General: MOT Advisory because it was raining!

[ITSv40]

This is nothing new. A quick Google brings up posts going back over ten years on this very advisory. Testers covering ars*s.

[Dippydog]

I for one don't blame testers for covering their backs as there is a lot at stake both for the tester and the garage they work for.

[Welton]

Our little Twingo has a fantastic braking system (fronts from the larger Clio model and rear drums with a super-grippy handbrake).

The last MOT advisory was: "Service brake and park brake pass on locks" some googlage revealed the rear wheels where locking up under test - I thought that would be a good thing, the rears skidding and jumping off the rollers just with the handbrake

Another classic in it's MOT History is: "item removed from drivers view prior to carrying out MOT test" this one turned out to be an Air Freshener dangling from the rear view mirror

I expect a good MOT station would report a regular amount of 'advisories' out of good practice. It would look a bit odd to the controlling body if an MOT station kept passing everyone through with no advisories.

[capt jack]

Well I finally got a response from the DVSA, which said that the tester had been "overly cautious", and that advisories should only relate to the vehicle's mechanical condition, nothing else.

They said that they would be contacting the tester to advise him on the "proportionate and appropriate" use of advisory notes.

The regulations don't include any provision for an advisory to note the fact that the car or the weather was wet when tested.

So, a minor victory for common-sense, although they haven't offered to remove the advisory!

Jack

[dingov70]

Originally Posted by Kev0607

Now that does take the biscuit!

Another odd advisory that pops up regularly is "Under trays fitted obscuring some underside components". Yes, there's trays underneath the car to protect it from the elements. If there were no under trays, they'd probably give an advisory for not having any fitted! You can't win.

Its a shame that your vehicle got an advisory for something so tedious. Its not mechanical or structurally related, so I wouldn't be too concerned.

As a tester , we are liable should we miss a potential fail item during the test , that is subsequently found or fails or should have been failed. Any cover hiding brake pipes Etc should be advised as you are unable to remove the cover & a potential time bomb is lurking . I regularly test motorhomes with various items fitted on the underside and I always advise underbody components prevent complete inspection AND inform the presenter why that advisory was given . Not had one complaint on that score . The advisory for a wet underside was just silly & may well lead to a "chat " with their local DVSA representative , as they do monitor what we advise

[barrybritcher]

not as bad as the classic, indicator bulbs too white.

where the paint has fell off the bulb. lol

[Supraweld]

[Rocinante]

Originally Posted by barrybritcher

not as bad as the classic, indicator bulbs too white.

where the paint has fell off the bulb. lol

Excuse my ignorance, I'm presumably missing something, but surely this is a legitimate advisory for an MOT.

Indicators are supposed to flash orange, if the paint has come off and they are flashing white, the bulbs should be replaced so they flash orange again, and give other road uses an accurate indication of the drivers intentions.

Why would this not be a legitimate advisory ?

[Bob Meadows]

Seems to be quite common for some bulbs:~
Amber light paint works well.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/2-x-Amber...MAAOSwq5Ffh0pD

[andy_d]

Originally Posted by capt jack

Well I finally got a response from the DVSA, which said that the tester had been "overly cautious", and that advisories should only relate to the vehicle's mechanical condition, nothing else.

They said that they would be contacting the tester to advise him on the "proportionate and appropriate" use of advisory notes.

The regulations don't include any provision for an advisory to note the fact that the car or the weather was wet when tested.

So, a minor victory for common-sense, although they haven't offered to remove the advisory!

Jack

maybe worth pushing the "advisories should only relate to the vehicles mechanical condition , nothing else" to get the "weather related " and "over cautious" note that should never have been there Removed.

as you say a Small win for "common sense"