8ob
Forum Supporter
- Messages
- 13,173
- Location
- Nescient in the vale
o-licence requirement i presume?
Not sure if its that or our over zealous and over paid transport manager
Bob
o-licence requirement i presume?
Ten years old ! i heard that the gov is going to put a time limit of 10 years on tyres and then they will be illegal. Just cannot stop meddling . It's as if there is nothing else to keep them employed.
bit of both probably.
there will be a historic exemption, there is in hgvs.
Does anyone else find it ridiculous that a law to regulate a safety critical component which ages dangerously won't apply to old vehicles?
So on to MOT`s. Do you get concered about advisories. For instense I took my car for a MOT who I have a service contract with,and they suggested it needed several things doing.Going to cost the earth. Took it to a local garage for one or two things to be done ,like engine mounts and I asked about the disc brakes,the answer was they are ok. So who do you trust
By definition an advisory is not a dangerous defect - so it is something you should seek to rectify but isn't something that should cause you to lose sleep.
Of course a lot depends on what it is.
I think it also depends on your relationship with them too.
My previous MOT man retired, but when he was still going he would tell me what needed sorting, and he knew I would sort it.
If it was something minor like a headlamp adjustment he would go off and make us a brew and let me fix it there and then.
It would then be marked down as a fail and immediate retest/pass which helped him out with his VOSA pass/fail numbers.
He wouldn't mess about with silly stuff but if there was something dangerous he would be on it and he knew I would too.
If he put something down as an advisory he knew I'd have it fixed straight away - so there was a level of mutual trust and history built up over the 20 odd years. He also knew the vehicles.
I wouldn't expect the same treatment from a garage I didn't know or who didn't know me.
My current place only does MOT's so they have no interest in "finding work" and are pretty straight, the guy also know my previous tester.
Neither were cheap tests, but the trouble with really cheap tests is they usually are a bit of a lost leader to bring in work, so they will be more inclined to find something that needs doing.
By definition an advisory is not a dangerous defect - so it is something you should seek to rectify but isn't something that should cause you to lose sleep.
Of course a lot depends on what it is.
I think it also depends on your relationship with them too.
My previous MOT man retired, but when he was still going he would tell me what needed sorting, and he knew I would sort it.
If it was something minor like a headlamp adjustment he would go off and make us a brew and let me fix it there and then.
It would then be marked down as a fail and immediate retest/pass which helped him out with his VOSA pass/fail numbers.
He wouldn't mess about with silly stuff but if there was something dangerous he would be on it and he knew I would too.
If he put something down as an advisory he knew I'd have it fixed straight away - so there was a level of mutual trust and history built up over the 20 odd years. He also knew the vehicles.
I wouldn't expect the same treatment from a garage I didn't know or who didn't know me.
My current place only does MOT's so they have no interest in "finding work" and are pretty straight, the guy also know my previous tester.
Neither were cheap tests, but the trouble with really cheap tests is they usually are a bit of a lost leader to bring in work, so they will be more inclined to find something that needs doing.
I’ve had the same advisory for a worn track rod end for eight years, done 40,000 miles on it now...
I had the same advisory for the front left headlamp out of adjustment for the last three years but this years it passed. I haven't touched though.I’ve had the same advisory for a worn track rod end for eight years, done 40,000 miles on it now...
you could take a car to 6 diffrent testers and each could have his own take on pass or fail or an advisoryI had the same advisory for the front left headlamp out of adjustment for the last three years but this years it passed. I haven't touched though.
once had some maxis tires on the front of the van and they were quite good grip wise and lasted the average milage.
I believe in NI (or Eire) it's already the case that tyres more than seven years old will automatically fail the MOT.
What a stroke of luck you have a mate who is in DVSA and happened to be involved in this very specific topic of tyre replacement! What are the chances?From my contact at the DVSA:
He claimed when they looked at this they found that the average mileage was 10.000 miles per annum and cars in everyday use used a set just over every 2 years, the anomoly was that while front whel drive cars wore their front tyres out quicker due to the steering, braking, and drive forces loading there front tyres much higher than rear wheel drive cars, on a rear wheel drive you take away the driving forces and put these on the rear tyres so they wear the rear tyres differently.
He further claimed that as most cars are front wheel drive now they had to look at such compromises between FWD and RWD cars, and that various manufacturers such as BMW, Lexus, and Mercedes Benz still produced RWD cars so this had to be factored in as most company cars were BMW 3 series with RWD or 4WD and this would hit businesses hard and they would object.
They concluded that most RWD cars with low mileages would replace there tyres in less than 4 years and FWD cars in less than 3 years and this was the reasoning behind this decision as the majority of car owners would easily replace there tyres in less than 5 years.
So on to MOT`s. Do you get concered about advisories. For instense I took my car for a MOT who I have a service contract with,and they suggested it needed several things doing.Going to cost the earth. Took it to a local garage for one or two things to be done ,like engine mounts and I asked about the disc brakes,the answer was they are ok. So who do you trust