https://mattersoftesting.blog.gov.uk/mot-services-were-working-on-10-september-2018/

MOT services we're working on: 10 September 2018

Since my last update, the team have been really busy working on the feedback you’ve given us, following the changes that were made to the MOT in May 2018.

As always, your feedback is really useful in helping us identify where there might be issues and how we can make the service even better for you.

Improving security

In my last blog post, I let you know that we’re looking to improve the way security cards work, to make the system more secure and easier to use.

This includes:

  • making our password policy stronger
  • making our recovery security question and answers harder to guess
  • reducing the number of times you’ll need to enter your security card PIN each day
  • increasing our proactive monitoring of suspicious activities, to prevent fraudulent use of the security cards
  • switching off the ability for your browser to autofill your password and user ID

Making your passwords stronger

To begin with, we’re looking at how we can make sure the passwords you’re choosing are stronger by banning very common and easy to guess passwords. We’ll be introducing a maximum of 7 days that you can be without a card and log in with security questions. After 7 days, you will need to use your security card. We’re also be preventing the use of the same answer for both security questions.

Another thing we're doing is looking into ways we can securely reduce the number of times you need to enter your PIN every day, as we know this can be very time-consuming.

We’re working on a solution so that you will only need to log in with your security card once a day. The system will then remember your details, so you won’t need to re-enter your PIN unless something like your browser or device has changed since you first logged in.

We’re aiming to make most the changes live by 3 and 4 October, and we’ll let you know more soon.

Garage risk ratings

Something else we’ve been working on recently is garage risk ratings. I explained more about what we’re improving and why in my last update. We’ve nearly completed this work now, and we’ve been busy training our staff on how to carry out the new risk ratings in the past few months.

So, from later in the autumn if you have a site assessment, the way it’s carried out will be different.

How the new assessment will work

We’ll be focusing more on compliance and the test itself so our examiners will be carrying out more checks on recently tested vehicles. We’ll also be doing a shorter check on systems and processes in the garage, which will be called a site review.

The purpose of the site review is to ensure the vehicle testing station is following principles that promote good quality testing, we will focus on 4 areas:

  • basic compliance
  • management control and quality control
  • premises and equipment
  • people's training and their skills

Each area will be then marked as either:

  • satisfactory
  • improvement needed
  • unsatisfactory

The site review outcome will combine the result of the vehicle re-inspection (if carried out), previous disciplinary history of the testers and the authorised examiner and data captured from the testing service. This will then be displayed on the MOT testing service as a rating of red, amber or green.

You’ll be able to view the outcome of the site review of the testing service and see the areas where improvement might be needed.

Risk ratings for testers

As part of this work, we’re also looking at risk rating testers, using data from the testing service and disciplinary history. Testers will be able to see their rating in their profile. The testers rating is personal to them and will not be displayed to site managers or authorised examiner (AE). However, some AEs may choose to ask prospective employees to share it.

We’ll let you know more about the launch of this soon. As part of this, we’ll be creating a short guide to replace the current guide to risk reduction – which will focus on the things that are expected of a well-run MOT garage.

Making the manual clearer

Something you let us know in the comments, was that the wording of some defects wasn’t as clear as it could be. To help make it easier for you to identify the defects while your testing, and make it clearer to the public, we’re making minor changes to some of the wording in the manual.

For example, previously, when testing the horn on a vehicle, you would need to choose the reason why it failed. We’ve now consolidated the reasons to make it clearer. So you’ll only need to choose the option that the ‘horn no longer meets requirements’.

We’ve made some of the manual clearer on how to check different things are working properly. Something you gave us a lot of feedback on was brake fluid. We’ve now provided you with clearer instructions on how to do this during a test.

We’ve also made it clearer which vehicles need the engine malfunction indicator lamp testing – by adding ‘from’ dates for different types of vehicles.

More defect descriptions 

Over the past 4 months, you’ve given us lots of really great feedback on the new test, including the new categories.

We’ve taken this into consideration and from 13 September 2018, we’ll be introducing some more defect descriptions. These include:

  • corroded brake hose ferrules including flexible brake hose excessively damaged, deteriorated, chafed, twisted or stretched
  • tyre valves seriously damaged or misaligned
  • headlamp alignment
  • shock absorbers bushes that excessively worn
  • suspension arms, rods, linkage that have ‘excessive wear or free play in suspension component’
  • transmissions for motorcycles - excessively tight transmission belt or chain

This won’t be a significant change to the test and should include most of the feedback you’ve given us since the changes in May.

