1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

MOT changes next year.

Discussion in 'A4/S4 forum(B5 Chassis)' started by ScottD3, Dec 30, 2011.

  1. aragorn
    Offline

    aragorn "Stick a V8 in it!" Staff Member Moderator VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Messages:
    15,791
    Likes Received:
    342
    [Mar 5, 2012]
    Yeh, projector headlamps tend to be a lot better, but they're still not always perfect, and so still suffer scatter due to the differing focal points between the two types of lamp. You can often improve things by dismantling the unit and spacing the reflector bowl away from the lens, or alternatively spacing the bulb back from the holder slightly.

    Passing an MOT or even a police stop check doesnt mean the lights are ok, it just means they didnt notice any issues.

    Same only goes for airbags if you still have the original equipment to resistorise/stealth.

    My track car project has no carpets, no airbags, no airbag wiring, no airbag ECU etc etc.
    #41
  2. paul20v
    Offline

    paul20v Audi fanatic

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    1,109
    Likes Received:
    3
    [Mar 5, 2012]
    This is Direct from the testers manual .......

    Method of Inspection
    1. As far as practicable, check that all airbags fitted as ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT are present and not obviously defective.
    2. Turn on the ignition and check the presence and operation of any Supplementary Restraint System (SRS) malfunction indictor lamp(s) (MIL).
    Reason for Rejection
    1. An airbag obviously missing or defective. Note: A passenger airbag that has been switched off is not a Reason for Rejection.
    2. A Supplementary Restraint System (SRS) malfunction indicator lamp: · inoperative · indicating a system malfunction.
    This inspection applies to airbags, seat belt pretensioners and seat belt load limiters fitted as ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT .


    Theres no let up for track day cars that i can see looking through the manual
    if the car was fitted with them it has to have them for a UK test .
    #42
  3. aragorn
    Offline

    aragorn "Stick a V8 in it!" Staff Member Moderator VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Messages:
    15,791
    Likes Received:
    342
    [Mar 5, 2012]
    Yeh, but if you read the links i posted, Testers have specifically asked VOSA about competition and track day cars and were told they were fine...
    #43
  4. paul20v
    Offline

    paul20v Audi fanatic

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    1,109
    Likes Received:
    3
    [Mar 5, 2012]
    Yeah until your local VE comes round and catches you not failing a car and says "whats the manual say"
    if its in the manual it has to be adhered to and until its there in black and white a tester is just asking to be busted for not failing an item clearly stated in the manual as a fail .
    #44
  5. aragorn
    Offline

    aragorn "Stick a V8 in it!" Staff Member Moderator VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Messages:
    15,791
    Likes Received:
    342
    [Mar 5, 2012]
    Why dont you ask them yourself when you have your seminar about the new rules then?
    #45
  6. paul20v
    Offline

    paul20v Audi fanatic

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    1,109
    Likes Received:
    3
    [Mar 5, 2012]
    seminar
    thats another mine field
    already had a seminar and theres no more scheduled for a while
    also not due a refresher course for another 3 years
    problem is whats said on seminars and refresher courses is " whats it say in the manual "
    thats the answer for everything so as a tester our hands are tied and i for one cant afford to lose my job so the manual is the guide to which i for one follow .
    #46
  7. aragorn
    Offline

    aragorn "Stick a V8 in it!" Staff Member Moderator VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Messages:
    15,791
    Likes Received:
    342
    [Mar 5, 2012]
    Yeh i can see what you mean, it just seems weird that other guys have been told that cars specifically modified for competition use are fine. That bit you pasted doesnt mention anything about disability cars being exempt either, and yet you can be sure if the airbags were removed because the car was adapted for a wheelchair user, it would be allowed just fine.
    #47
  8. murran
    Offline

    murran Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,540
    Likes Received:
    35
    [Mar 5, 2012]
    this has been directly asked.
    apparently cars that are obviously "extencively" modified for a purpose, are exempt from these new failure items.

    by extencively i mean fully rally/track car prepped. that means not just an after market steering wheel or bucket seats/harnesses on their own in an otherwise standard car..............


