The second year of annual MOT training and assessment (2017 to 2018) closed in March. It’s great to see most of you completed it and recorded your results in time - thank you to everyone who did this.
But, some testers either didn’t complete the training in time or forgot to record their results before the March deadline which meant they were suspended from testing.
To put these testers back on the system again our staff had to carry out important checks to verify their assessment certificates. This is a long process and it meant some testers were having to wait more than a week to be switched back on.
Also, testers who had missed the deadline had to complete the training and assessment, and record their score, and then had to wait a considerable length of time to get a demonstration test. They needed to do this to get switched back on.
I know this can be frustrating to you and your business, so I wanted to give you some tips in this blog post to make sure this doesn’t happen to you. I also wanted to let you know what the training topics for this year will be.
Topics for 2018 to 2019
We chose the topics for this year’s assessment based on what we think testers need to become familiar. Some of you also told us you’d like to know more about testing electric and hybrid vehicles, so this is something we included too.
The topics for group A and B are:
- changes to the MOT test from 20 May 2018
- how to use test quality information
- data protection for yourself and your customers
The additional topic for group B will be testing vehicles with alternative propulsion systems, such as hybrids and electric vehicles.
The pass mark will stay at 70% and from this year, and you’ll also need to add your user ID and your date of birth into the MOT testing service.
Keep a training log
To pass the annual training and assessment you must keep a training log. Keeping this is one of the best ways to make sure you don’t forget to complete your annual assessment! You can keep your training log electronically or in paper format. It needs to show:
- the MOT annual training year (for example, April 2018 to March 2019)
- the date of the training
- how long the training session lasted
- what topics you covered during the session
- notes on what you did, how you did it and what you learned
- what vehicle groups your training covered
- your name and MOT testing service user ID
You can use the template to record your training, or you can make your own.
Have your assessment result uploaded automatically
If you complete your annual assessment with either the Institute of the Motor Industry (IMI) or ABC Awards, your result will automatically upload into your MOT testing service profile. You won't need to do it manually. This is a great way to make sure you don’t miss uploading your result in time for the deadline.
To do this, you need to include your date of birth and your MOT testing service user ID when you complete your assessment. If you don’t put in these details, we cannot verify your identity and your result won’t upload automatically.
Don’t forget to maintain your status to test
You won’t be able to do your testing on time if you’ve lost your status to test. To keep this status, you’ll need to carry out a test once every 6 months. The MOT testing service records the status of testers so you don’t need to tell us.
However, if your status to test has lapsed, you’ll need to follow the process to return to MOT testing.
In summary….
We know that fitting your training and assessment studying into your working week can be quite a challenge, but the earlier you can do this, the better.
Because the close of last year’s annual assessment coincided with the Easter bank holiday, some testers’ annual assessment results were not uploaded in time to meet the cut-off date even though they had done it in time. This year, Easter won’t fall on the cut-off date so you shouldn’t find yourself in this situation again.
I hope this blog post has reminded you of some good practice tips to make sure you get your training and assessment completed on time. If you’ve got any other good ways of remembering to complete your assessment on time, please share them in the comments. Good luck!
And finally
This will be my last blog post as I am retiring. Thank you for your comments over the years, which really help us to make the service better. Simon Smith will be taking over my role and will be answering your comments.
153 comments
Comment by Shaun posted on
Hi yeah sorry I was responded to in the previous blog before this one, response was...
Hi Shaun
Limits can be displayed in an alternative position, not just on the chassis plate. The limits could be on a sticker/plate under the bonnet and may have R 24 on it.
If the vehicle is represented with the plate removed, the tester should still retest to the same plate values as that information is still available and relevant.
Comment by Martin posted on
If doing somebody else's retest and emissions sticker has been removed I would test to default limit as the previous tester could have made a mistake.
Might be unlikely but not impossible.
After years of being told test as presented and take details directly from the vehicle being tested surely taking details from an emissions sheet is no different than taking details from the V5 or old mot cert which carries a penalty.
Comment by richard posted on
Interesting point you've raised there Martin regarding about test as presented & not taking details from another source then the vehicle itself.
Any clarification on this from DVSA.
Comment by richard posted on
Shaun , many thanks for replying, I don't know about you or anyone else ,but I feel it still doesn't answer the question. I had one today small sticker 0.51 in a box stuck to the underside of the bonnet, nothing else with it. Could be the data for anything.
