ChasR
RR Helper
motivation
Posts: 10,296
Club RR Member Number: 170
|
|
|
|
|
The dangerous category will override whether it has an MOT or not, or if the repair place is a mile away. It's been happening with HGVs and the GVT (an MOT for stuff over 3.5T) for years and yes, even if they go in early they have to be towed away.
My tester is very worried; he's fearing 'cheap' places will use the Dangerous category to generate business and overcharge customers
"It's dangerous, Your tyres are bald"
"OK, I'll take it to my tyre shop"
"Good luck, it will be a tasty fine; it's dangerous after all to take on a road as it is"
"OK You can do the tyre"
"No problem; it will be £100 for a budget 195/65R15 tyre!"
"errrr".
That's the scenario he is picturing, amongst bushes etc. or any 'easy' moneymaker.
|
| |
Last Edit: May 1, 2018 11:16:00 GMT by ChasR
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's why I only ever use "JustMoT" type places; there's nothing in it for them to fail an item. If anything, I'd think that they're more likely to pass a 50/50 item so that they don't have the bother of a free re-test.
Forlorn hope I suppose, but will there not be some sort of guidance issued as to what is and is not "dangerous"?
|
| |
|
|
mk2cossie
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 3,046 
Club RR Member Number: 77
Member is Online
|
|
|
|
That's why I only ever use "JustMoT" type places; there's nothing in it for them to fail an item. If anything, I'd think that they're more likely to pass a 50/50 item so that they don't have the bother of a free re-test. Forlorn hope I suppose, but will there not be some sort of guidance issued as to what is and is not "dangerous"? I can sort of agree with that logic in that  We often have the scrap man come round to take away old batteries and such like and he is always asking if we have any old cats. There are very few cars we get in that the emissions failures are caused by a duff cat. We always make sure the engine is hot before doing the test and the vast majority just sail through. I wonder if the MOT only test stations have the same stand on that part. ChasR when the new rulings come in this month, if a car has a dangerous marker on it, as before we can't actually stop the vehicle presenter taking it away. It will be down to their own conscience to live with the decision of whether they leave it with us for repairs or take it away for someone else to do. That part is the case at the moment as well, as you need to be driving a road worthy vehicle.(obvious exemptions on the driving to MOT testing station, or place of repair) The changes this month from what I have read through briefly are trying to get the MOT test more in line with road requirements. At the moment, the test means the vehicle met minimum road safety standards at the time of test. Nowt to do with C&U and legal requiremnets. The new stuff is laid out for us as a roadworthiness draft, and moving the goal posts between MOT and roadworthy closer together  (At least it means all the herberts with HID bulb kits in halogen lamps will be a fail  Although I would imagine it will be the same for people that have de-cat pipes that are swapped out at MOT time  ) |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The place I use is generally very good.
They spent a good 20 minutes trying to get my MX5 through on emissions last year and have on occasion tipped me the wink, "I don't think I ought to test this because I noticed xyz, perhaps you should take it away and fix that first"
|
| |
|
|
ChasR
RR Helper
motivation
Posts: 10,296
Club RR Member Number: 170
|
|
|
|
|
The place I also use is very good. He knows about the quality of modern pattern parts, and his main priority is if the car is safe (i.e is it leaking out tons and tons of oil, is the steering vague etc.).
He's switched on for the older stuff. As the manual says to allow play on taper bearings he is aware of how much is too once. Once he told me off for going too tight!
But he is getting on a bit now. I've used him for around 10 years.
|
| |
|
|
froggy
Posted a lot
Posts: 1,099
|
|
|
|
|
The current system allows for a dangerous mark against fail items but i rarely use it
|
| |
|
|
mk2cossie
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 3,046
Club RR Member Number: 77
Member is Online
|
|
|
|
Current system allows for a dangerous marker against advisories as well. Which I have used, for a 2 ton van that had tyres only load rated to a total of about 1400kg and stretched to fit the steels as well  |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's not right Quatermass. You can definitely drive the car to/from pre-arranged repairs for FAILED items (with insurance, of course). So if the tyres in my example were a FAIL, then it would be fine to drive to/from the welder and then to/from the tyre place. I like to think that this rule was brought in to stop unscrupulous garages from holding your car hostage and charging whatever they like for repairs, knowing that you are unlikely to pay for a tow truck to move it. except it's never allowed or acceptable to drive on an illegal tyre. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current system allows for a dangerous marker against advisories as well. Which I have used, for a 2 ton van that had tyres only load rated to a total of about 1400kg and stretched to fit the steels as well Can I ask an aside question involving the new regs on diesel emissions testing coming in in May? Do the new emissions rules apply to only vehicles with a a DPF or are older vehicles going to be hit by the 'smoke of any colour observed by the tester' as the gov.uk website states (as I have a focus TDCI daily with no DPF and it does chuck out a bit of black soot on hard acceleration, as does my dads v70 d5 which is euro 4 and has a DPF) I'm looking to replace the daily but cba with another diesel if its going to be a pain to get through the new MOT every year. |
| |
|
|
mk2cossie
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 3,046
Club RR Member Number: 77
Member is Online
|
|
|
|