    Thank you for your e-mail enquiry dated 9th February 2012, concerning ABS/SRS removal.

    The information column in Section 3.4 of the Private passenger MOT inspection manual states that "If an ABS or ESC system has been intentionally rendered inoperative, the whole system must be removed. However, this does not apply to sensor rings or other ABS components which are an integral part of another component e.g. brake disc or drive shaft"

    We are aware that the inspection of many of the new testable components may adversely impact modified vehicles. We have therefore made provision for most modifications to be accepted, provided that the vehicle is in fact extensively modified to meet a particular purpose, rather than simply modified on a whim and a fancy.

    The Introduction of the 2012 MOT Inspection Manual will therefore be amended at the end of April to coincide with the commencement of testing the new components. It will state:

    Modified Vehicles

    Where a vehicle has been extensively modified or converted, Reasons for Rejection for components missing where fitted as standard should not be applied, for example:
    • a car converted for rally use (i.e. rear seats removed and fitted with a roll cage and full harness seat belts etc.) may have been converted so as not to require a brake servo or power steering
    • a car converted to a stretch limousine may no longer be fitted with curtain airbags

    Additionally, Section 5.1 of the Manual will be amended to state: "An adult harness belt comprising a lap belt and shoulder straps bearing an FIA, British Standard or European approval marking (an upper case ’E’ or lower case ‘e’ and a number) is an acceptable alternative to any of the seat belt types listed"

    It is also worth pointing out that Section 6.2 of the Manual, on Seats and Doors, already contains a note in the Information Column which states: "Original design characteristics and specialised modifications (e.g. to enable wheelchair access) are to be accepted"

    It must be remembered however, that modifications can only be accepted so long as they comply with the Road Vehicles (Construction & Use) Regulations 1986 and the Road Vehicles (Lighting) Regulations 1989 as amended.

    I hope this information has assisted you with your enquiry, but if you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact us again.

    Kind Regards,

    Robert Evans
    Customer Service Centre
    VOSA Operations Directorate
    #48
  9. aragorn
    Offline

    aragorn "Stick a V8 in it!" Staff Member Moderator VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Messages:
    15,791
    Likes Received:
    342
    [Mar 5, 2012]
    #49
  10. murran
    Offline

    murran Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,540
    Likes Received:
    35
    [Mar 5, 2012]
    "modified for a purpose" in my eyes is alot more than just sh1t missing and airbag lights on in a chavved up saxo dropped on its arse with 18" chrome rims and a flip laquer paint job.......
    altho, you could argue that the said saxo is modified for the purpose of making the driver of such a car look like a total knobhead..... so being modified for that purpose means...... it would have to pass.

    having such exemptions opens up a whole grey area meaning they may as well not have bothered at all with the new failure items in the first place!!
    #50
  11. Oranoco
    Offline

    Oranoco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,240
    Likes Received:
    210
    [Mar 6, 2012]
    Sounds like yet further VOSA incompetence and backpedalling creating a large amount of ambiguity.
    #51
  12. paul20v
    Offline

    paul20v Audi fanatic

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    1,109
    Likes Received:
    3
    [Mar 6, 2012]
    If this is right which i agree it should be and its only implemented at the end of april
    in there rules and regs any car that has modifications to the airbags will still fail in the month of april
    this shows the mentality of what so many test stations have too put up with from yet another shambles of something goverment run
    i will keep a close eye on this and await the computers testers manual update
    this also as already said in the thread is yet another complete waste of time and effort from vosa regarding the new items
    i dont know why im surprised .
    #52
  13. aragorn
    Offline

    aragorn "Stick a V8 in it!" Staff Member Moderator VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Messages:
    15,791
    Likes Received:
    342
    [Mar 6, 2012]
    The way i read it was if that its an obviously prepped track car, for instance no interior, no carpets, bucket seats, harnesses and perhaps a roll cage on semi-slick tyres, then it quite clearly has been modified for a purpose. If its a chavved up saxo missing airbags as you describe then its not modified for a purpose, its still a road car and its broken.