Comment by Shaun posted on
Yes I agree
Comment by dave bs posted on
Shaun thank for your comment earlier I have found where you got your answer from DVSA and will change my way of theses test from now on
Comment by mark mitchell posted on
i see vosa has fixed the scroll down issue about time it was driveing me nuts
Comment by mark mitchell posted on
very good question discounting is just getting silly with some off these deals on these sites mots at £10.00 in our area we need fixed prices soon
Comment by martin posted on
Why hasn't the manual been updated yet?
Dangerous cars are passing the mot test legitimately because of the omissions in the poorly worded manual.
light interaction/brake hose ferrules/hazard lights/tyre valves/beam image etc to name but a few.
It's no good telling us cracked is the same as broken as has been suggested in one answer.
If it's not worded correctly and in the manual we can't fail it.
Making the defect fit the inappropriate wording in the manual should not have to be an option.
Comment by ian posted on
agreed
Comment by david b posted on
DVSA- had an email from groupon today offering £9.99 mots. this makes and absolute mockery of the mot test.
HGV testing is fixed rate no discounts offered so why isnt cars,vans, and motorbikes?
Comment by Shaun posted on
When the system first came out there was a very annoying feature, when entering / deleting retest items the page keeps refreshing everytime an item is removed, this issue you sorted for months but has returned for a while now, I thought this would have been picked up and sorted by now.
Comment by richard posted on
still doing it & its a pain !!!
Comment by Graham posted on
This was sorted before and has now returned, can you look into this please dvsa!!!!!
Comment by dave bs posted on
has anybody been got back to about diesel smoke limits that are not on the actual vin/manufactures plate (like the testing guide states) but are visible elsewhere with a lower limit on them?
lots of people asking this question but not direct answer
Comment by Shaun posted on
If you look back my questions regarding this have been answered finally, yes sticker anywhere counts.
Comment by Bert posted on
hi shaun, when was this answered? as been waiting for reply myself about this, cheers
Comment by dave bs posted on
sorry shaun but I'd like a reply from dvsa as the last time a vehicle examiner came to us for a visit his words was the manual is black and white, that states manufacture plate (showing vin plate) is the limit to be used
Comment by richard posted on
Must have missed that in amongst the others,can you just let me know what the DVSA reply was, many thanks, also how certain can you be its an emission related sticker & not say aircon or a headlight adjustment data sticker.
Comment by Shaun posted on
Sorry I was responded to in the last blog not this current one, response was .
Hi Shaun
Limits can be displayed in an alternative position, not just on the chassis plate. The limits could be on a sticker/plate under the bonnet and may have R 24 on it.
If the vehicle is represented with the plate removed, the tester should still retest to the same plate values as that information is still available and relevant.
Comment by 2002 posted on
I have got so feedup with reading or being told different things about limits today and how some cars will never pass plate limits 3 Sept I rang the help desk about a car today and was told only the manafactures chassis plate counts if the limit is on it other wise default limits come in. He read out the manual and that is what they are told counts and sounds like the blog does not count . Read the blog and any random box/sticker counts stuck any where on the car. Wait to see if we get a visit now.
Comment by Bert posted on
Julia from DVSA said as follows:
Limits can be displayed in an alternative position, not just on the chassis plate.
The limits could be on a sticker/plate under the bonnet and may have R24 on it.
If the vehicle is represented with the plate removed, the tester should still retest to the same plate values as that information is still available and relevant
Comment by dave bs posted on
ok im going to have to read through to confirm this answer for my self, but thanks everybody for pointing this out
Comment by Tony S posted on
R24 could be air con type!?
Comment by Graham posted on
Maybe if i keep asking, eventually someone will answer. If a motor comes in that is wider than 2100mm and after 1991. If it has no end outline marker lights fitted as standard, do we still have to check them? Or do we only check them if they are fitted, or clear evidence they have been fitted but removed, for example transit tipper. The only fail you have for not there, is missing, but if it looks like they wernt fitted as standard can i still fail for missing? Because technically, if you only have 3 kids, your fourth child isnt missing, it was never there. You see what im saying, we could do with a 'not fitted were it should be' kind of fail. For those of us who have had an encounter with dvsa staff, we all know its what the manual says down to the exact word. Something isnt missing if it was never there.