I hope the changes we’ve made will make it quicker and easier for you during testing. If you have any more questions please let me know in the comments below, and we’ll try and get back to you.

115 comments

  1. Comment by JOHN posted on

    In my opinion tyre valve deterioration in cars and motor cycles especially
    should be added as a dangerous failure because this is what I experience more often than a damaged valve.

    Reply
  2. Comment by Mohammad Ramzan posted on

    Please can someone tell ne how to find little reserve travel on the handbrake lever I've looked for it but cannotfind it on the system I'm having to use manual advise for little reaserve travel on handbrake lever

    Reply
  3. Comment by Pj posted on

    Had a main beam bulb that the output was poor, but the only option in the manual was "not working"

    Reply
  4. Comment by john a posted on

    new class 1&2 manual, section 4.7.1. You must test all vehicles, fitted with front and rear position lamps, for presence of registration plate lamp and its operation. It then goes on to say "Some mopeds do not have a registration plate lamp". The manual does not state if this constitutes a pass or fail if we come across one of these. Guidance please.

    Reply
  5. Comment by castrolrob posted on

    another question ive been asked for what seems like the 10th time,car failed on height adjuster 1 side inop,93 corolla,bits not available.if he removes the switch does it then pass?i have no guidance I can give em,have asked a few to ring dvsa and almost universally they cant get thru and give up then go elsewhere for a pass.you can add this to the pile of enquirys about defaced/missing plate smoke limits on initial test if you like......

    Reply
  6. Comment by Graham posted on

    So i take it now we dont fail brake pad light on dash, only if the pads are worn down to the 'metal' squeal indicator. You cant just remove this without clearing this up, quite confusing all this adding then removing stuff and telliong us to look at manual to find out info. It would be much easier if you give us a brief description of the change

    Reply
  7. Comment by C williams posted on

    Has any body come across Ford fitted tow bars don't pass electrical test with the approved electrical tester because it's LED and the body control module doesn't see volt drop

    Reply
    • Replies to C williams>

      Comment by richard posted on

      I've had this happen on Skodas as well.

      Reply
    • Replies to C williams>

      Comment by Bert posted on

      ive had it on a mini

      Reply
      • Replies to Bert>

        Comment by stevie m posted on

        i had it on a vw passat the customer bought the car back with his caravan on to show it worked. cant argue with that.

        Reply
    • Replies to C williams>

      Comment by Pete posted on

      Happens all the time , there was a special notice dating back to 2012 advising to pass and advise trailer sockets, but it seems to have been removed in the last couple of weeks.

      Reply
    • Replies to C williams>

      Comment by Graham posted on

      Yeah get this loads, all of the lights will flash very fast, aslong as they all light up i pass. If some dont, then pass and advise as you cant be sure

      Reply
  8. Comment by Ken Mcintosh posted on

    Rather than a guide to risk reduction just tell us exactly what is required then bingo things will be as they should be.
    I have met many vehicle examiners since I started testing in 1977 and guess what they are exactly the same as us testers, they all have there own ideas on certain things to do with the testing scheme.
    Why you may ask, because we are all human Subjective.

    Reply
  9. Comment by Dave posted on

    Is it now ok to have any old nut,with no locking device on suspension ball joints etc.???????

    Reply
    • Replies to Dave>

      Comment by Simon (DVSA) posted on

      Hi Dave
      As the presence and effectiveness of some locking devices, such as locking fluid or ‘nyloc’ nuts, can't be easily determined you should advise the presenter

      Reply
  10. Comment by John posted on

    I feel like the quality of DVSA service is never monitored,Red from me ,
    Back up service is dire. Feel like as a garage service is left to carry the can,

    Reply
  11. Comment by Kevin from Hull posted on

    It needs to be clearly stated to the customer that the M.O.T test is a very minimum standard AT THE TIME OF THE TEST and not a certificate of road worthiness for the next 12 months and that the advisories are the difference between that minimum standard and the much higher service standard.

    Reply
  12. Comment by mark george posted on

    where in the manual do you find play in strut top bearings/bush ?

