MOT Advisory Debate starts here.....

Got my 200tdi 90 MOT'd today - initially failed on:-

Lockstop adjustment allowing tyres to foul the front shocks
Couple of holes in the Swiss cheese that is my chassis
Exhaust not allowing Probe to be inserted - its a big side exit jobby.

Welded the holes, adjusted the lock stops and probe found a way to stay in the exhaust - Bingo! Pass.

But tester then listed two advisories, one of which not featuring on initial fail - get this:-

"Warning - in my opinion the vehicle is dangerous to drive because of....

1) Tyres protrude beyond Wheelarch
2) Exhaust outlet liable to cause offence to other road users or pedestrians *DANGEROUS* "

The tyres protrude by 20mm from perpendicular line from edge of wheelarch eyebrow to face of sidewall.

The exhaust is a silenced big bore outlet on passenger rear quarter panel 125mm above OEM position.

The question is, is the tester being a cock?

I have my ticket so don't really care - unless the advisories carry any weight with insurers/cops.

Guess this may be evidence of 'interpretation' of the new rules - and he was a cyclist apparently....

No you are right he is a cock

Yes, he is a wanger.

How exactly can the exhaust cause offence and in what way is that dangerous? What a knob

hes a total prick

Those with no working brain cells and in a position of power over you, are very dangerous. What a complete tosser. Anyway, he shouldn't be stating it's dangerous to drive. I've had loads of advisories on the new receipt style certificate, but never any mention of dangerous. If it's dangerous, it should be failed. It might be worth reporting him to VOSA.

v8landyman said:

Those with no working brain cells and in a position of power over you, are very dangerous. What a complete tosser. Anyway, he shouldn't be stating it's dangerous to drive. I've had loads of advisories on the new receipt style certificate, but never any mention of dangerous. If it's dangerous, it should be failed. It might be worth reporting him to VOSA.

Click to expand...

+1 if dangerous it should not have passed, so a bit of a contradiction in my opinion.

Get him to show you exactly where in the MOT legislation it details what is and is not dangerous in terms of exhaust layout. If it is dangerous he should not have passed the vehicle. Report him and maybe they'll retrain him so he can do his job properly.

I always understood tyres sticking out beyond the wheelarch was a failure? or is this just a police issue not an MOT issue?

Cheers

PS. sounds like the examiner is being a bit of a cock. All I want from an MOT is a pass, and if there are advisories then make them factual, not the opinion of some ****

The tyres sticking out beyond the wheelarch on a normal car is slightly understandable but as fenders are flat sided, and on mine for a pedestrian to walk into the tyre they would have to literally be flat against the body to hit it. My rock sliders, bullbar and wing mirrors protrude further than the tyres to so surely even without wheel arches it won't be a fail.

slomofo said:

But tester then listed two advisories, one of which not featuring on initial fail - get this:-

"Warning - in my opinion the vehicle is dangerous to drive because of....

1) Tyres protrude beyond Wheelarch
2) Exhaust outlet liable to cause offence to other road users or pedestrians *DANGEROUS* "

Click to expand...

Are there any reference numbers attached to the advisories

Advisories are just that- if you got a mot then advisories are items to look at

Exhaust would come under construction and use-don't bother unless stupidly loud.

Tyres how far out if very slight dont bother, 20 mm plus look at wide arches

sounds like a berk to me.
some places go OTT on advisories.
I got me sedona done at me non regular garage, cos it was convinient, and it came out with 5 advisories for summat of nothing, one being a tiny, tiny oil drip.

the only one my fender got on me fail sheet was the oil leek, I have a feeling it only got that cos it happened to drip on him whilst he was testing

I've enquired with my local garage why there are now so many advisories on the certificate. I have a classic Rover V8 P6 and the first test after the new style certificate appeared, the advisory column was filled up completely. Things like slight fraying of seat belt webbing; all four road springs corroded; various oil leaks. The road spring mention is laughable as they are about 1/2" cross-section on these cars. Anyway, the answer is they now have to mention anything that could possibly cause a problem, to cover themselves, even though it is not a fail or even testable item

it is all about confidence and experience of the tester mine has experience of classic cars etc and while picking up on some swivel hub play and slight wheel bearing play- he was aware of what it should be.

my springs are rusty, but it doesn't affect the component to a point that would impact safety

advisories are things to be aware of and consider-also allows mot tester to cover their arses

Advisories serve two purposes , they can warn you of something that is not a failable item under the terms of the testing manual that he as a tester has to follow, but would possibly contravene other legislation eg Con and use regs . The second is to record an item that he is unsure has reached a fail mot level , but he wants to bring to your attention , because if in doubt he has to give you benefit . (it could also cover his A7$e if was picked up in a road check or failed) . Wheels protuding , if the tread is not completely covered in the required area , then its prosecutable. Without seeing the exhaust its difficult to say what he was trying to get at ? HTSH

tacr2man said:

Advisories serve two purposes , they can warn you of something that is not a failable item under the terms of the testing manual that he as a tester has to follow, but would possibly contravene other legislation eg Con and use regs . The second is to record an item that he is unsure has reached a fail mot level , but he wants to bring to your attention , because if in doubt he has to give you benefit . (it could also cover his A7$e if was picked up in a road check or failed) . Wheels protuding , if the tread is not completely covered in the required area , then its prosecutable. Without seeing the exhaust its difficult to say what he was trying to get at ? HTSH

Click to expand...

Wheels are a bugger of an area I think its 3% max can be out. Had a lot of dealing with tyre issues following stanced bmws running -3º camber.

biggeeeee said:

Are there any reference numbers attached to the advisories

Click to expand...

Aye, what are the codes next to the advisories ? I would be interested to see if any actually matched to the handbook.

lorri789 said:

Aye, what are the codes next to the advisories ? I would be interested to see if any actually matched to the handbook.

Click to expand...

No codes against the advisories, hence my belief that he was being a cock - exhaust is as my avatar, tread pattern does not protrude beyond arches but sidewalls are fat (285/75/16)

It will not be going anywhere near there again...except maybe to fill up and irritate testers and cyclists with a dangerous exhaust of course....

if the exhaust is high and sticks out then there may be a danger of someone accidently touching it and burning themselves or if it's at pram level then a child could get a face full of exhaust fumes/soot etc and in either case it could be dangerous.