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Graham
Vehicles first used on or after 1 April 1991 that are wider than 2,100mm must have their end-outline marker lamps inspected.
There must be:
• 2 white lamps visible from the front and positioned at windscreen upper edge level or higher
• 2 red lamps visible from the rear and positioned as high as is practicable
The front and rear end outline marker lamps on each side can be combined in one lamp.
These are requirements detailed in 4.2.3.
Its not a case of if fitted they must be tested, it’s a case of they must be fitted if the vehicle is more than 2100mm wide first used after 1st April 1991.
So if there aren't any outline markers on a vehicle of this age, it would fail under 4.2.1 (a). A lamp missing or inoperative.
Comment by Graham posted on
Thanks for getting back to me
Comment by david b posted on
dvsa- CE gareth Llewellyn stated that 20% of vehicles still have not had safety recalls carried out-why not then have it where by when we go to log a vehicle on for mot and it flags up this vehicle hasnt had its recall carried out then system refuses to allow us to test it, then forcing the owner to get this done and then once the recall has been done- the testing ban is uplifted?
if a vehicle is deemed unsafe enough to be recalled then it shouldnt be allowed on on public roads.
for example what if a zafira not had its recall done yet goes up in flames while on the test bay, who is at fault there? who will pay for the damage??
Comment by Bert posted on
brilliant idea David
Comment by Tony S posted on
Would be better to fail it for recall not carried out, that way you still get your MOT as opposed to losing it!?
Comment by david b posted on
DVSA with all the new mot items-new data protection laws, testing hybrids elec vehicles, having a refresher course or regional seminars to explain all the new items would of been 10x more helpful than us testers having only a comment section on a blog to get our voice heard and the help we all need. help you only give when you can be bothered to answer select questions or we can get someone from dvsa to answer a phone within 10mins to answer our query.
so with the surplus £26 million pound you saved- what is being proposed/planned with going forward in how you deliver new information we need to use in order to test ? how will this money be spent to improve us as testers? and improve the mot scheme as a whole-
because the way you delivered the current new items has been nothing short of a shambles and the current method of training is not good enough for a profession such as ours.
Comment by richard posted on
DVSA whats going on ?
David, I completely agree, I cant understand why questions are being asked , including myself & only a few "choosen" ones get answered, its frustrating to say the least. They ask for feedback, we give it, post a question , someone moderates it ,puts it online , but no reply to it !
Comment by david b posted on
DVSA- When will you be producing a new mot restest and appeals poster with all the new mot items on there??
new items came out may 20th-today is august 13th and still no update for us.
why didnt this new poster come out on may20th??
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi David
Thanks for the query and apologies it wasn’t clear in the information published at the time. The changes to the test on 20 May have not changed any of the rules around free retests or appeals so the posters don't need to be amended. The new items either don't qualify as free items or, where they do, are covered by the existing headings in the poster such as daytime running lamps is covered by the ‘lamps’ heading).
Comment by david b posted on
thank you julia for your reply, someone within dvsa finally answered the phone yesterday on this query and i was told if i have vehicle fail on EML light on dash then it is not a free re test and partial fee retest applies. yet despite being a visual check like main beam tell tale-tpms this does fall into a free test category ?
im sure there will be plenty of customers not happy with this.
again this is something on the system that needs changing ASAP.
Comment by Graham posted on
What about engine managment light fail, is this a free next day retest or a partial retest?
Comment by david b posted on
ive had it confirmed by dvsa via phone and by my VE. EML light on is partial re test.
Comment by jhulian posted on
what is the correct procedure if a car fails it diesel emissions by manufacture plate and when it returns for retest that plate is missing or damaged do you retest on higher levels ? need an answer
Comment by jhulian posted on
this question has been asked several times and still no answer
Comment by Tony S posted on
I'd say it's pass and advise that plate is missing or no longer readable, but I'm sure DVSA can confirm, If they wish to, don't know if this will be shown, as a lot of mine don't get shown, so I don't bother with it much now.
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Jhulian
If the vehicle fails on smoke and is represented with the plate removed, the tester should still retest to the same plate values as that information is still available and relevant.
Comment by Paul posted on
Hi Julia ref. your answer to Jhulian on smoke meter testing standard to use. On a presented Re-test for emissions Fail, with a lower level obviously shown and entered from vin. plate which the plate as now been removed !
