MOT plus private reg questions

[malibudave]

So just my car MOT'd ready for sale and it's come back with four advisories. One I accept which is for a stone chip on the windscreen.

However the second is for "Rear windscreen has damage to an area less than a 40mm circle outside zone".... Eh? Checked rear window and there is definitely not any damage to it. Queried dealer and they agree that someone must have made a mistake, however they aren't sure if they can amend the MOT document....any ideas?

The third and fourth points seem a bit strange, I.e. "Under trays fitted obscuring some underside components" and "engine covers fitted obscuring some components"......eh, never had that before!! Anyone else had that surely this must be the case for most cars nowadays. Why mark it as an advisory?

Finally I have a private reg on car which I am retaining and putting onto my Spider. I hadn't realised that all of the local DVLA offices have closed so everything now has to be done by post. Any experience on how long this takes?

 

[Nelly Welly]

The under covers have to be noted as some of the drive system is obscured and the MOT tester is not allowed to remove the undershields to check more thoroughly.

Everyone who has the shields fitted will get the same advisory as it safeguards the mot tester against someone saying they didn't check the inboard components.

 

[Nelly Welly]

As for the rear screen mentioned it was probably the MOT tester trying to find the descriptor of the damage to the front screen and selected the rear screen in error.

 

[David-H]

Mine took 2 weeks to get the initial paperwork giving authorisation to put the cherished number on the new car and then another 2 - 3 weeks for the paperwork to catch up / new V5C to arrive. (That's without putting it on retention at all).

 

[srhutch]

The third and fourth points seem a bit strange, I.e. "Under trays fitted obscuring some underside components" and "engine covers fitted obscuring some components"......eh, never had that before!! Anyone else had that surely this must be the case for most cars nowadays. Why mark it as an advisory?

Had this on my 118d when I MOT'd for the first time back in May. BMW tested it, which made me chuckle.

I thought about covering the whole car next time, they would just have to pass it. :lol:

 

[malibudave]

The third and fourth points seem a bit strange, I.e. "Under trays fitted obscuring some underside components" and "engine covers fitted obscuring some components"......eh, never had that before!! Anyone else had that surely this must be the case for most cars nowadays. Why mark it as an advisory?

Had this on my 118d when I MOT'd for the first time back in May. BMW tested it, which made me chuckle.

I thought about covering the whole car next time, they would just have to pass it. :lol:

Exactly, kind of makes a bit of a mockery of the MOT system! See no evil...hear no evil!!

 

[Talksthetorque]

If you covered the whole car you'd fail on an obscured windscreen :|

 

[ZedFourM]

On the last MoT for the Z4 I had an advisory that the rear brake pipes were showing some surface corrosion, so I asked my local (and very trusted) garage to clean and grease them. Realising that the fronts brake pipes were probably showing the same issue, I also asked them to remove the undertrays and to clean and grease the front pipes - and to undertake an MoT.

When I got the MoT certificate, it had the advisories about undertrays fitted. I explained that I had asked for them to be removed as part of the work - to my simple way of thinking, having the trays off the car would also mean that they could carry out a more thorough MoT test.

Their response? The ramp that's used for service/repair work is different to the one that's used for MoT work, so they had had to replace the undertrays when they had done the pipes, and then move the car to the other ramp to carry out the MoT! Apparently if they had been seen using the "wrong" ramp for MoTs by someone from VOSA, they could have lost their MoT testing status.

 

[Terryvision]

The third and fourth points seem a bit strange, I.e. "Under trays fitted obscuring some underside components" and "engine covers fitted obscuring some components"......eh, never had that before!! Anyone else had that surely this must be the case for most cars nowadays. Why mark it as an advisory?

We had this on our 2009 Civic Type-R every year it was MOT'd! I thought at the time it's an odd thing to state :idunno:

 

[srhutch]

If you covered the whole car you'd fail on an obscured windscreen :|

Wrap it in clear perspex, apart from the wheels of course. :lol:

 

[Harry911]

Hi,

From sending off paperwork to getting back retention document took three weeks.

Cheers.

 

[GreyZed]

I had a kit car tested once and got an advisory saying that the structural steel chassis members were concealed behind fibre glass and that they should be exposed periodically for inspection. The car had a GRP monocoque! Don't over estimate the competence of the MOT robot. :lol: