| Author | Post |
|---|
Rebel
Trade Member
|
Posted: Tue Dec 4th, 2007 06:24 pm |
|
I find it difficult, and a little hypocritical to refuse to test a car for having a fuel flap which I can't open, when I have to continue to pass and advise outer sills and entire underside of vehicles with plastic covers.
|
Weetabix
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Mana: |  |
|
Posted: Tue Dec 4th, 2007 12:31 am |
|
If "...any door, tailgate, boot, engine cover, fuel cap or other device designed to be readily opened cannot be readily opened..." then the vehicle shouldn't get out of the MOT parking bay. It should be refused to be tested.
It's not right to only apply this rule to rough-looking vehicles, and let the clean ones through with just one line on a VT30.
|
Johnboy
Member
|
Posted: Mon Dec 3rd, 2007 05:36 pm |
|
Spot on Stealth. It goes to show that even the mighty VOSA staff can get it wrong.
I hope they will take the same attitude if I make a mistake (probably not)
|
nicknak
Trade Member
|
Posted: Mon Dec 3rd, 2007 04:59 pm |
|
You wern't asked that question then.
|
Stealth
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 31st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 137 |
| Mana: |  |
|
Posted: Mon Dec 3rd, 2007 12:38 am |
|
nicknak wrote: Thats right but there seems to be mixed opinions on this one, i spose if you were happy with the car generally the pass and advise option would be ok, but if any dout refuse to test.
nicknak - If you pass & advise and it's a Mystery Shopper, you'll have been deemed not to have examined those structural areas - points dont make prizes.  
|
nicknak
Trade Member
|
Posted: Mon Dec 3rd, 2007 12:34 am |
|
Thats right but there seems to be mixed opinions on this one, i spose if you were happy with the car generally the pass and advise option would be ok, but if any dout refuse to test.
|
Stealth
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 31st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 137 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Dec 3rd, 2007 12:27 am |
|
Here's the text...
2. Refusal to test
This manual does not include the reasons for refusing to test a vehicle in the Reasons for Rejection columns.
VTS's may only test those classes and types of vehicle that they are authorised to test and which are of a size and weight that can be accommodated by the authorised equipment.
If any of the following reasons apply, the test should not be carried out, the vehicle presenter informed and any fee paid for the test must be returned. It is therefore advised that 'refusal' items are checked before starting the test.
If the vehicle presenter requires written confirmation of why the test cannot be carried out, the test should be registered using the VTS Device. a VT30 should be issued clearly showing the reason(s) why the test could not be carried out.
If reason to refuse i. applies, issue a hand written VT30 containing as many of the vehicle details as possible. a copy of the VT30 should be retained by the VTS.
The reasons for refusing to carry out the test are:
a. The registration document V5C or other evidence of the date of first use is not produced if the information therein, is necessary for the test to be carried out.
Note: Normally this evidence is only necessary if the vehicle has a 'cherished' registration mark or if the registration mark's year letter does not make clear the standard that should be applied - for instance, regarding seat belt requirements for D
prefix vehicle.
b. The vehicle, or any part or equipment on the vehicle is so dirty that examination is unreasonably difficult.
c. The vehicle is not fit to be driven when necessary to complete the test because of a lack of fuel, or oil, or for any other reason
d. The NT considers insecurity of a load or other items would prevent a proper test being carried out - unless the load is secured or removed.
e. The VTS asks for the fee to be paid in advance and this is not
done.
f. The vehicle emits substantial quantities of avoidable
smoke.
g. A proper examination cannot be carried out because any door, tailgate, boot, engine cover, fuel cap or other device designed to be readily opened cannot be readily opened.
h. The condition of the vehicle is such that, in the opinion of the NT, a proper examination would involve a danger of injury to any person or damage to the vehicle or other property.
i. The vehicle has neither registration mark nor VIN/Chassis No/Frame No. by which it can be identified, or that all such identifications are illegible or use letters and numbers not normally used in the English Language.
In addition to this an NT must decline to test any vehicle that is not of a class they are authorised to test or it is of such a size, weight or configuration it cannot be properly or safely tested on the approved facilities
If despite due care initially, it becomes apparent during a test that the test cannot be completed for any of the above reasons, you must fail the vehicle because the test could not be satisfactorily completed.
Any re-examination and fee must be in line with normal policy (see Fees and Appeals poster) treating the component which could not be examined, as a failure item.Last edited on Mon Dec 3rd, 2007 12:30 am by Stealth
|
Weetabix
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Dec 3rd, 2007 12:25 am |
|
Johnboy wrote: I dont mean to open a can of worms, but i've just become a NT, the vosa instructor raised the issue of doors that do not open. He told us that if a rear door does not open, the car can still be tested, but the tester should advise that certain items could not be checked because of it, i.e. inner sill, seatbelt mounting etc etc.
I agree with 'stealth' that the car should not be tested in such instances, but vosa has recently told me otherwise, so that leaves me confused.
I too was of the impression that such a vehicle should be a refusal to test.
|
Stealth
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 31st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 137 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Dec 3rd, 2007 12:23 am |
|
Hi Johnboy
Check the Introduction section of the manual - Reasons to Refuse to Test - there's a whole list of reasons - the final few paragraphs should make it clear - if you cant open the door you cant check the inner sills.
You could be missing a corroded inner sill within a prescribed area of seat belt or suspension mountings, there's also the 'b' post to consider in the area of front seat belt mounting points.
The correct procedure is to refuse to test, or if it becomes apparent during the test that you cannot complete the test for the examples given, you should fail the vehicle because a satisfactory inspection could not be completed.
Last edited on Mon Dec 3rd, 2007 12:23 am by Stealth
|
Johnboy
Member
|
Posted: Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 10:57 pm |
|
I dont mean to open a can of worms, but i've just become a NT, the vosa instructor raised the issue of doors that do not open. He told us that if a rear door does not open, the car can still be tested, but the tester should advise that certain items could not be checked because of it, i.e. inner sill, seatbelt mounting etc etc.
I agree with 'stealth' that the car should not be tested in such instances, but vosa has recently told me otherwise, so that leaves me confused.
|
Stealth
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 31st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 137 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 05:37 pm |
|
aarvee wrote: I recently bought a used 2002 model Renault. After driving the same for few days, there were 3 aspects that I observed and was wondering whether this could affect my MOT due next year.
1. The rear right door does not open at all. I am planning to get this repaired, but still wanted to know if this can cause MOT failure.
2. The wind screen washers do not work properly.
3. The boot lid closes properly, but still leaves the "Warning Door Open" light "On" in my dashboard.
Can someone please advice which of these do I need to repair before I go in for next MOT.
aarvee....
1. The rear door needs to open to allow examination of the structure around suspension, seat belt mounting areas etc. The tester should refuse to test the vehicle if he can't open all doors etc. to allow a satisfactoy examination.
2. The screen washers need to work & effectively clear the screen in conjunction with the wipers.
3. The boot lid has to latch securely in the closed position, but the warning light would warrant an advisory notice.
|
aarvee
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 02:29 pm |
|
I recently bought a used 2002 model Renault. After driving the same for few days, there were 3 aspects that I observed and was wondering whether this could affect my MOT due next year.
1. The rear right door does not open at all. I am planning to get this repaired, but still wanted to know if this can cause MOT failure.
2. The wind screen washers do not work properly.
3. The boot lid closes properly, but still leaves the "Warning Door Open" light "On" in my dashboard.
Can someone please advice which of these do I need to repair before I go in for next MOT.
aarvee....
|
Current time is 12:41 pm | |
|