I would like to know where in the manual or 19th. Emissions manual or Special notices it tells you are able to test above Default limit in this case .. As per 07/2017 Special Notice explanatory note ? Bearing in mind this could be a different Tester doing Re-testing .
I know morally its a fraudulent act that's possibly been committed by presenter but legally is what you have listed the correct action for us Testers ?
Await your reply. Paul.
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Paul
Please see my reply to Keith of 20 August.
Comment by Paul posted on
Thanks for confirming and prompt reply.
Sounds like a big job to collate info. that would have been easier at time of new model launch not later catch up, like for Petrol models.
Comment by Graham posted on
Sorry julia i dont understand your answer. If a 2010 car comes in and has a plate showing 0.5. The first time we test to 0.5 and fails, but if it comes back and plate is removed, do we test to the default 1.5? How can we test to the first value if its not there anymore. What if fred did the first test, then bob retested, how does bob know fred tested to a lower plate value, without checking back through his paper work. What if fred did the first test and put an incorrect value in, will bob get in trouble for going off what fred put in. My eyes you test whats infront of you! Dont rely on another tester!
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Graham
If the vehicle you previously tested with a plate value displayed comes back with that plate removed, you should test to the value that was used on the last emissions print out. If this is not available, then you can only test to the default limit.
Comment by Graham posted on
Yeah ok, but what if the last emmisions printout was an incorrect plate value, the tester had entered it wrong.
Comment by jhulian posted on
what do you do if a car fails it diesel emissions by manufacture plate and when it returns for retest that plate is missing or damaged do you retest on higher levels ? need an answer
Comment by Tony . Exeter. posted on
I can't find DATA protection either, and what the hell has it got to do with our MOT testing anyway!!
Comment by myke posted on
MOT testing guide, > Section 'B' Authorised Examiners > B7 Use of Data and Data Protection, on page 28. It has a lot to do with testers, it's known that certain recruitment temping agencies are asking testers to take screenshots from within their logged in profile pages, and B7 item 6, states: "In order to safeguard the data, each system user should follow these simple rules:
a. Do not give another person information that they would not otherwise have access to, this includes test result information."
Unfortunately, this has been going on, and this Data and Data Protection training will help stop this.
Comment by keith posted on
If you are different tester or station how would you know the limits are if they have been removed and if you are re testing a vehicle with the limits removed which is then protested how would you show the plated limits you have used even if they are no longer on the vehicle.
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Keith
Where a vehicle has been presented for test and failed on a plate value and has been re presented with the plate value defaced/removed for retest, provided you have a copy of the emissions printout showing evidence of the plate value on the initial test, the vehicle should be retested to that value. If there is no evidence, it must be tested as presented and therefore default limits apply. We are currently exploring opportunities to provide the plate values for vehicles through a central source.
Comment by Graham posted on
If you have evidence on a failure emmisions, how do you still know this information is correct. What if the tester put the incorrect information first time round! I have seen this a few times!
Comment by Stephen Ball posted on
So where is DATA protection. can't find it anywhere
Comment by Pete posted on
its on page 28 of mot testing guide
Comment by Tony . Exeter. posted on
thanks for the info' Pete. bearing in mind that all these comments are vetted one would have expected a DVSA representative to have supplied the info and not your good self.
Comment by Stephen Ball posted on
227 pages to read for data protection nonsense, I'm an MOT tester not a book worm
Comment by Tom posted on
Why have you dumbed down windscreen defects and removed zones etc?
Now a chip less than 10mm well out of the drivers line of vision (e.g. passenger side) results in a PASS with repair as soon as possible:
Windscreen damaged but not adversely affecting driver's view (3.2 (a) (i))
Can they no longer put as advisories?
Try finding a car without a chip in the windscreen.
Comment by Graham posted on
What about re-wording the tyre criteria to include cracks in tread through to cords, aswell as cuts. Surely this is just as dangerous, at the moment, if i get a heavily cracked tyre with a crack greater than 25mm, which is through to cords, i cant fail it due to the wording. Can you consider this and include please, im sure many other testers agree with this!!
Comment by Shaun posted on
I've always been told by vosa if cords are exposed without the need to poke the tyre, then it's a fail regardless of circumstance.
