phaetonott
Nominated Tester
I may not be right but at least I am trying!
Posts: 376
|
Post by phaetonott on Feb 6, 2012 0:12:18 GMT
That's a centre silencer with it's supports rusted through Held up by bending a piece of rod and hooking it on the plastic brake pipe clip at one end And tied to the fuel pipes with metal banding / strapping like you get on pallets.
|
|
nitros44
Nominated Tester
esto es un negocio serio
Posts: 741
|
Post by nitros44 on Feb 6, 2012 1:39:28 GMT
It would not get that far as a pass/advise
i would have to refuse to test if i was aware before logging it on vts device
Abandoned the test if found during test
|
|
alex
Nominated Tester
Posts: 305
|
Post by alex on Feb 6, 2012 18:14:35 GMT
It really is unbeleivable the things that you come across,it,s a good job that we have an annual test the things you find on some cars are down right dangerous.
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Feb 6, 2012 18:39:36 GMT
It would not get that far as a pass/advise i would have to refuse to test if i was aware before logging it on vts device Abandoned the test if found during test I have been aware of this idea for quite some time about checking the underside before starting the test Many years ago when I worked at Vauxhall, the local VE came to approve me for testing after leaving the scheme for a while when doing my degree, anyway that's a different story, however I lifted the vehicle up on the ramp and checked the underside before registering for the test, the VE after the test asked me why did I do that? I explained I was checking to see if the vehicle was clean enough to test? He didn't reply Today I tested a Ford Transit Connect, guess what , I should have lifted it on the ramp and checked the underside first , the oil filter/sealing ring was leaking oil, but on this occassion only slightly, had the engine blown up on test , this would have been clearly my fault The moral of the story, always visually check the underside before registering for a test Dave
|
|
phaetonott
Nominated Tester
I may not be right but at least I am trying!
Posts: 376
|
Post by phaetonott on Feb 6, 2012 22:11:02 GMT
This was a few months ago and I just found the photos on my phone so I sent them up here. Obviously I was well into the test before I found this. It had already failed on several other items.
I couldn't see that continuing the test would cause an immediate failure of the fuel pipe or brake pipe so I did complete the test.
It failed on enough to write it off, and I did use the old RfR exhaust excessively deteriorated.
Under the new rules, there isn't an RfR to fail it on.
It's not leaking, not so insecure it's likely to fall off, the fuel pipes and brake pipes weren't damaged. You can't fail it because the owner is a thingy(waiting for Daveg to correct me on that) .
I would rather complete a test if possible. Firstly we don't charge for an abandoned test, so the boss gets the hump. secondly the customer brought the car in to be tested, and would prefer to have a full list of failures before deciding to spend money on the exhaust, thirdly I lose bonus if I abandon. Only if I'm not putting myself in danger of course.
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Feb 6, 2012 23:45:34 GMT
This was a few months ago and I just found the photos on my phone so I sent them up here. Obviously I was well into the test before I found this. It had already failed on several other items. I couldn't see that continuing the test would cause an immediate failure of the fuel pipe or brake pipe so I did complete the test. It failed on enough to write it off, and I did use the old RfR exhaust excessively deteriorated. Under the new rules, there isn't an RfR to fail it on. It's not leaking, not so insecure it's likely to fall off, the fuel pipes and brake pipes weren't damaged. You can't fail it because the owner is a thingy(waiting for Daveg to correct me on that) . I would rather complete a test if possible. Firstly we don't charge for an abandoned test, so the boss gets the hump. secondly the customer brought the car in to be tested, and would prefer to have a full list of failures before deciding to spend money on the exhaust, thirdly I lose bonus if I abandon. Only if I'm not putting myself in danger of course. Well, not all customers are good ones , some are better than others . Your wrong about the abandon test though , when a test is started it must be completed to the maximum safest possible amount, then abandon at the point where you can't go on anymore, and you can charge an appropriate amount of the test fee for the work you did and the customer does get the very next best thing to a full test result, because the only thing(s) you could not test was the reasons you applied the rules for abandoning the test, therefore the customer got a full test result ;D you just can't enter all details into the computer that is all however in your above example I would fail to understand why you would abandon that test, it's not good working practice what has bin done, but unless the heat of the exhaust is going to travel down the steel wires and melt/set fire to the fuel lines, which is very very unlikely, you could do a full test, and under the rules say that the exhaust is not adequately supported Dave
|
|
phaetonott
Nominated Tester
I may not be right but at least I am trying!
Posts: 376
|
Post by phaetonott on Feb 8, 2012 21:56:32 GMT
We can charge, just our company policy is to waive the charge on abandoned tests. That's up to them, they insist on charging for a ten second twiddle with an allen key to adjust a headlamp, and then give away 45mins of my time. I've given up wondering where they keep their brain
|
|