    Reply
    • Replies to mark george>

      Comment by Simon (DVSA) posted on

      Hi Mark
      MacPherson strut tops are detailed in Section 5.3.4 of the inspection manual.
      Reasons for failure are selected via Suspension > Other suspension components > Pins and bushes

      Reply
  13. Comment by Glyn posted on

    I think you should put it back like it used tobe ..ite like word search to find what you want .pass..fail ..major ...minor...advise ...

    Reply
  14. Comment by mike posted on

    when are you going to default the steered axle 1&2 selection to axle 1, in 35 years i have never tested a 2nd axle steered car, ridiculous to have to select it every time.

    Reply
  15. Comment by richard posted on

    Brake fluid, you stated you were going to add information to clarify on how to check if the brake fluid is contaminated, I cant see it any where ?

    Reply
    • Replies to richard>

      Comment by Simon (DVSA) posted on

      Hi Richard
      This is what has been added:
      'On many vehicles, you won’t be able to see if the brake fluid is contaminated. You should only fail a vehicle if you can clearly see that the fluid is contaminated.'
      Many questions were raised where the reservoir is not transparent or clear and fluid cannot be clearly seen

      Reply
  16. Comment by Geoff B posted on

    You talk of tightening security for logins and the security questions, but the with regard to the security questions - this is an absolute joke!

    If you login without having your pin card with you, you click the link and you are asked to answer the questions. When you type the answers they are displayed in plain text - who on earth thought that a good idea??

    Just about every other site that I have ever used with recovery question/answers, the typed answers were always obscured, like a password.

    Ultimately, if someone already guesses/knows a UID/Password, then they only need to shoulder surf a tester entering security questions to have unimpeded access...

    Reply
  17. Comment by Mike Williams posted on

    'brake lining or pad wear indicator illuminated' can you confirm that this failure has been removed and replaced with 'Brake lining or pad:
    worn down to wear indicator'. so if the warning light is on do we fail it?

    Reply
    • Replies to Mike Williams>

      Comment by Paul posted on

      Brake linings and pads
      you gotta go into 'Brake lining(s)' to get.. worn down to wear indicator

      then come out & go into 'pads' to get.. brake lining or pad wear indicator illuminated

      Reply
    • Replies to Mike Williams>

      Comment by castrolrob posted on

      wear indicator illuminated is on the previous page,the one where you selected pads,worn to indicator is on the actual pad failure page.yeah I know.....

      Reply
    • Replies to Mike Williams>

      Comment by castrolrob posted on

      and now its gone,yesterday I had both worn to indicator and warning light,gone to use it today and warning light looks gone.am I going senile?

      Reply
    • Replies to Mike Williams>

      Comment by Simon (DVSA) posted on

      Hi Mike
      Brake pad wear indicators illuminated has been removed, if pad warning indicators are illuminated they should not be failed under the linings rfr.
      If the wear indicator is illuminated you should not take this that the pads are worn to that extent and a fault is not present within that electrical system. ie wire has earthed

      Reply
      • Replies to Simon (DVSA)>

        Comment by Paul posted on

        The Brake pad(s) Brake lining(s) pages are identical inc the RfR's except for wear indicator on the Brake pad(s) page.

        plural noun: brake linings
        a layer of hard material attached to a brake shoe or brake pad to increase friction against the drum or disc.

        Reply
      • Replies to Simon (DVSA)>

        Comment by 2002 posted on

        I take we are still no allowed to find a tool to measure that the pad material is under 1.5 mm.

        Reply
        • Replies to 2002>

          Comment by Graham posted on

          i was told by dvsa bloke, becasue you cant measure 1.5mm with your eyes, only fail a pad that is grinding. Then if its grinding you must do brake test either, so there shouldnt be any fails out there just for pads, unless you carry out brake test first.

          Reply
  18. Comment by craig posted on

    Trying to find updates in manual useing show all updates on contents page , nothing showing + no link

    Reply
    • Replies to craig>

      Comment by Simon (DVSA) posted on

      Hi Craig
      It may be that your computer has cached a previous version of the manual, these should expire within 24 hours. if you cant see them now, clear the cache in your browser settings

      Reply
  19. Comment by Alex Carter posted on

    I have ordered a new card and after around 6 months it still says on order with no other way of ordering it again when will I receive my new card??