Comment by Graham posted on
Yeah i know, what im saying is, what it is heavily cracked / perished, and in one of these cracks if i have a poke around i find cords, then surely this is just as dangerous as a cut to cords
Comment by Brooke posted on
My colleague recently completed the annual assessment and found that some of the questions were misleading. For example there was a question about the correct procedure to power down a hybrid/ electric vehicle after completing the mot test. He selected the answer which is backed up on the gov.uk site ref hybrid and electric cars however he got this question wrong? Also there was a question about the correct procedure to test a brake servo on an electric vehicle, this question he got incorrect and could not find any testing information in the manual, gov site or testing guide. Can anyone help please ?
Comment by mark posted on
how does he know he got them wrong
Comment by Brooke posted on
Hi mark, it tells you at the end the ones you get incorrect
Comment by Keifer j posted on
Interesting reading
We recently had a Tesla model s booked in for a test , I quickly realised that “it’s just another car to test” wasn’t going to cut it , so I thought I need to look at how to test this properly and also safely , I spoke to a trainer freind of mine and also did some research on the net and found actual info on Tesla’s site how to carry out the test and oh my word there was a significant more amount of info than on the testing information, if I had used that I’m pretty sure I would have caused an issue with the active suspension for sure aswell as not being able to correctly spin the wheels etc , if I can find the info in 5 mins on my I phone why can’t Dvsa ?
Comment by John boy posted on
I have been a tester for 42 years testing cars bikes quads and trikes I am not taking the assessment next yesr all you veteran testers will understand why so all I can say is good luck to those you prevail
Comment by phil posted on
Who even knows, who is doing the training, you used to have to take your smart card with your photo on, and driving licence, now you are invisible.I
personally know of at least two garages that the manager does the training on behalf of the tester's, so they are never up to date with changes,
The new euro directive, has in it that at there discretion member states can increase the standard of the test, Spain for instance have made a six month test time for commercial vehicles over 10 years old, this includes small vehicles ie Corsa van, i know this from first hand as my brother in law has just had to have there citroen belingo tested. So why are we allowing anything over 40 years old Exempt, i have recently tested two exempt vehicles, that where presented voluntarily and both failed on dangerous items, point made, and D.V.S.A say there skint, so why take vehicles out of testing, and loosing money from it, no sense in it.
Comment by Mike posted on
I think a few hours training and an hour on a test is far better than taking two days off to go to Chatterton in peak hour there and back .Even if it was only every five years. i am 62 and find it easy.
Comment by david b posted on
graham good luck on your retirement wish you all the best.
Our mot training calendar goes from april to april- so why in august are we only now being given our training material?-
the same blog telling us of the consequences/inconvienence if we do not complete our training on time.
why on april 1st are we are not given the years material?
things within DVSA are not getting better they are getting WORSE.
Comment by richard posted on
We had our 2018/2019 training material given to us in in April/May.
Comment by CJ posted on
I'm not too sure what you mean David. We were given this information (training topics) earlier this year. It was also recommended to complete it before May 20th. This is just a reminder. Personally I completed this years training and assessment last May. I presume, because of all the changes that are going on, the DVSA are worried that people will forget about the training. So this is just a gentle reminder.
The problem is that the manual is still changing and is due/in need of some serious changes. So you may be better off doing it early next year, when the promised updates/special notice have hopefully been completed.
Regards.
Comment by david b posted on
hi cj, i have gone through my special notices and dvsa emails and i have had nothing on training topics for 2018/19. can you tell me how dvsa gave us this infomation please?
many thanks
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi David
The next list of training topics is higher up in this blog post.
Comment by david b posted on
thank you julia, is this the 1st time dvsa have posted the training items on here or was there an email/special notice given to us??
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi David
Training items were published on 1 April 2018 and this blog post is just a reminder of the training for this year.
Comment by david b posted on
thank you julia- where was the training published? on this blog? through SN or email??
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi David
The links in the blog post will take you to the GOV.UK pages where you can read more about the topics.
Comment by glen posted on
It would be nice to still have the class of vehicle on the m.o.t certificate and the colour of the vehicle. I think it shows the proper identification of the vehicle you are testing.