    I guess this is the point of discretion.

    In the same way its upto the tester to decide how much play in a bush or rust on a brake pipe actually constitutes a fail, its upto him to decide if its a specially modified vehicle or not. Sometimes its obvious, such as disability modifications or a stretched limo with curtain airbags removed. Other times its less so, ie how modified does a car have to be before its a "Track Car" rather than a road car thats sometimes used on the track... I'm sure it would hard to deny a fully prepped stripped out racer isnt specially modified for a purpose, but there could well be plenty road legal track cars out there which only have mild modifications.
    #53
  14. Goosey
    Offline

    Goosey Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2011
    Messages:
    58
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Mar 8, 2012]
    you'd think that with VOSA emailing the public they would have sent a special notice out for us to read, talk about out of the loop.

    i'm more than pleased about the harnesses, i can take out my pointless inertia reel ones out now
    #54
  15. murran
    Offline

    murran Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,540
    Likes Received:
    35
    [Mar 8, 2012]
    from what i understand that wasnt a member of the public enquiring. that was an nt asking via the messaging system on their vts device at work about a car they had in. he printed off the responce.

    guy was a member of a certain drifting website i frequent. theres two testers on it now me and this other guy.

    read and ye shall'th understand.... th.
    a word of caution tho, the trampdrift site is unlike any other forum ive encountered. they swear and are generally coonts and abusive.
    E36 dash warning lights - TrampDrift
    #55
  16. Goosey
    Offline

    Goosey Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2011
    Messages:
    58
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Mar 8, 2012]
    ah ok, i've been meaning to message them for a while but keep forgetting with being busy.

    i welcome it although they really should have seen it, as for being a but subjective then half the manual is.
    the current dust covers on ball joints being a fail goes against the main basis of assesing (sp) components
    #56
  17. murran
    Offline

    murran Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,540
    Likes Received:
    35
    [Mar 8, 2012]
    dont agree on the ball joint dust covers. its a good thing.....
    if road dirt and sh1ts getting into the ball joint.... if it isnt knackard at the time of test, then 2 months down the road its going to be. and given an ignorant motorist (which 70% are) who dont stop driving until their car wont go forward anymore.
    they wont stop untill the joint drops out.

    not forgetting an mot test has nothing to do with road worthyness at any other time but the time of the test and the road worthyness of the vehicle is purly down to owner/driver...... helping them on their way to owning a road worthy vehicle six months after the test is no bad thing!
    #57
  18. Goosey
    Offline

    Goosey Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2011
    Messages:
    58
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Mar 8, 2012]
    but still goes against the original idea of the MOT, ie the item that fails needs doing there and then.
    i could mention loads you'll know about that you can't fail yet it can be dangerous.

    end of the day IMO a ball joint dust cover is a service item, not an MOT failure, my astra had a ruined trackrod end dust cover for the 3 years i had it and it took well over 2 years before it started to wear the joint.
    sadly it seems that europe has too much on us as normal
    #58
  19. aragorn
    Offline

    aragorn "Stick a V8 in it!" Staff Member Moderator VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Messages:
    15,791
    Likes Received:
    342
    [Mar 8, 2012]
    Yeh, my dad had an old transit with a TOTALLED propshaft centre bearing. Every MOT for about 3 years the guy put an advisory on about it, and ticked the box saying "This vehicle is dangerous to drive" and yet still issued the MOT cert because the bearing being fubar isnt a reason for failing the test!
    #59
  20. jcb
    Offline

    jcb Active Member VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2005
    Messages:
    4,118
    Likes Received:
    13
    [Mar 9, 2012]
    I had an MOT done in Jan, very slight knocking from front, asked him to check it out.

