MOT inconsistencies

[Gaz2]

It's absolutely true that MOT testers are investigated if they pass too many cars. My garage used to fix any minor faults as they went along so most cars passed. Now they won't even change a faulty bulb; they have to fail the car, replace the bulb then re-test it. My garage is very apologetic but the "MOT police" force them to do it that way. So the garage that proactively keeps your car in tip-top condition is, as far as the MOT police are concerned, a poor garage! Crazy.

[john.wigley]

Originally Posted by Gaz2

It's absolutely true that MOT testers are investigated if they pass too many cars. My garage used to fix any minor faults as they went along so most cars passed. Now they won't even change a faulty bulb; they have to fail the car, replace the bulb then re-test it. My garage is very apologetic but the "MOT police" force them to do it that way. So the garage that proactively keeps your car in tip-top condition is, as far as the MOT police are concerned, a poor garage! Crazy.

Thank you, 'Gaz2', that explains something else.

When I put my Saab convertible in for it's MOT in August, it came back with the following 'advisory':

Nearside Front Upper Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover severely deteriorated (5.3.4 (b) (i))

My garage said 'Oh, don't worry about that, we'll change it when you bring it in for service' - which they did last month. I now wonder, if they hadn't, would it have appeared as an advisory again next year?

Regards, John.