Comment by Steve Mason posted on
The MOT test has evolved quite considerably since its first conception. As vehicles have improved in performance and structure, these improvements have brought the need increase the number of items to inspect and the way they are inspected. What has not helped is the revamp of what was a good way of recording the results of the inspection. The early days of transference to computerisation was a bit of a struggle with things like system failures but we survived because the terminology used to distinguish a pass or fail met the description of the item concerned. The latest revamp is a disaster, we have lost a lot of sensible descriptive terminology and the combining of manuals was a very big mistake. So DVSA how about putting your hand up and admit that it was a big mistake to proceed with this revision. By all means include the new items but in the old terminology and layout.
Comment by ian posted on
agreed
Comment by Peter posted on
What does it matter what we say nobody listens anyway , sign of the times I am afraid?technology moves on but generally it always goes back to the old routine with possibly a different title to it &guess what? It works .
Comment by Michael k posted on
I think a lot of you should stop moaning its your job, if you dont like it find another simples. Its a responsible job your only expected to do 4 hours training a year to be honest it should be more. Its dead easy if you do it early enough and take the time to research the new changes and not leave it untill last minuite. Not a lot of effort goes in to a training test just to familiarise yourself with new changes. And as with moaning about computers Welcome to 2018. Everybodys on computers the police, the nhs even factorys just get over it and get on with it. Think the changes are great and minumises some manual advisories ive seen that are just stupid when ive seen previous years ticket. Weve just got to be more clear on whats what when issuing a legal document. Fair enough keep up good work dvsa
Comment by John posted on
Agree! It's not difficult really is it?! I've just about stopped using manual advisory since May as everything I used it for previously is now somewhere in the listings, and they're not hard to find. I'd call that a success
Comment by Michael k posted on
And to add to this, we are obligated to do so by the eu untill we leave. If we dont comply our government recieves a fine = fines cost the tax payer = a bit more out your pay packet
Comment by Stephen posted on
I click on data protection for you and your customers and i get the mot testing guide.
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Stephen
I understand you have had a reply from Simon Smith here at DVSA.
Comment by eddy posted on
I have been a tester for 30yrs,i dont mind technology were it makes the job easier,but since 20th May its been turned on its head.Glad i have only 5yrs to retirement.
Comment by paul posted on
the new system is a joke all done to save you money and cost us the garage
Comment by cerb posted on
i think that a lot of these comments are valid dvsa are struggling to find testers for their atf sites and its the old addage to little information too late it is a prime time to liase with other goverment bodies to standardise the whole mot testing process and maybe set a standard minimum test price to discourage discounting etc
Comment by Michael k posted on
No! Its more a question of how much you appreciate the privalage of your role and how much time your willing to spend to keep it. Its bare minimum 4 hours out of 8760 in a year. Not a lot to ask and if thats to much then maybe consider another profession
Comment by jhulian posted on
i agree that the price should be the same we had a customer come in who had a discounted mot at one of the big chains and they had failed it on rear wiper not working and rear washer not working
Comment by david posted on
its high time as testers we should make a stand against how we are treated , training should not be left to any one individual . this is a legal requirement (mot test) show it has the credibillity to stand up ! some one has been paid a lot of money to create a manual that is very poor , i do not test motorcycles but the the class 1 /2 manual is worse than 4/5/7 . time as a group we said enough and suspend testing till they listen to the people who do this job . its us who go to court .
Comment by CRESCENT posted on
i only do class 4 tests but the exam i take has questions on different classes.they raised the pass rate and will raise it again next year .i find it totally over the top when we keep getting told that the the mot test is a basic check.alot of red tape for a basic check.
Comment by Louisa posted on
What's the point in doing the annual assesment now, the goalposts would have moved again by then!
Comment by KEN SANTI posted on
Another major flaw in the new fail criteria: failed a Fiat Punto on a badly corroded front lower wishbone this morning, it was that weak it was flexing at the point where the corrosion was most evident, the system saw this as a major failure, it should have been a DANGEROUS failure!!! please give us back the option to mark items as DANGEROUS, don't forget we are hands on in test stations..............................
Comment by steve mot posted on
totally agree
Comment by karl posted on
maybe a fixed statutory fee of 100 pounds per mot ,[long overdue] would remedy all above grievances.
Comment by George Marshall posted on
If M.O.T. Testing Is so essential why do I see vehicles, over three years old, in my area . Being used with defective lights, one in particular with the offside headlamp out. This vehicle has been used for the past two years in that condition to my knowledge, I expect it will be the same this winter.