    3 weeks later I am feeling movement, when I take it back they find an front upper rear ball joint almost lifting out of its socket.

    "its amazing how quickly these things degrade" says he.......no what is amazing is the ****ing cheek of trying to charge me £20 to find out something that I specifically asked you to find whilst doing the MOT!
    #60
  21. Slammedorion
    Offline

    Slammedorion Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    96
    Likes Received:
    13
    [Mar 9, 2012]
    Just like to add our 2001 a3 has passed it's mot today with retro fitted hids in.
    Put it on the headlight alignment machine and the beam pattern is perfect.
    I think alot of glare problems is just down to idiots not fitting bulbs right, hid or not.
    #61
  22. murran
    Offline

    murran Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,540
    Likes Received:
    35
    [Mar 9, 2012]
    why drive round with a part fitted to the car, which is in your own words, totalled?
    if anything this is why vosa should further spread failure items.

    people will drive their cars till they fall apart and stop. esp in this economic environment.

    a ball joint might last 2 years with a split boot, might last 3 weeks. from an mot point of view.... presume its 3 weeks!
    #62
  23. aragorn
    Offline

    aragorn "Stick a V8 in it!" Staff Member Moderator VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Messages:
    15,791
    Likes Received:
    342
    [Mar 10, 2012]
    Exactly, its not something i would do myself, i maintain my cars to a very high standard and have never had a vehicle I own fail an MOT. It was simply an example of an item that isnt covered by the test even though it could potentially be dangerous.

    You know as well as i do that the MOT is nothing more than a basic test of roadworthyness. It doesnt mean the vehicle is actually safe, and doesnt mean that it complies with all relevant construction and use regulations. However many people seem to use passing an MOT as proof that their dodgy modifications (such as retrofitted HID's) are completely fine, when infact it might just be that the tester didnt notice or couldnt be arsed looking properly, noticed it but thaught they'd let the guy off because its a modified car or couldnt actually fail it due to there being no option for it on the computer.

    I do agree that since most people will take their car to a garage once a year, for an MOT and a service, if a part is showing signs of wear, but isnt quite hanging off yet, then it IS a good idea to fail the component even though it might have lasted another three months, because its entirely likely that a lot of drivers simply wouldnt notice that its become knackered 4 months down the line, and will simply ignore it.

    When i had my first A4, i fitted some cheap control arms from ebay, unaware of their extremely poor quality and short lifespan. Approx 3 months after fitting them i had the car in for an MOT, and the guy gave me an advisory for the front control arms, saying there was a bit of play in a couple of the balljoints, but they'd probably last another year. This puzzled me as i knew they were only 3 months old, and i figured the guy was maybe just touting for work, hoping that i'd get him to replace them. Not much more than a month later, those control arms were clunking creaking and groaning, and upon inspection were literally hanging off. I ended up having to replace the lot with quality parts.

    Had i been your typical Mrs Mavis, who was a bit tight on cash, its quite likely they'd have simply ignored the clunking and continued driving the car thinking "its only just passed an MOT, so it must be something minor".
    #63
  24. jjmurphy21187
    Offline

    jjmurphy21187 Tiptronic

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Messages:
    895
    Likes Received:
    48
    [Mar 19, 2012]
    Sorry to pull up a thread that's a week + old, but the new regulations will mean that retrofitted HIDs, EVEN if they are auto-leveling will be counted as an MOT failure if there is not also a headlight washer fitted? This means that all the members on here (and others) with upgraded headlight units and HIDs which do provide the correct light pattern with no dazzle etc, will have their cars fail their MOTs due to a lack of healight washers?

    If so I won't bother getting new headlights as a new bumper, painting & washer retrofit will tripple the cost!?

