Useless dealership mechanics

[premmington]

Why? It makes no sense. Stupid!!!

Mopeds and light trailer tyres are just visible tread.

 

[Gavin_d]

The worst I've seen was s customer with a 1.7 cdti Astra. It had no boost. Other garage had fit two (yes TWO) second hand turbos, a boost pressure sensor and a turbo solenoid. None of the above fixed it.

The vacume pipe on these go around the side of the engine and run MM's from the aux belt. If not clipped back on properly the belt will chafe through them. All I did was start it up and felt for vacume at the solenoid. There was nothing. I removed the air box and could see the split vacuum pipe. New pipe for a few quid and it was all good again!

The customer spent over 1k elsewhere for a £15 vac pipe.

To much swopnostics and not enough diagnostics these days.

 

[the snooper]

What would I take out - DPF nonsense for older vehicles (Anything pre 2008/2009), some of the warning light checks...airbag one...natural selection...
Add in an MOT for trailers (ESPECIALLY those used on roads by farmers...) and require trailers to have their own registration plates (ala ontario canada)
Require suspension / steering components to be swapped as pairs (i.e. springs/shocks/ drop links etc... more of a danger than a missing cat...)
take minimum tread level up to between 2 and 3mm and add an age related check to tyres (markings on sidewall shaved off...fail) say 6 years max
Also a check for correctly fitted tyres to get those "dubbers" with their stupid levels of tyre stretching off the road...
A db noise check with a reasonable margin, so you're ok with a decent "sports exhaust" but the big bore drain pipe lot have to tone down the volume...

a noisy exhaust should be failed at mot now its part of the test, tyres I totally agree they should be on the correct width rim, tyre ages are or will be restricted for at least pcv vehicles

 

[premmington]

So do a part of the list and use the words "including but not limited to" then.

I own and run MOT bays, the last physical test I did was in 1988 as a job (yes that's true). I have tested every month to keep my "ticket" ever since.

I have sat on "law lords commissions by invitation" about the motortrade and 4-4-2 testing. More recently about the "right to repair campaign in Europe".

What you need to understand about MOT testing is.

1. It is the minimum standard required for use on the public highway

2. The people in power have more money than the average motorist, so they don't have the same pressures. But they have all the say on the issues! Sad but true!

3. More money spent on vehicle maintenance and higher testing standards would improve safety (this is fact)

4. If you are working on minimum wages and own a car, you can hardly afford to run it let alone get it repaired to high safety standard.

Yes I know this post is going to get deleted by the moderators (Sorry in advance)

 

[Gavin_d]

There are trailer rules coming in now. Your not aloud homemade trailers. Not in force properly yet and I don't think they know how it will be enforced. We will see.

 

[premmington]

Looks like mrfuzzy would fail my early 80's tyres shame, they're fine and fit for purpose.

How would the MOT man check that suspension/steering components had been replaced as a pair/set?

As for trailers, generally the worst I ever see are the sub 750kg abortions people class as 'tip run trailers'. Sadly, those are the ones least likely to be required to be tested whereas the bigger trailers mainly used for work purposes and (sometimes...) better looked after are the ones that will be used as cash cows - fee to register, fee for trailer MOT, then you'll have to insure them, then there will be VED to pay...

Most of Europe has "logbooks" for trailers over 750kg and some countries already have SVA testing!

 

[the snooper]

There are trailer rules coming in now. Your not aloud homemade trailers. Not in force properly yet and I don't think they know how it will be enforced. We will see.

I doubt they can enforce it, how can they determine what age the trailer is, people will argue it was built before the date of the law change

 

[the snooper]

That I massively disagree with. It would 'appear' to improve safety, like mandatory hi-viz jackets on bikes.

Can you tell me how many 'accidents' are caused solely due to insufficient maintenance?

not that many, some years ago an idiot driving a car with no licence bad tyre and defective brakes killed a young boy a court found that the defects didn't contribute to his death

 

[premmington]

That I massively disagree with. It would 'appear' to improve safety, like mandatory hi-viz jackets on bikes.

Can you tell me how many 'accidents' are caused solely due to insufficient maintenance?

Can you argue! That every vehicle that is presented for an MOT and fails is safe!

