Happy Halloween!
Forget the ghosts and ghouls banging on your doors, we’ve got some far scarier tales to share with you from some seriously spooked MOT testers.
When you think you’ve seen it all, we bring you some new tales that will have you wide eyed and white knuckled as you delve in to our latest edition of Halloween MOT Horror stories.
Creeping Corrosion
This lower suspension arm on a Vauxhall Meriva was creepily close to failing on its way to the testing station. The tester was amazed that it hadn’t completely disintegrated under the weight of the vehicle.
It’s very possible that this vehicle would have had an advisory on a previous MOT test for corrosion that has been ignored by the vehicle owner.
Advisories are provided to alert drivers to future problems on their vehicles before they become serious or dangerous.
The best course of action is to get advisories repaired before your next MOT test.
This will ensure that your vehicle is in the best possible condition it can be, and normally the earlier you address an advisory the less costly it is likely to be to repair it.
Night of the living tread
A Local Authority tester was tread-ified after seeing the tyres on a motor caravan.
One of the worst examples of tyre wear that we have seen so far. Made worse by the bulging sidewall of the tyre which is reminiscent of a scene from Alien.
This tyre was at a serious risk of having a blowout and should have been changed at a much earlier date than at the MOT test. The law requires tyres to have a minimum tread depth of 1.6mm, although this is a case of the more you have, the better!
A low tread depth can make it more difficult to drive in adverse weather conditions, can cause you to aquaplane, result in blowouts, increase stopping distance, and cause maintenance issues with wheel alignment and balance.
Our advice is to check your wheels before you get behind your wheel, and always make sure your tyres are pump-kined up.
Watch out, Tready Krueger’s about
A cracking example of what can happen if you don’t check your tyres regularly. You may end up with a visit from Tready Krueger!
Ignored by the driver despite a daily commute of 100 miles on the motorway, thankfully the vehicle was presented for MOT before it got a Boo-low out.
You should always remember to check your tyres regularly, especially before a long journey.
Tyres are one of the most common reasons for MOT fails, and damaged or inadequate tyres can seriously compromise your vehicle when driving, especially at speed.
If you find a crack or bulge on your tyre, you should seek advice by taking it to your local garage to get it inspected.
Van-pire tales
The MOT tester really got his teeth into this one. After applying pressure to the brakes during an MOT test, an almighty bang echoed around the testing station.
Upon inspection the brake servo had blown apart at the seam! Fixodent was no use here!
A brake servo is a device that increases the pressure applied by the brake foot pedal.
Although this isn’t a common occurrence, if you detect any change in your vehicle’s braking system, get it checked out by a professional immediately.
You’d be batty not to realise that we all have a stake in vehicle safety, so a Count of one new servo was ordered to ensure this one was back on the road.
29 comments
Comment by mark posted on
same 8 replies/comments after 3 weeks now....i guess its closed?
Comment by shaun trowsdale posted on
its issues like these that we all see every day, that make me worry so much about the proposal for the mot to be done every 2 years. all of these vehicle would still be driving around without being repaired, personally i care too much about my loved ones to want them to share the road network with these vehicles and others like them.
Comment by Edward Pritchard posted on
I would like to go back to the day when we had to do 5 year class room visit all this online assessment only means you can run two computers together, you can't beat being kept up to speed by the likes of bill Henderson and the like this in my opinion was far better than today's method,I got my first MOT approved in1971
Comment by Keith Redman posted on
I posted a valid comment on Halloween Horrors that was awaiting moderation ,there is still no sign of it .
As a member of the VTS council from its conception I have sent many emails to various people at VOSA / DVSA to see if it is still in existence but have had no reply can you please help.
Comment by Derek posted on
I am sure that Sean will be right here , I doubt very much that it was advised last mot and if it was then its time to stop advising corrosion on suspension arms etc and just fail them . About time Dvsa started looking into things like this and start taking action against tester's .
Biannual mot's is definitely a no no in my book .
Comment by mark posted on
any chance of newer posts getting shown?
Comment by Martin posted on
Whats with the silly comments again ? It was cringe worthy enough the first time you did it.
Inane comments put you in a worse light .... If such a thing were possible.
Comment by Iam Shocked posted on
The suspension arm should have failed the last MOT there is no way it could get into that state in one year. Also the law which allows vehicles over a certain age to not require an MOT is ridiculous
Comment by Richard posted on
I wonder if the cords/ply's were visible on that split tyre? I suspect the split also closed up a fair bit when the damaged section was not supporting the vehicle's weight.
Comment by Kevan Chippindall-Higgin posted on
Driver training simply does not address tyres in any meaningful way. All of my students get at least an hour on tyre markings, pressures, contact patches, tread depth, the function of tread, tread patterns, winter, summer and all season tyres.
