Since my last blog post, we‘ve been progressing with preparation for the changes to the MOT that will come into effect from 20 May 2018. We’ve also made improvements to data within the ‘Check the MOT history of a vehicle’ service and improved the way we do garage risk assessments.
Choosing vehicle defects
Over the past few months, we’ve been working hard to design how testers will need to pick the defects after 20 May. This needs to change from the current service because of the new defect categories – but we have tried to minimise the change.
To make sure this area works for testers, we’ve done a lot of research with them on the screens to make sure they are easy to use. You’ll just need to pick the defect description that matches the defect on the vehicle as some types of failures might have both ‘dangerous’ and ‘major’ defects.
We’re also building a prototype area for testers to try these new screens within the MOT testing Service. This means that testers will be able to try the new screens before they become ‘live’ on 20 May. We will let you know more when we make this available in April.
Improving the ‘search for a defect’
As you’ll have seen, the new MOT inspection manual is organised slightly differently and a lot of the wording has changed.
To make it easier to find defects, we’ve improved the ‘search’ function. This means you can find the defect you want to record if you’re not sure which section of the manual it’s in or the exact wording.
We’ve had lots of positive feedback about how easy this is to use, so I hope you’ll find this useful.
Improving advisories
Over the past few weeks, you’ve given us a lot of feedback on hand-typed ‘manual advisories’. Many of you told us you use free text, because there aren’t enough of the right pre-defined advisory defects available. So, we’ll be adding a number of new ones, related to MOT defects, to cover this.
These are based on the feedback you gave us and will be in place from 20 May. We’ll assess your feedback on these and can add any that we've missed. Once we’ve covered all of the needs for ‘free text’ advisories, we’ll consider removing that feature. This will improve the consistency of information we provide to motorists and avoid the need for testers to type as much as they do now.
We’ve had some helpful feedback on the proposal of 'observations', and will be looking at this more when the new roadworthiness directive changes are in place.
Training materials for the roadworthiness directive
The team has also been working on creating new training materials to cover the roadworthiness directive.
You’ll be able to find these on GOV.UK from the end of March. We know that different people like different types of training materials so there’ll be web content, video and presentations available. We’ll add to this as we get feedback from you.
Also, you’ll be able to use this material for next year’s annual training, which includes the directive changes. We’d encourage you to do this training as soon as the new training year begins on Sunday (1 April 2018), to avoid rushing at the end of the year. This will also help to make sure you fully understand the changes before 20 May 2018.
Further details of the syllabus will be available on GOV.UK on 1 April.
Garage equipment
Back in November, we told garages about the changes that will need to be made to smoke meter settings from 20 May. Since then, we’ve worked with the garage equipment manufacturers to make sure that they understand the changes that need to be made, so they can make them in time.
Some of you will have already found that not all equipment models will be able to be updated. So some of you will have to invest in new equipment. To try and make things clearer, the Garage Equipment Association has published a list that shows which types of equipment can and can’t be updated.
New data on ‘Check the MOT history of a vehicle’
Something else we’ve been working on this month, is adding heavy vehicle (HGV and PSV) data to the ‘Check the MOT history of a vehicle’ service – and that will be available publically in April. Many of you told us through feedback that you’d find this really useful, so we’ve added it in.
We’re now working on adding HGV trailer data to the service, and we will then move to extending the ‘Get MOT reminders’ service to include heavy vehicles. As always, we like to hear your feedback when we add new things into the service to make sure they’re working well for you.
Garage risk ratings
In previous blog posts, we’ve let you know we’ll be improving the way we rate garages in terms of the risk they present to test quality.
We’re looking at our new approach to risk rating being driven by 3 main areas – analysis of our data, a site review and outcomes of DVSA checks. At the moment, we’re trialling the different parts of this and expect to make the changes in the summer to make sure that we use our resource better.
We’ll use our data to identify unusual trends. We are piloting this now and we’re already finding, and dealing with, some garages doing poor or fraudulent testing.
Also, we’re also trying a new approach to a ‘site review’ to replace the current site assessment. The key changes we’re trialling will narrow the assessment down to the things that materially affect test quality. This will make it shorter and more focused than it has been in the past.
We’ll continue to test with different garages over the next few weeks, and will let you know how we get on and when our approach will change.
120 comments
Comment by john f posted on
I give up time to hang the gloves up i think!
