pm |
|
7th Post |
|
afiafi1 Member
|
Have seen car know, there is damage on axle as if it hit a speed bump. Also corrosion holes have been made worse, the holes are same size of sharp end of toffy hammer( toffy hammer end fits perfectly in hole)But as a good will gesture we have offerd to replace axle. But my original question was who would get in trouble the nt who tested or the nt who did the retest , considering car failed on nothing that ment checking rear of car.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sun Aug 5th, 2012 08:48 pm |
|
8th Post |
|
kjb Member
|
Someone has removed the link that I posted Attachment: SDC169841 (Medium).jpg (Downloaded 97 times) Last edited on Sun Aug 5th, 2012 09:04 pm by kjb |
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sun Aug 5th, 2012 02:24 pm |
|
9th Post |
|
Aylesbury Jock Member 
|
I was wondering the same thing. Thought me eyes were failing.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sun Aug 5th, 2012 12:38 am |
|
10th Post |
|
Stealth Super Moderator 
|
Wesley wrote:Stealth wrote:Wesley wrote: Where did my post go ?
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Aug 2nd, 2012 11:24 pm |
|
11th Post |
|
Wesley Trade Member
|
Stealth wrote: Wesley wrote: I am liking the look of sitting on the fence, defect? now theres an option?Last edited on Thu Aug 2nd, 2012 11:29 pm by Wesley |
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Aug 2nd, 2012 08:44 pm |
|
12th Post |
|
kjb Member
|
kev1975 wrote: looking at the state of that in the full size picture it looks like it was severely rottenFurthermore it hasn't happened in 8 wks,if vosa get hold of this I fear for the original n.t & depending on the rfr's maybe the n.t who retested it aswell
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Aug 2nd, 2012 06:39 pm |
|
13th Post |
|
kev1975 Trade Member
|
looking at the state of that in the full size picture it looks like it was severely rotten
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Aug 2nd, 2012 12:30 am |
|
14th Post |
|
Wesley Trade Member
|
afiafi1 wrote: this is my first post. i did a retest on a micra and tested the fail items and anything associated with fail item(8weeks ago) a local mot station who got shut down by vosa brought it in,(he stoped using us ,because we would not look the other way on his vehicles). i had the new owner of the car complaining car should not have passed due to corosion on rear axle, original fail had no defects on rear of vehicle. i asked him to email me picture, on the picture it looks like car has had a impact at rear axle thus putting crack in it. when i retested it the car failed on corrosion at front of vehicle, when it comes to corrosion and im retesting i have a look at rest of car and touch most panels with finger /thumb as i go past just to check nothing has been missed, i also checked for movement using shaker plates as it had also originally failed on front balljoint (the rear axle was firm with no movement what so ever) And where is "stealth" lurking when you need him?? Is? this guy is a vosa rep? investigating an appeal?? Is this guy retesting a vehicle that was originally tested at an other testing station? That should have had a full Inspection? Maybye You guys should declare your interests on this forum? and state that you are "Vosa Members" and not just mere "Members"? Like I Have stated, I am a contributor on this forum and fall into the "Trade Member" Category. as previously posted, "confusion" Last edited on Thu Aug 2nd, 2012 12:53 am by Wesley |
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Wed Aug 1st, 2012 08:53 am |
|
15th Post |
|
Favell Trade Member
|
I can't make out too much from the quality of that picture, by the time I zoom it up it is very pixilated. If as you say the rear wheel has had an impact, you have nothing to worry about, at the time of test there was no defect with the car. Just because a component cracks or fractures after an impact does not mean it was obviously weak at the time of the MOT test.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Jul 31st, 2012 11:11 pm |
|
16th Post |
|
Wesley Trade Member
|
this post appears to be one of those "fart smeller" ones, whereby the op intends to confuse all of those of good intentions, into missreading what has been originally posted? Last edited on Tue Jul 31st, 2012 11:27 pm by Wesley |
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Jul 31st, 2012 08:50 pm |
|
17th Post |
|
Aylesbury Jock Member
|
In an appeal the original tester is responsible for the whole of the vehicle, since that is what he had to test, and you are held responsible for any items which need retesting. By the sound of it you've pretty much had to retest everything. Anything the original tester missed is his problem, and not yours.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Jul 31st, 2012 07:18 pm |
|
18th Post |
|
kit1958 Trade Member 
|
So there is an inverted appeal against the pass that you issued 8 weeks ago?? Last edited on Tue Jul 31st, 2012 08:52 pm by kit1958 |
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Jul 31st, 2012 08:42 am |
|
19th Post |
|
afiafi1 Member
|
yes was retested 8 weeks ago
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Jul 31st, 2012 08:28 am |
|
20th Post |
|
Favell Trade Member
|
Can you just clarify something. I think you're saying that you did the retest 8 weeks ago. Not that you retested 8 weeks after the car failed it's MOT. Fav
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Current time is 11:06 pm | Page: 1 2 |
| MOT Forum - The MOT Testing Forum for the UK MOT Testing Industry > Trade Category (MOT Trade Discussions) > MOT Regulations - Need clarification? try here | MOT Forum > retest/corrosion | Top |