    Reply
  20. Comment by Mick posted on

    Why is an engine under try insecure a fail but there is no failure listed for an in secure heat shield. I've seen it a few times where a heat shield that's supposed to a part of the exhaust system (for example vauxhall a antara rear exhaust silencer) become loose and could fall of causing danger to other road users.

    Reply
  21. Comment by Craig posted on

    Exhaust heat shields on older cars missing above rear box should commonsense be used by the tester

    Reply
  22. Comment by Jim posted on

    Have you not considered going back to PASS , ADVICE , FAIL, that is the biggest complaint we get from both trade and retail customers all the time day after day were i work we are mot only and do anything have from 10 to 40 mot tests it's getting very annoying constantly having to explain it what was so wrong with the old system? ?

    Reply
  23. Comment by Colin posted on

    Why can't we have an advisory for tyres perished/cracking but not exposing cords ?

    Reply
  24. Comment by tom posted on

    I have noticed that the search option will bring up items that are not avalable on the main listing .
    Brake efiiciency only just met for example.
    Also whilst the search option is of use it gives no inducation of where to find an item on the main listing .
    Also the help desk tried to connect me to the another department for clarification on an item but no one was available and they are not permitted to call back. How can a tester get help if needed?

    Reply
  25. Comment by Wayne posted on

    Introducing new items and wording .with short notice .as said before confuses testers .we need better training and some on the ground dvsa staff .had a site visit last year previous visit 5 years previous been 16 months since last visit .no help at all seems we are left to try to understand so many changes with out any assistance .help desk total waste of time .left on hold for 10 mins last time eventually hung up .fix what needs fixing

    Reply
  26. Comment by Scotty posted on

    The biggest improvement that could be made to the scheme is the test fee. DVSA should set this fee as a fixed fee for EVERY VTS! This improvement alone would eradicate a lot of shoddy tests being carried out nationwide. There would be no local competition between local garages and everyone could prosper from it - leaving the customer to make their choice on the garage reputation - rather than saving a few quid!

    Reply
  27. Comment by Guy at Landford Garage posted on

    Hope the trailing arm makes a new appearance under suspension...

    Brake and wear indicators touching. Does that mean we can fail every car where the resistive (electrical resistance) indicator is not showing 100%, come on boffins you’ve just given the ‘Teflon failures’ the authorised reason to change BMW pads at 5mm.

    Reply
  28. Comment by Lm posted on

    What about tie rods/track rods, nothing anywhere advising play or even exsessive play as a failure! Emissions, if a diesel offers no or too little reading to record, that should be an advisory??

    Reply
    • Replies to Lm>

      Comment by mark posted on

      why advise that

      Reply
    • Replies to Lm>

      Comment by myke posted on

      tie rods/track rods, if what you mean is the track rod arm coming out from the steering rack boot and the free play you can detect is the inner axial joint, is only slight, in non component section there is or was a tick box for slight play in steering rack axial joints. For excessive play of these joints failure is to be measured by the amount of free play at the rim of the steering wheel. Inspection Manual > Section 2 Steering > 2.3 Steering play > a. i. excessive = Major. As for the emissions (over rated european non revving engines) Section 8 Nuisance > 8.2.2.2 Opacity the section "For example" explains the procedure. Also on some DSM machines that cannot detect the "blip" you need to abort the session to obtain a print out.

      Reply
  29. Comment by Gary Kearvell posted on

    The whole testing site seems to have been rushed and the changes in May were not needed anyway and now you are basically putting it back as it was?i test MCs and the pass fail areas are very confusing. Rear reflector for instance used to be Fail if not central to the machine now it can be anywherewith pass and advise so what is the point of testing it?it is a constuction and use item

    Reply
  30. Comment by Col posted on

    A motorcycle throttle doesn't have to return to the idle position ! To me a throttle that don't return to idle is dangerous ! Then you say something about throttle not working correctly .

    Reply
    • Replies to Col>

      Comment by Alan posted on

      Totally agree. And side and centre stands should be added for return to the rest position and behind hard to peg down.

      Reply
    • Replies to Col>

      Comment by Mike Smith posted on

      There are after market lamps on motorcycles where half the rear light fashes amber when indicating. We were told to fail this for one light effecting another. Now I have seen new Discoveries with with rear led tail lights progresively goin amber along in a line. Has the failure critereor change or is there a problem with type approval?

