Steven
Nominated Tester
Posts: 131
|
Post by Steven on Jul 27, 2005 9:57:13 GMT
I have found many examples on the internet of people who are not MOT testers giving the wrong advice to other people. The sort of thing I mean is like: - 'If a CAT is missing, the car WILL fail the MOT'
- 'If your reversing lights are not working, your car WILL fail the MOT'
- '..if the Roller Brake Tester shows your brakes are working well, then the vehicle WILL PASS, no matter what condition the hydraulic components (ie leaking) are in or if the discs are excessively scored / pitted / worn '
If it is ok, I shall have post links to them here as I find them on my travels of the web. Perhaps other members have found other examples of incorrect advice in other car maintenance websites.
|
|
|
Post by baz657 on Jul 27, 2005 16:33:19 GMT
Agreed the misconception is alive and well.
I have a MOT based website (which badly needs updating!) with a link to ask questions - some of them are impossible to answer, but most are caused either by the general public and their urban myths, or some testers just getting it wrong. I'll have a dig through the archives and see if there are any classics that I haven't deleted.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 11, 2005 23:41:04 GMT
There is one classic:
'If it is fitted, then it must be working'
Many people believe this to be true of any item fitted to the vehicle.
|
|
motdave
Nominated Tester
Posts: 242
|
Post by motdave on Nov 2, 2005 18:00:21 GMT
'An MOT tester cannot test his own vehicle'
|
|
Steven
Nominated Tester
Posts: 131
|
Post by Steven on Dec 11, 2005 23:46:48 GMT
|
|
fail
Nominated Tester
Posts: 5
|
Post by fail on Mar 20, 2006 20:33:47 GMT
Popular misconception
1- A car with a years mot is Guaranteed fault free for a year. 2- Servicing is not required, it's had an mot
|
|
Rob
Nominated Tester
Posts: 279
|
Post by Rob on Mar 20, 2006 22:57:16 GMT
The one we're getting from a lot of customers at the moment is:
So I've got 14 days to fix it then?
|
|
|
Post by jayeastanglia on Jun 22, 2006 17:43:25 GMT
1. if there is rust on ur vehical i.e a hole and u feel that it may fail because of this, simply remove the rust and make sure the surrounding area is cut, a machined hole is classed as a modifcation and therefore cannot fail.
Found that one on the golf forum..is that really true??
|
|
Rob
Nominated Tester
Posts: 279
|
Post by Rob on Jun 22, 2006 18:41:30 GMT
1. if there is rust on ur vehical i.e a hole and u feel that it may fail because of this, simply remove the rust and make sure the surrounding area is cut, a machined hole is classed as a modifcation and therefore cannot fail. Found that one on the golf forum..is that really true?? It all depends on where the 'modified' area is, if it's in a prescribed area for brakes, steering, suspension or seat belts it could easily be failed on:- Or if it's not within a prescribed area, depending on how big an area it is:- The best bet if you know you've got any corrosion in any prescribed area is to have it repaired to the correct standards.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Hill on Jun 23, 2006 21:18:50 GMT
Uncanny that this should appear today.
I had an old Volvo 740, that had loads of security locks fitted to every door (tailgate included). It turns out that it used to belong to a drugs development firm & as such was a "high security" vehicle.
Anyways, 10 years on & it has holes drilled in the wheel arches (inside the rear door aperture) & the front sills (again only visible with the door open). These cars are built to last until eternity but yet this one has "deliberate modification to a prescribed area".
Who am I to say whether or not these are going to cause significant reduction to the strength of the structure? I am a mechanic not a forensic scientist.
Help please!!!!
Cheers all
Dave Hill
|
|
Rob
Nominated Tester
Posts: 279
|
Post by Rob on Jun 23, 2006 22:52:12 GMT
You're d**ned if you fail it, and d**ned if you don't. (Filters d a m n, but not arse, weird) Without seeing the extent of the holes, it's pretty hard to come to any conclusion, but if they were corroded holes you'd have no hesitation in failing it. As far as 'significantly reducing the original strength' is concerned, seeing as it's a Volvo and the quality of steel is pretty decent the best thing really is to pass and advise, at least you've more or less covered your arse.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 26, 2006 20:22:38 GMT
You're d**ned if you fail it, and d**ned if you don't. (Filters d a m n, but not arse, weird) Reply from Admin: Censored word list edited to allow 'damn'
|
|
|
Post by Info1 on Jul 4, 2006 13:18:53 GMT
Damn!
|
|
micoli
Motoring Public
Posts: 8
|
Post by micoli on Jul 7, 2006 23:33:32 GMT
Who am I to say whether or not these are going to cause significant reduction to the strength of the structure? I am a mechanic not a forensic scientist. Help please!!!! Cheers all Dave Hill *Ahem* I'd ask a structural engineer, not a Forensic Scientist, they'd know fox-all about it...
|
|
|
Post by Dave Hill on Jul 13, 2006 19:24:57 GMT
Good point!
I have always associated structural engineers with buildings & properties though.
Perhaps a metallurgist would do??
What is a forensic scientist anyway?
Cheers!
|
|
micoli
Motoring Public
Posts: 8
|
Post by micoli on Jul 16, 2006 22:36:36 GMT
|
|