    FYI I was looking at these: eBay - The UK's Online Marketplace
    #64
  25. aragorn
    Offline

    aragorn "Stick a V8 in it!" Staff Member Moderator VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Messages:
    15,791
    Likes Received:
    342
    [Mar 19, 2012]
    Sort of.

    The rules are worded in such a way that its still a bit vague, and potentially cars with retrofits will still pass.

    That doesnt alter the fact that its effectively illegal to use HID's on the road without washers, automatic levelling and type approved light units.
    #65
  26. jjmurphy21187
    Offline

    jjmurphy21187 Tiptronic

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Messages:
    895
    Likes Received:
    48
    [Mar 19, 2012]
    I hate incorrectly fitted HIDs as much as the next guy, expecially after a late evening drive back from Cardiff yesterday... wouldn't want to get them if it wasn't going to be road legal and not blind other road users, I thought the auto-levelling would make them safe/legal in all respects, I guess not :(
    #66
  27. aragorn
    Offline

    aragorn "Stick a V8 in it!" Staff Member Moderator VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Messages:
    15,791
    Likes Received:
    342
    [Mar 19, 2012]
    The washers are specified for the same reason the levelling is, dirty lenses mean the light will scatter and cause glare.

    Why not look out for a used bumper and get the washers installed?
    #67
  28. ScottD3
    Offline

    ScottD3 I want your faulty electronics Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2010
    Messages:
    15,197
    Likes Received:
    1,031
    [Mar 19, 2012]
    Is a steering lock a MOT requirement?
    #68
  29. aragorn
    Offline

    aragorn "Stick a V8 in it!" Staff Member Moderator VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Messages:
    15,791
    Likes Received:
    342
    [Mar 19, 2012]
    a quick google suggests only for cars built after september 2001?
    #69
  30. ScottD3
    Offline

    ScottD3 I want your faulty electronics Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2010
    Messages:
    15,197
    Likes Received:
    1,031
    [Apr 25, 2012]
    #70
  31. Viking
    Offline

    Viking Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2010
    Messages:
    223
    Likes Received:
    20
    [Apr 25, 2012]
    I'd be asking where it says in the MOT test manual that a dust cover on a shock absorber is a testable item.

    A steering lock fitted as standard must be present for the test, and must work. If the tester is in doubt as to whether a steering lock was fitted as standard then the benefit of the doubt must be given.

    It is acceptable to remove the steering lock to be removed if it has been replaced with another immobilisation device.
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2012
    #71
  32. murran
    Offline

    murran Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,540
    Likes Received:
    35
    [Apr 25, 2012]
    it'll be a ball joint dust cover. you know the little rubber boot/gaiter that keeps **** out of the joint.
    and if they are split or missings if theres no play atm there will be soon!
    in my mind its a good thing that the mot test is paying attention to preventative maintenence items..... esp. with the general public being mechanically ignorant, doing 20,000 in their cars while ignoring service lights because the're short of cash.

    you cant fail shocker shaft boots so wont be that.
    #72
  33. ScottD3
    Offline

    ScottD3 I want your faulty electronics Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2010
    Messages:
    15,197
    Likes Received:
    1,031
    [Apr 25, 2012]
    Thats what he explained it as.
    I'll see him in a couple of days and I'll make sure.
    #73
  34. Viking
    Offline

    Viking Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2010
    Messages:
    223
    Likes Received:
    20
    [Apr 25, 2012]
    It should be listed on the failure sheet exactly what it failed on.

    He gave you a failure sheet, didn't he?
    #74
  35. ScottD3
    Offline

    ScottD3 I want your faulty electronics Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2010
    Messages:
    15,197
    Likes Received:
    1,031
    [Apr 25, 2012]
    Not my car that failed.
    It was my mates car
    He sent me a msg today.
    Hes the first person I know who had a MOT under the new regs.
    #75
  36. Viking
    Offline

    Viking Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2010
    Messages:
    223
    Likes Received:
    20
    [Apr 25, 2012]
    Ah I see.
    #76

Share This Page