      Reply
  31. Comment by Richard B posted on

    please may I have an answer to a previous question I posed a while ago . The defect category for TPMS is contradictive .
    h.Tyre pressure monitoring system:

    i.malfunctioning or tyre obviously under-inflated
    Minor
    ii.obviously inoperative
    Major
    if the system displays a fault with the TPMS (flashing light or visit dealer message for example) it is malfunctioning (minor) but if the system is displaying a malfunction surely it would be inoperative ?? please could confirm IF this means that the TPMS function lamp does not display at all this would be a major ? e.g system dead ? then otherwise if the system is "live " but saying there is a malfunction it is only a Minor ?

    Reply
    • Replies to Richard B>

      Comment by Bert posted on

      if the TPMS light is just lit up to say a tyre is low then the system is working as intended not a fault in the system or inoperative, the system is faulty when it is say flashing etc

      Reply
    • Replies to Richard B>

      Comment by Jamie posted on

      I think the first 1 may refer to the telltale being inoperative

      Reply
  32. Comment by A Gibbons posted on

    Still nothing about incorrect tyre rotation in failure criteria for class 1&2 yet it states it in the manual
    Nothing about incorrect kick on headlights

    Reply
    • Replies to A Gibbons>

      Comment by Simon (DVSA) posted on

      A tyre not fitted in accordance with the direction of rotation marked on the side wall has been added. Section 5.2.3 (i)
      The failure in the MOT testing service can be found ; Motorcycle tyres > Condition

      Reply
  33. Comment by Paul posted on

    Hi are you putting back main beam on warning lamp checks as no mention surely this as been picked up on by someone ..

    Reply
    • Replies to Paul>

      Comment by Richard B posted on

      section 4.9.1 a ii main beam mandatory tell tale.... defect Major
      it's in the manual Paul

      Reply
    • Replies to Paul>

      Comment by Paul posted on

      Don't have to its already on there under.. 4.9 ‘Tell-tales’ mandatory for lighting equipment

      Reply
  34. Comment by Matt posted on

    I’m sure DVSA is aware of this but I’ve just seen an advert where Halfords are offering a free MOT if you buy any product from there store, so you could buy a £1 sponge or air freshener and claim a free test. Wow MOTs just a pound now.

    Reply
  35. Comment by Philip Burgess posted on

    Hi
    Reference the garage risk rating is satisfactory the highest rating??..
    Satisfactory in my opinion means MOT Station meets minimum standards.
    Should the DVSA not recognised MOT Stations that exceed these minimum standards with a 'good/outstanding' rating similar how the government rate schools and care facilities

    Reply
    • Replies to Philip Burgess>

      Comment by martin posted on

      Only as long as it is judged only on standard of testing (which in an ideal world should be the same countrywide) otherwise a good rating would be influenced by grander premises and facilities.

      Reply
    • Replies to Philip Burgess>

      Comment by Ellen posted on

      Totally agree. Something should be done about this. On the money saving expert he suggests about this deal in his words"it's best for motors less likely to fail". SO what does that imply??

      Reply
  36. Comment by will posted on

    where in the new manual does it say that the tester can have the use of an assistant if necessary using an approved atl or optl

    Reply
  37. Comment by Mark posted on

    The whole MOT system being operated by garages which then offer “repairs for the faults found” is corrupt. MOT check centres should ONLY offer MOTs then the consumer/car owner knows he will be given a fair analysis in the MOT process.
    Separate MOT centres from repair garages and bring the UK into the modern days we live in.

    Reply
    • Replies to Mark>

      Comment by martin posted on

      The "mot system" isn't corrupt but some garages are unscrupulous and fail for profit.
      Those amongst us who operate fairly and by the book are as annoyed as you are that this practice is allowed to continue.
      Unfortunately those who encourage this practice by financially rewarding their staff are hiding in plain sight in every town in the uk and are teflon coated as far as I can see.

      Reply
    • Replies to Mark>

      Comment by Howard Walker posted on

      All cars should be serviced or have an MOT check prior to the test.
      Also, cars should be taxed based on an annual pollution test. I have seen too many cars going out with a new test certificate issuing black fumes. My BMW 744i was tested and had 0 for its pollution score, and 1 for the other test.
      DVLA issued it with a class A certificate equal to an electric vehicle.
      It was built in 2000 but had only done 6k miles when I imported it from Japan, where pollution is much better controlled than in the UK.
      Much rubbish is spoken about pollution from cars. Well maintained ones do not polute as much as badly maintained ones. The UK should forget EU polution laws and take a look how the Japanese do it.