Am I correct in thinking very old bangers neither require a Test or tax, doesn't seem quite right to me.
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi George
Cars more than 40 years old don't need an MOT but owners can still have their car MOTd if they want to. This web page gives you more information and the situation with vehicle tax. Whether MOTd or not, a car must always be kept in a roadworthy condition. A car over 3 years old needs an MOT.
Comment by Charles Marvell posted on
I got 100% easily, it's all in the manual, you just have to read it. As rules become more black and white it must surely make the testers life easier.
Comment by Michael k posted on
Agree and im not the brightest spanner in the box i got 90% but its good enough for me and i learned where and what i needed to research on. If you value the privalage of the responsibility you have and take time and critisism and turn it in to a possitive, its all good, otherwise maybe it isnt for you
Comment by Barry posted on
Due to easter I took my on line exam in April.
Although I passed I have never even sat in an electric car let alone tested one.
I felt the test was useless in regards to content.
It reminded me of that first test at my local VOSA HGV classroom when there was a question about Air brakes...
When did they ever fit Air brakes to vehicles which came under the MOT scheme?
Anyway as I was too late entering my rezults I am suspended and.....
To be honest I'm glad I don't have to sit in front of a screen anymore.
Comment by Mark posted on
I've worked on cars since college in 86 always taken my car for mot safety check and fixed what it failed on if the mot is done on computer how do you know he hasn't missed something I've got 8 children travelling with us in the car I need to know its safe prefer mechanical not electronic diesels so rather test was done the old fashion way cars are to complex now but still need the mechanics checked properly
Comment by Lloyd posted on
Computers arent checking your car over, humans are
Comment by Andy Reynolds posted on
I agree it was a drastic shake up and alot to happen at once, I still wonder why the categories had to change and find I`m using the search option more than I ever have. I suppose we had to move forward with our friends in Europe and abide by their legislation. Personally I think annual training is a change for the better, it keeps the NT and VTS manager more current and switched on. I`m 58 and always remember: The dinosaurs did not evolve and died off. I`ve probably evolved 3 times in my career to stay updated and current with vehicle technology, this old dog can learn new tricks and isn`t ready to die off yet !!!!!!
Comment by Chris williams posted on
I've been a tester for 20 years going for annual training was a great experience and picked up many tips from other testers but this system I'll feel is not saw good time to give it up I think
Comment by Graham Bowley posted on
I stopped testing due to the changes to much stress to do the job properly
Comment by PHIL posted on
My opinion is that old saying If its not broke don't fix it . Less time spent on technology and more time inspecting the vehicles.
Comment by Als stewart posted on
Totally agree,, to much paperwork red-tape n bs,, like most jobs 80% paperwork which takes ur focus off the real important safe stuff,,
Comment by T Fairhurst posted on
I feel the DVSA have thrown us testers out on a limb here. Of course we do our upmost to keep vehicles safe and test to our given guidelines ( even with many grey areas). To change the rules in such a dramatic way and not release a training package of some sort, to assist our understanding of the new rules was a huge mistake. You only have to see the forums online to see the confusion this has caused to testers, not to mention the customers caught out by it. Where does their anger vent to?... straight to the poor tester who is equally perplexed!
The public announcement of the changes were poor. I read many times over that having no brake discs was a fail?!?! Wasn’t it always? Having an under inflated tyre was a fail.... no it’s not?!?!?!
The degrees of failure are inconsistent. I sent out a vehicle with slightly split ball joint dust covers...minor fault. The low brake pads... advise. I knew that had that customer had of presented that vehicle maybe a couple of weeks later would have failed on low brake pads meaning a dangerous failure. How does this make logical sense? Off my customer went with it written in black and white that his dust cover was more important than his pads?
DVSA has made us testers look like fools. Having to point out flaws in a system is that should be ‘bang on’.
There are countless other stories from many other testers which has led them to consider whether the responsibility is worth it.
Why is it so hard to write a black and white manual where we all know where we stand? I base this argument on not only speaking with other testers but also DVSA representatives who too have different interpretations of the manual !!!
I predict a drop in the numbers of GENUINE Mot testers.