The radius arm is an interesting one. I find it hard to accept that it went from an advisory to the state in the picture in a single year. I suspect that the servo was just one of those things. Neither of these are realistically normal driver maintenance issues, hence the need for annual MoTs.
The other faults should have been seen and dealt with by the driver. Anybody driving around with tyres in that state should have their competence to drive and own a vehicle seriously questioned.
Comment by jo posted on
bit like when you buy a car from a garage and passes with flying colours. only to be told a few weeks later when its in the garage that it needs a lot off work. the garage showed me bits they replaced on my car which should never have passed a mot. but the garages pass them and shove the problems onto the new owners.
Comment by Mr eeee posted on
Kia wishbones, honda rear axles just two examples that corrode from the inside out you cant advise or fail what you cant see in every instance ,,,any reasonable doubt pass and advise
Comment by Ghost posted on
The scary story is how easy it is to get a telephone mot and how many garages there are compared to dvsa staff who are no longer in Control
Comment by Ash posted on
My biggest horror story is of a MOT tester that missed a crack in my chassis. I repaired it myself, same as I check my vehicles myself.
Comment by Emma posted on
Every car should carry spare bulbs by law. Used to be regular roadside checks by police and be given a 7 day wonder for any defects.
Comment by M Annetts posted on
Around eighteen months ago I tested a Ford Transit van of monocoque construction. There was so much extensive corrosion around various prescribed areas along with other defects ,that after I tested it and failed many items I couldn’t believe that even though it’s mot had expired a couple of months earlier how this had occurred in the space of fourteen months. I therefore took the opportunity to look up its mot history. The van by the way in my opinion was way past being a viable vehicle for repair. The vehicle had indeed failed on the same items then a few days later gained a clean pass. This in mind over the next few weeks I kept an eye to the history page for the van and sure enough it suddenly had a pass. This time though all the failure item’s had been listed as advisories and descriptions were as if it was a vehicle with a separate chassis so that for instance many corrosion areas sounded like they were away from suspension mounts etc. I made my local V I aware of my suspicions. Have had said van drive past me of late and apart from the manner of the driving that made take a second look at it I noticed the same rear lighting defects that I remember from when I tested it. So I always remember when I first started testing and on my demo test I described part of the underside as chassis. The VI chap asked me to refer to it as a structural member as a chassis can be removed from the car via fastenings.
Comment by R Duffy posted on
Motor vehicles are to have an inspection per miles or every six months which ever comes first. One before presenting for an MOT and one six months later.
An attempt, at least, should be made to present the vehicle in a road worthy state.
The MOT is not an inspection and when used for that purpose, only determines whether the vehicle has been used in an unroadworthy state for possibly up to a year.
Comment by Keith Redman posted on
Having been involved with the mot scheme for 52 years I have witnessed the worst effects of poor MOT tests many of them fatal ,looking at that lower arm the first that comes to mind is that it did not happen over night in fact I would say that it did not happen over 365 nights who the hell put an MOT on this vehicle last year ,that should be the question and investigated.
As the emphasis in mot training is heavily focused on admin and not a good understanding of road safety and component failure this is likely to only increase the no of dangerous vehicles on the road.
Comment by K.sale posted on
The biggest horror story in the mot system is the new nominated testers in the system with no idea of what they are doing!!
It is possible for anyone who has a few thousand pounds can become a tester.
It's time for the public to get the information about what is happening.
Comment by Roy Hart posted on
Several more reasons why vehicles on our roads require testing every year.
Otherwise the consequences may well be horrific!!
Comment by Peter Shearcroft posted on
The Suspension Arm must have required an advisory last MOT which you can look up . So have you?
Comment by Roy Bryant posted on
You asked us to send in horror photos but our emails are rejected from the website address you gave.
Comment by Robert Wyllie posted on
Re: Matters of Testing.
I loved the issue "MOT Halloween Horror Stories".
Joking apart these were all "Dangerous deficiencies" I feel these examples help to keep us focused conducting fair but thorough inspections.
I thank all involved for their time and effort in to give us insights into what can turn up at the test station,
thanks all,
kind regards
Bob Wyllie
Comment by Fiona Grant posted on
These pictures are helpful but they are the worst example of their type.
I would like DVSA to provide pictures of tyres that are not legal but not so obviously not legal so I could use them in a training exercise with our drivers.
Fiona
Comment by Ray Miller posted on
We need more incognito testing
Comment by Richard Mildon posted on
This is why it should be every year for an mot not 2
Comment by Joseph Williams posted on
Not things to be made into a joke. Any of these component failures could have resulted in a loss of life , yet you want to use it as a ‘Halloween’ joke..??
Comment by Sean posted on
I bet that suspension arm was not advised at the last mot. Seen it loads of times testing a vehicle which last year had no advise notes from other stations and now have severe corrosion !
Comment by B Cairns posted on
I believe the issue here is that advisories are not mandatory on the VT20.
I believe they should be.