      Reply
    • Replies to Mark>

      Comment by stevie m posted on

      bit of a slur on mot testers that. i test in a garage that does repairs that by no means has any reflection on my test results. and i am sure there are many other testers that are the same. and i an sure that independant testing stations would recommend a repair shop to a customer. mmmm maybe they are on a commission.

      Reply
    • Replies to Mark>

      Comment by colin posted on

      I run an mot station that then offers repairs, I wouldn't dream of failing for profit !..
      If we fail a car then it's failed by the guide lines set by the manual and the customers don't have the worries of having to find a reputable garage to do the repairs, the know they can just leave it with us safe with the knowledge that when they pick up their Vehicles it been repaired to mot standards with a pass certificate. We are a local cheap and cheerful garage and all my customers love us to bits.your comments are totally unfair. There are bad mot stations out there as in all businesses but taring us all with the same brush is out of order. Being able to mot and repair keeps my four lads employed and our mortgages paid

      Reply
      • Replies to colin>

        Comment by Mick posted on

        It's also a benefit for the customer that doesn't have to bring it back again or reboot for repairs then retest.

        Reply
      • Replies to colin>

        Comment by Dave C posted on

        I fully agree with Colins comments,we are a small family run garage and would not dream of failing for profit , our pass and fails are average .Maybe one should look at higher fail rates to see where trouble may lie .

        Reply
    • Replies to Mark>

      Comment by PETE posted on

      I TRUST MY MOT TESTER 100% OR I WOULD NOT EMPLOY HIM...HE FAILED HIS OWN CAR AND MINE FOR THAT MATTER...SHAME ON YOU. MOT STATIONS WHO ONLY TEST, PASS THE CAR WITH A STRING OF ADVISORIES. ITS THE TESTER NOT THE TEST STATION IN MY OPINION

      Reply
    • Replies to Mark>

      Comment by Mack posted on

      Mark, Why instead of insulting honest hard working test stations don't you complain about reduced test fees or mot's being used by the big fast fits and main dealers as loss leaders ? These surely have to have a biased view in the mot outcome of vehicles presented ? If the fee was mandatory across the board then standards will only improve !! After all you cant buy cheap road tax can you

      Reply
  38. Comment by martin posted on

    Good effort with the amendments such a pity we had to work with a substandard system to begin with.
    Who on earth decided that we are losing too much time using our security card when we wasted many hours trying to find defect failures that had been removed.
    I think you should concentrate your priority's elsewhere ie proof reading,correct terminology,punctuation and spelling.

    Reply
  39. Comment by con posted on

    how will the risk score work if a tester has points from a previous station will it affect the new station as technically the new place could have done nothing wrong and be changed from say green to amber

    Reply
  40. Comment by John Stock posted on

    Why can't the mileage of the last test be desplayed at the BEGGINING of the "Test Results" section?
    If the tester has made an error in typing in the correct vehicle mileage it is not spotted until he has then already configured the pass cert, ready for printing. At this point it can no longer be altered.
    The incorrect document has to be recorded, the system accessed and then re-enterred in order to correct the mistake.

    Reply
  41. Comment by Alan posted on

    Hi , what about ' headlamp image obviously incorrect' missing from the list
    of possible headlamp aim failures ?
    I come across incorrectly fitted bulbs on an almost daily basis.

    Reply
  42. Comment by mr vincent r longotano posted on

    its time that the pricing of mot went up

    Reply
    • Replies to mr vincent r longotano>

      Comment by Eddie Mackin posted on

      C'mon, where on earth did you come up with that idea in-between all else thats been spoken about ? How does that song go ....? 🎶 Are you for real 🎶 I'm also guessing that you are a garage owner that just happens to do MOT's ?

      Reply
      • Replies to Eddie Mackin>

        Comment by Mick posted on

        I agree I think people are charging too low for mot's considering the price of the labour rate. No I'm not an owner either.