Comment by Paul T posted on
I agree i fed up with all these damn changes along with the traing regime thats already a massive stress..Taking work home isnt what i signed up for! Its a disgrace the way we are being treated..How about a proper tutorial on the changes too! Lazy DVSA
Comment by Alf posted on
It’s going to be havoc !, Mark my words !, testers will be under so much pressure from their employers to get through tests they would normally manage on a daily basis , but with it all being new it’s going to be very challenging finding and basically getting your head round new procedures and testable items and removed testable items , that don’t apply anymore ,so expect a back log of vehicles out on roads without current mot’s as the testing sites won’t be as efficient as they were prior to this change as in turn around of tests , plus no doubt the mot testing site will crash or there will be so many critical updates it will be the same scenario as when computer testing first came in to force
Comment by Pete posted on
Yep your right Alf corroded ferrules aint there. Can't help but feel this is going to be a nightmare come May 20th
Comment by alan posted on
Trying to find excessively corroded brake hose ferrule on the new system are they no longer part of the test?
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Alan
The manual was published on 27 April 2018. The section on braking is here - https://training.mot-testing.service.gov.uk/documents/manuals/class3457/Section-1-Brakes.html
Comment by mark posted on
nothing about corroded ferrules
Comment by alan posted on
Thanks for the reply, not sure if you get the picture the ferrule is the connector on the end of the brake hose, I cant see any mention of it in the new manual, it is a regular failure at present when testing older cars.
Comment by craig posted on
spoke to swansea dvsa and told to manually advise , also had a brake fluid leak from a rear hub , only info for fail was wheel cyl leaking but if you cannot see it you cannot fail it again told to manually advise imo opinion any fluid leak should be a dangerous defect
Comment by Shaun posted on
Didn't really answer his question if still testable, I've just looked and can't find ferrules so I assume not!
Comment by Mark at Lucknow posted on
Hi on the 'new type mot certificate' have seen that the AE of the station has his full name on there!! shortly this can not be right, as it is the mot station which is issuing the certificate. I have called DSVA and I was told if I sent in a new VT01 form with the station as the AE this would replace my name.
I have contacted a few garages with the same problem we find this quite worrying that anyone can access the electoral roll and find out where you live, which is surly against data protection act!!
Comment by terry posted on
also the testing stations name is missing and our contact phone number.
Comment by Robert A.E posted on
We need to keep the manual advisory, an example is older vehicles presented for MOT testing with greased/undersealed brake pipes, you can see this but how can these be properly assessed? so you need to advise unable to fully assess due to grease/underseal
Comment by phil starkey posted on
how if manual advises are been taken from us do we carry out daytime only tests and record this as the case
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Phil
Manual advisories will still remain as they indicate a component will become defective soon.
Comment by Dave bs posted on
latest special notice is saying about training environment available from 20th of april, tried twice so today and link not working
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Dave
The online MOT tester training environment is now live at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/mot-changes-from-may-2018-guidance-for-mot-testers/identifying-and-recording-the-new-defects-on-the-mot-testing-service#use-the-training-environment. Take a look at the Special Notice for more details on this: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/mot-special-notice-05-18-training-environment-and-redesigned-test-documents
Comment by Dave bs posted on
thanks noticed on 25th it was working
Comment by Stewart Cumming posted on
Good Morning,
I am trying to reach the new MOT Manual training environment, which was due to go live this morning, 20/04/2018
I cannot connect with this web site, could you please give me an update ASAP.
Is this the correct web address? - https://training.mot-testing.service.gov.uk/
I have a training session with MOT CPD candidates next week and was hoping to set this cohort some self-study.
Best regards
Stewart Cumming - Motor Vehicle Engineering Lecturer
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Stewart
The online MOT tester training environment is now live at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/mot-changes-from-may-2018-guidance-for-mot-testers/identifying-and-recording-the-new-defects-on-the-mot-testing-service#use-the-training-environment. Take a look at the Special Notice for more details on this: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/mot-special-notice-05-18-training-environment-and-redesigned-test-documents
Comment by PAUL posted on
ALL WELL AND GOOD REVERSING LAMP ,HEADLAMP WASH WIPE TO SEE WHERE YOUR GOING TO CRASH AT NIGHT . WOULDNT A RAISE IN TREAD DEPTH LIMIT BE A BETTER SAFTEY ISSUE
Comment by Stephen posted on
I must agree with most of the comments regarding manual advise list. We as testers write down on our check lists faults either testable items or not. So will DVSA defend us if a customer complains about something that we noticed but couldn't put down as an advisory.