Comment by graham gibbons posted on
I have been a tester over thirty years and I totally agree with this comment
Comment by Pete posted on
Totally spot on T. It's not only just veteran testers like myself who have decided to hang up their corrosion assessment tools. I know of three testers that only passed their training in June 2017 has said "stuff this" and have stopped testing. I was very close to doing the same but am en-devouring to stick it out.
Comment by Jim posted on
Totally agree with this comment. Skilled tradesmen and tradeswomen should not be subjected to continual in house quality checks and also the ongoing training and annual examination (big brother doesn,t trust us)
Comment by Andrew posted on
Yes I agree,all this new training and constant changes to the MOT doesn’t help Testers
Comment by Bob B posted on
Thinking along the same lines as you,is getting a bit too much ,easier ways to make a living !
Comment by David williams posted on
All jobs have changed to move with the times I’ve been testing over 25 years cars have evolved so we have to aswell it’s been difficult to adjust as you age I think there is a need for a higher fixed price for an mot so wages can rise to attract the younger generation to take on this now highly skilled job
Comment by Jamie browne posted on
The mot test was fine, it was achievable within the time given and it was a fair test. There was no need to change it at all and everyone does not understand why. I guess employees there have to be seen to be doing something. Just leave alone what works, not making up stupid reasons for rejection etc
Comment by Paul posted on
Good luck with the retiring Graham Martin have a good one.
Simon regarding View test location on Check MOT history would not enabling testers to view this information say by entering the last 6 digits of the Vin help us to make the service better?
Comment by Tony S posted on
I'd go along with that, let's see what happens, I guess they don't want us testers to see that information.
Let's see if we get a reply, bet we don't!
Comment by Tony S posted on
Left a reply to this the other day and it didn't get published, like a lot of mine don't, so I don't bother too much now,
Any way I fully agree, that is a good idea, maybe they don't want Testers to see the info
Comment by Hooters posted on
How will the ongoing, I say again, ongoing changes affect my annual assessment test if I choose to take it now or nearer the cut-off date given the impending Special Notice, which I understand will move the ‘goal posts’ some more?
Comment by Stephen Bradshaw posted on
Why ask class 4 testers class 7 questions we will never get 100%
Comment by Steve posted on
There’s nothing wrong in doing a job correctly or following standards. If you were spending more time at the computer than you were spending on testing cars, I think it’s a good thing that you gave up testing.
Comment by john waddington posted on
I have not done any tests on hybrid or all electric so its a bit unfair to include questions in the exam . those at the dealerships may have already had these in the workshop so will be more familiar with them.
Comment by Bert posted on
but i'm sure one day you will so you need to know about them
Comment by James Jackson posted on
yet another tick box exercise to apportion blame where none exists. testers and all involved in testing are being stretched to the limits . leave the good guys alone who want to test properly . not spend half their time in front of a computer at great expense to all testing stations large or small, it is a waste of time just as the BSI qualification nothing to do with the workshop or testing just more paperwork to create jobs at more expense
Comment by Peter posted on
How true
Comment by Russ posted on
Do you intend to keep the pass mark at 70% from now on, or will it continue to rise?
Comment by richard posted on
Well I certainly miss the classroom based training & yearly seminars, I feel computer based training was a step backwards to be honest,possibly run it alongside the old way. I felt I learnt a lot more from the tutor & the guys I was doing my refresher course with, not all of us want to use a computer at the best of times.
anyhow all the best in your retirement Graham.
Comment by glenn pike posted on
I stopped testing due to all the changes put too much stress on testers to do there job properly.more time wasted at computors than on testing cars.why do they keep trying to fix things that are not even broken
Comment by Jack bold posted on
Yes ...You are spot-on let the testers do the job ..Because of that some of my all testing mate have stopped testing because they feel they’re spending more time on computers where they should be testing cars
Comment by Dave posted on
Totally agree with this. As if this trade isn’t getting hard enough with all the new technology, diagnostics etc,we now have to waste even more time on the computer rather that what we actually joined the trade for. Many of us joined a hands on practical trade because we didn’t want to spend all our days in an office in front of a computer screen......... oh look what’s happened!!! No wonder so many of us hate the trade now and are getting out.
I got told last year, if I miss the dead line for the accessment, all that would happen is I’d be suspended until the accessment was completed. Again misinformed. Left hand, right hand springs to mind.
Comment by Phil Bowen posted on
I agree totally spend more time on the computer. than doing the job we are trained to do