I've only had a quick read through the new diesel regs. But the visible smoke of any kind is for DPF equipped cars. And there is also vehicle specific smoke opacity limits for individual cars after 2008 (I think). Basically to prevent anything with remaps, EGR removal, or decat pipes/DPF removal from getting through the test still, despite being technically illegal The whole shake up is to try and bring inline the current mismatch of MOT test pass and roadworthiness |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've only had a quick read through the new diesel regs. But the visible smoke of any kind is for DPF equipped cars. And there is also vehicle specific smoke opacity limits for individual cars after 2008 (I think). Basically to prevent anything with remaps, EGR removal, or decat pipes/DPF removal from getting through the test still, despite being technically illegal The whole shake up is to try and bring inline the current mismatch of MOT test pass and roadworthiness Nice one, that clears it up a bit, non DPF diesels are back on the purchase list once again |
| |
|
|
froggy
Posted a lot
Posts: 1,099
|
|
|
|
|
If the vehicle has a limit value on the chassis plate it will have to pass that not the default values , I’ve been trying a few at the plate value and it’s not looking good . 2002 vw t4 van has a 0.3 limit on the plate , that’s stricter than the new Euro 6 test limit
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If the vehicle has a limit value on the chassis plate it will have to pass that not the default values , I’ve been trying a few at the plate value and it’s not looking good . 2002 vw t4 van has a 0.3 limit on the plate , that’s stricter than the new Euro 6 test limit I guess this is going to screw over huge numbers of VAG diesel cars for certain, as they cheated their emissions tests i'm going to guess they put the lower (never going to be able to hit it) limit on the chassis plate, and so they will never pass another MOT again? |
| |
|
|
froggy
Posted a lot
Posts: 1,099
|
|
May 10, 2018 10:39:44 GMT
|
|
It’s more the older pre 2008 stuff that I see struggling . As usual plenty of stupidity in the new manual like failing a mil light even if it flies through the emmissions test
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
May 10, 2018 15:34:07 GMT
|
|
wont affect anything pre 08, regs aren't changing for them
|
| |
|
|
froggy
Posted a lot
Posts: 1,099
|
|
May 10, 2018 17:33:18 GMT
|
|
For vehicles first used before 1 July 2008, the limit will be one of the following:
the level specified on the manufacturer's plate
2.5m-1 for a non-turbocharged engine – if it's not stated on the manufacturer's plate
3.0m-1 for a turbocharged engine – if it's not stated on the manufacturer's plate
For vehicles first used between 1 July 2008 and 31 December 2013, the limit will be one of the following:
the level specified on the manufacturer's plate
1.5m-1 – if it's not stated on the manufacturer's plate
For vehicles first used on or after 1 January 2014, the limit will be one of the following:
the level specified on the manufacturer's plate
0.7m-1 – if it's not stated on the manufacturer's plate
If the smoke level is displayed on the VIN plate, it will be a number, usually in a box (as below), and often positioned in the bottom right .
Seems pretty clear to me , plate value overrides default limits
|
| |
Last Edit: May 10, 2018 17:34:27 GMT by froggy
|
|
|
|
|
May 17, 2018 17:25:44 GMT
|
Failure Methods- Dangerous; It will actually be illegal to drive a car with this category against it....you can be fined £1000 if you are caught. unless that dangerous fault happened when the front wheels hit the ramps on the 4 poster lift into the MOT station, then it was illegal to drive the car there, and could also have been fined 1000 if caught i acknowledge the rewording and new categories, but they wont be holding my car to ransom |
| |
|
|
mk2cossie
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 3,046
Club RR Member Number: 77
Member is Online
|
|
May 17, 2018 19:01:22 GMT
|
Failure Methods- Dangerous; It will actually be illegal to drive a car with this category against it....you can be fined £1000 if you are caught. unless that dangerous fault happened when the front wheels hit the ramps on the 4 poster lift into the MOT station, then it was illegal to drive the car there, and could also have been fined 1000 if caught i acknowledge the rewording and new categories, but they wont be holding my car to ransom As I have said elsewhere, the testing station does not have any authority to prevent people driving away in their MOT failure, irrespective of if it is something silly or downright dangerous DVSA or local constabulary have a different view if they catch you however |
| |
|
|
froggy
Posted a lot
Posts: 1,099
|
|
May 24, 2018 11:42:09 GMT
|
For vehicles first used before 1 July 2008, the limit will be one of the following: the level specified on the manufacturer's plate 2.5m-1 for a non-turbocharged engine – if it's not stated on the manufacturer's plate 3.0m-1 for a turbocharged engine – if it's not stated on the manufacturer's plate For vehicles first used between 1 July 2008 and 31 December 2013, the limit will be one of the following: the level specified on the manufacturer's plate 1.5m-1 – if it's not stated on the manufacturer's plate For vehicles first used on or after 1 January 2014, the limit will be one of the following: the level specified on the manufacturer's plate 0.7m-1 – if it's not stated on the manufacturer's plate If the smoke level is displayed on the VIN plate, it will be a number, usually in a box (as below), and often positioned in the bottom right . Seems pretty clear to me , plate value overrides default limits 4 days after going live the option to fail pre 2008 diesels on the manufacturers plate limit has gone from the failure items list despite still being in the testing manual . Most likely the massive jump in diesel emission failures was a bit much for Dvsa |
| |
|
|
Although I would imagine it will be the same for people that have de-cat pipes that are swapped out at MOT time 
)