There are a lot of MOT failures, so there is a lot of unsafe cars (This has to make sense).

More money spent on servicing and repairs at intervals would reduce MOT failure rates and thus reduce unsafe cars on the road.

 

[the snooper]

Can you argue! That every vehicle that is presented for an MOT and fails is safe!

There are a lot of MOT failures, so there is a lot of unsafe cars (This has to make sense).

More money spent on servicing and repairs at intervals would reduce MOT failure rates and thus reduce unsafe cars on the road.

there are a lot of unsafe cars but most don't end up in accidents, theoretically more cash and maintenance will make the roads safer but most accidents are human error

 

[premmington]

there are a lot of unsafe cars but most don't end up in accidents, theoretically more cash and maintenance will make the roads safer but most accidents are human error

The above is very valid point! Human error or driver training! (I totally agree with you 100%).

But they (the government) have made the driving test and motorbike tests and CPC training. Huge hurdles for normal people now.

 

[the snooper]

Well seemingly the TuV disagree with you re fit for purpose..as do most tyre makers (degradation of elastomeric compounds..causing hardening same thing happens to carb rubbers)

If one spring is shiny and new and the other is rusty...
Ditto if one drop link is bare metal/silver and the other is black with different end caps..not pair
Shocks are 2 diff brands - not a pair

drop links I don't think need to be changed in pairs after all they are only ball joints I don't think springs need to be in pairs either as all 4 corners are independent suspension, if the car doesn't look level then yes

 

[the snooper]

The above is very valid point! Human error or driver training! (I totally agree with you 100%).

But they (the government) have made the driving test and motorbike tests and CPC training. Huge hurdles for normal people now.

cpc another cash cow, no one can fail it how on earth did the haulage industry survive in the past without it

 

[premmington]

If every car that fails an MOT is so unsafe, why didn't every one crash into a nunnery full of kittens on the way to the test?

I never said every MOT failed car is safe either.

What you really mean is more money spent on cars means more money for you.

Let's face it, most MOT failures are for stupid things.

For instance, how does 0.1% over on an emissions test make a vehicle unsafe?

Personal comment aimed at me! (teehee)

 

[the snooper]

If every car that fails an MOT is so unsafe, why didn't every one crash into a nunnery full of kittens on the way to the test

there just are not enough nunnery's full of kittens to go round these days so dvsa removed it from the rules

 

[the snooper]

There's plenty of scope if you include bus stops with a queue of pensioners, the local orphanage, salvation army headquarters, etc.

are you going to add a points system ie 10 points for a pensioner multiply by 100 if only the cat has failed or only 5 points total if a brake failure

 

[premmington]

Of course it was aimed at you, if you were really only interested in the safety of kittens you'd fix people's cars properly on a maximum of minimum wage while supplying parts at what they cost you.

But you aren't, you have a business to run and a living to make - therefore any legislation added to make home repairs and servicing more difficult for the public means more money in your pocket so you will support it, while justifying it to yourself and others as "in the name of safety".

MOT testing has to be about safety not garage income!

(for your information out of all the operations we run, MOT testing and repairs is not that profitable)

Heavy engine internals are where the money is, most garages just wanna change your oil and fit new wiper blades you don't need.

There is a shortage of Tradesmen who will rebuild your engine, we are seeing cars getting recovered into us from customers 200miles away, because they can't find anybody else to do the jobs.

You think with that type of supply and demand I am not going to charge top dollar.

 

[the snooper]

I know MOT testing makes less money than other activities, but it has the potential to lead to more work - I also know that MOT repairs aren't usually charged at a lower rate than 'normal' work.

It's not just about safety though, I am still yet to see why going 0.1% over on emissions makes a vehicle unsafe.

I'm also yet to see even one suggestion of something that could be justifiably added to a motorcycle MOT...

The 0.1 doesn't make it unsafe but it exceeds the EU pollution rules

 

[Justme]

Mopeds and light trailer tyres are just visible tread.

Define "light trailer" & can you quote a source for that?

 

[premmington]

Define "light trailer" & can you quote a source for that?

I have checked "light trailers over 3500kgs" need 1mm of tread.

The only thing that needs visable tread is mopeds.

I was wrong!