        Reply
      • Replies to Eddie Mackin>

        Comment by Jay Cusick posted on

        Yes,he probably is and quite rightly so.the test price hasn't risen for a long time whilst the cost of running a station has increased dramatically. When the new emissions test came in in may i had to purchase a new gas analyser at £6000 alone. How many tests to get that back? We then have computers,printers,training and ect on top of all that also to pay for

        Reply
  43. Comment by richard posted on

    "Another thing we're doing is looking into ways we can securely reduce the number of times you need to enter your PIN every day, as we know this can be very time-consuming."

    Really ? Time consuming ? I don't think so. The security to access this site is more then my banking app uses.

    Reply
  44. Comment by Richard B posted on

    ,Good morning .the re introduction of"tyre incorrectly fitted on the rim", does this mean we can fail stretched tyres again ( I know there are stretched tyres and there are seriously stretched tyres) but if we have badly over stretched tyres that are clearly poorly seated, does this mean we could fail them using this defect as before ?

    Reply
  45. Comment by michael watling posted on

    Why in this modern times are MOT,s still neccesary, I always have my car serviced at the same garage every year,yet every year I have to pay extra for a MOT, that they admit is not needed, it's just another way of making money from the motorist

    Reply
    • Replies to michael watling>

      Comment by M.P.Cole posted on

      You must be in the minority then as the amount of vehicles we see daily which are not fit to be on the road beggars belief.The M.o.T test is there to prevent defective vehicles from being on our roads.Simple as that.

      Reply
    • Replies to michael watling>

      Comment by dave posted on

      yes sir, you are among the diligent who see car servicing as prudent. However the vast majority of vehicle owners who are not, enough said.

      Reply
    • Replies to michael watling>

      Comment by stevie m posted on

      what about the people who do not maintain their vehicles. as a tester of 18 years i have seen to many vehicles presented that have obviously not been looked at since previous test. they seemed shocked that an advisory from previous test actually failed on the next test.

      Reply
      • Replies to stevie m>

        Comment by Col posted on

        Totally agree ,so many owners think all you need to do is put fuel in , no need for a service or tire check lights check ,or spend any money on maintenance ,and as you say then are shocked when they fail

        Reply
    • Replies to michael watling>

      Comment by martin posted on

      To a significant number of the motoring public the mot is viewed as a game to see how much they can get away with.
      As has been mentioned before the amount of horror stories most mot stations see on a daily basis is justification for an annual check in itself.

      Reply
    • Replies to michael watling>

      Comment by Ken Mcintosh posted on

      We wouldn’t require an mot test if everyone looked after there car as intended but sadly the servicing side in the garage has dropped off due to long life servicing intervals and bad maintenance, which makes the mot even more important than in days gone by.
      Tyres brakes and bulbs just a few important things on a vehicle that don’t last forever.

      Reply
  46. Comment by Simon posted on

    Thanks - but surely there is a mistake in the modified wording regarding suspension:
    "c (ii). A suspension component modified so that the suspension is operative or likely to fail"
    You must presumably mean "inoperative".
    This wording is in the new SN but I think you may have transcribed it incorrectly and should consider modifying it so that the proper sense is conveyed.

    I particularly like the feature of emailing us directly to tell us that there is an impending new SN - an excellent enhancement.

    Have you considered modifying the login requirements so that if, for example, a tester only wishes to see their own test quality information (while doing CPD at evening/weekend!) it would not be necessary to enter the security number from the card?.... I'm guessing that there would be nil fraud risk if only accessing that data and not other functions of the site.

    Reply
    • Replies to Simon>

      Comment by Olivia (DVSA) posted on

      Hi Simon,

      Thanks for letting us know about this, this has now been corrected.

      Thanks,
      Olivia

      Reply
  47. Comment by Geoff cross posted on

    Still can’t find anything on spoked wheels ie broken or loose spokes

    Reply
  48. Comment by Clifford moore posted on

    Sounds like you are doing a great job working out all the issues and are trying to make my work easier so well done

    Reply
  49. Comment by David Madge posted on

    What about the operation of light adversary affected by the operation of another light ? for example brake light flashing with an indicator

    Reply
  50. Comment by Munyaradzi Hoffice posted on

    Please include “covers and under-trays obscuring view of some components”in the advisory menu . It saves us typing time as most later cars have covers in the engine bay, along sills and the undercarriage.

    Reply
  51. Comment by S Calvert posted on

    A good improvement, but always room for more.....
    Brake hose ferrule condition should have never been removed, a welcome return for sure.
    However why when they were discussing reinstating the brake hose ferrule condition did they not also included an Advisory or indeed a Minor option for a Slightly Corroded brake hose ferrule ???
    This further reinforces the need to keep the ‘Manual Advisory’ as theres always going to be something that hasnt been included

    Reply
    • Replies to S Calvert>

      Comment by Simon (DVSA) posted on

      Thank you for your comment. System defined advisories have been associated with some new failures, of which slight corrosion to ferrule has been included. We have only listed the failures as advisories are not part of the manual.

      Reply
  52. Comment by Kev Egerton posted on

    With the tyre valves why can't you just say when they are perished due to age that they are 'Perished and dangerous'

    Reply
    • Replies to Kev Egerton>

      Comment by Simon (DVSA) posted on

      Hi Kev

      Failures for tyre valves, misaligned and damaged are distinctively different and therefore cannot be categorised as one as you suggest.

      Reply
  53. Comment by David Matthews posted on

    As regards security, if you need to log on without your card to order a new one for instance and the first kiss question etc comes up, the answer we type comes up in readable text!!! people were stood behind me and almost saw my security word, NOT GOOD IS IT!!

    Reply
    • Replies to David Matthews>

      Comment by Pete posted on

      Agreed with this, I have been waiting for a new card and those security answers should be hidden

      Reply
    • Replies to David Matthews>

      Comment by MJB posted on

      I would be interested to know how big a problem the security changes are trying to address. What are the instances of password fraud, DVSA?

      Reply
  54. Comment by graham hastings posted on

    emissions values should be date related, or printed on the inspection sheet to save arguments with customers.
    Also a provision to alter incorrect brake weights

    Reply
  55. Comment by Ron Entwistle posted on

    Change, Change and more Change. Why were these changes not introduced in May? Testers are going to get confused from what they learned yesterday, no longer applies today. It seems to me that the staff
    at HQ. are hoping to justify their own jobs. They will end up confusing
    testers. If the test needs to evolve, then more thought is required before
    implementing any more changes.

    Reply
    • Replies to Ron Entwistle>

      Comment by Reg Salway posted on

      I thought the changes made in May were to align us with Europe, so we all have the same Mot system! Well that's the excuse DVSA/Goverment made.
      Now these new changes come in, reinstating some of the very good and obvious fail items that were removed in May.
      Does that mean we no longer align with Europe?
      We should never have changed it in the first place.
      "If it aint broke don't fix it" leave it alone, or would that put some very highly paid pen pushers, who don't know one end of a track rod from the other out of a job? What a shame!

      Reply
  56. Comment by Steve Bohanna posted on

    All sounds good but I don’t see how pressing our security card for a code is time consuming !! I would have thought that for the sake of security at the time of logging in. 1 press is a small amount to ask to keep security at a maximum ?

    Reply
    • Replies to Steve Bohanna>

      Comment by richard posted on

      yeah I was a bit bemused by this, I cant believe anyone would think pressing the smart card & inputting the numbers is time consuming.

      Reply
      • Replies to richard>

        Comment by Derek Bayley posted on

        A small point but, as someone with arthritis in my hands having to click on a box to activate it before entering the result is an unnecessary extra click every time, most sites I use have the box already active with the cursor ready to enter
        It might seem much but when you test over a thousand vehicles a year multiplied by the miner of entries it begins to add up.

        Reply
  57. Comment by Colin Wellesley service station clacton on sea posted on

    Hi are you going to put back in as a fail lamp interacting with another lamp example indicators interacting with position lamp as it is no longer in the list of failures and we have been told to put it down as a pass and advise. Which in my opinion is a fail as it always has been thanks I look forward to your reply

    Reply
    • Replies to Colin Wellesley service station clacton on sea>

      Comment by Geoff B posted on

      I agree with Colin!
      I have had two vehicles in with this issue, one with the position lamp going out when the brake lamp illuminated, and one with a flashing position lamp when the indicators were operated. This is less common than it used to be (Mk3/4 Escorts and Audis from the 80s), but PWM lamps with the wrong bulbs and good old fashioned earthing issues are still out there.

      Reply

Leave a comment

We only ask for your email address so we know you're a real person