Also as for the new refresher course 2018/19 80% pass and a time limit, i can me and possibly a few other testers failing, why can't we stop start the refresher training exam so as not to interfere with our jobs.
I don't have thousands of pounds to retire on, i'm only 57, so please give us old boys a chance,
Comment by Harry posted on
Will an historic vehicle over 40 years old, still be exempt from an MOT if driven abroad or in any other european countries?
Comment by Shaun posted on
I have MANUALLY advised countless cars for:- tyre bald on inner edge worn very close to ply/cords.
Now some cars come in where they are literally 50 miles away from having the cords exposed, so with your new manual this car would go out without even an advisory, sorry minor notice.
Problem is you can't advise it on close to legal limit as rest of tread could be 4mm
Comment by castrolrob posted on
having started to dig thru the links on Fridays special notice I find that if we find a dangerous defect on a non test item we should"inform the presenter"does this mean that manual advises HAVE been removed?my garage for instance has office staff at the front with me testing 100 yrds away.as a result I rearely see a presenter and while I can inform the office bods of such a defect without anything in writing it WILL get missed on occasions or lost in translation.this also completely ignores the instances where the car is being sold and the punter has no interest in passing this on.no record=not spotted
Comment by phil starkey posted on
also when is a fluid leak a fluid leak when it drips on the floor under test or mildly damp around a seal this is far to unclear and open to so many comments of "well it was like that last year" also eml light on will fetch the same answer followed by "well what,s wrong with it " and then a further comment on the cost of a diagnostic after paying for an mot which alot of the general public think is a service
Comment by Dave Motterham posted on
I am totally bemused that we all spent training time covering issues already covered to be told we now have to learn a new manual only 2 weeks after. Some one at DVSA needs a kick up the bum !!!
Comment by Paul T posted on
Absolutely! A total shambles..I feel like jacking it in
Comment by Nigel posted on
With the the manual going live on May 20th2018 but you say things may change in the manual right up until that date the deadline for 2018/19 mot assessment should be extended until the end of may in 2019. That will give us a full 12months to complete the assessment as we do now
Comment by Paul posted on
Check MOT history 'outstanding manufacturer's safety recall found contact a Dealership to arrange for repairs' were we going to put that advise without the manual advisory box
Comment by Graham posted on
You shouldnt be advising that on the mot as it has nothing to do with mot. Instead a verball warning or something on the invoice to let them know. The reason there trying to get rid of manual advisorys is because to many testers advise ridiculous stuff that dosent need to be on there.
Comment by Tom AE posted on
I agree Graham
Comment by Tony S posted on
Stuff like your tyres are badly perished and cracked, not showing any cords, (Doesn't fail and there's no advisory to pick from)
And your baby's Child seat, although it is strapped in using the adult seat belt, it's not done properly and will swing around when you go round bends, (Doesn't fail and there's no advisory to pick from)
Just a thought
Comment by Yogi posted on
Please keep the manual advisory active , it's all about armer plateing your backside
Comment by steve posted on
could you please give us some clarification on end outline marker lamps please, especially for the rear of the vehicle . I am sure that there are many testers who have not come across these lights before . some pictures would be a great help
Comment by castrolrob posted on
I queried this when the draft manual was first released,apparently we have to measure em all to see if they exceed 2.1 metres,get yourself a big tape......
Comment by david b posted on
why is it websites like garagewire email me with news from dvsa about mot related items before we get official news from dvsa??
Comment by Dan posted on
Loosing manual advisory’s will be bad for road safety, not everything can be covered in the manual. Listen to us tester.
Comment by Tom AE posted on
But on the other hand the amount of silly advisories is stupidly high.
Comment by mark posted on
so much for doing 3 topics a year i can count i can count 8 now plus didnt we do corrosion last year and headlamps and drivers view the year before the whole thing is a joke run by people who havnt a clue what they are doing
Comment by Julian posted on
what a great idea some seminars would be a good thing also so we can ask questions about everything
Comment by Steve Reneaux posted on
Why have you combined class 5 vehicles with 4 & 7 in the new manual?
I know you started this process a few years ago, clearly confusing many testers. The new manual is an opportunity to rectify this.
There are so many components and methods of inspection that will never be seen by class 4/7 testers and yet the Annual Assessment includes questions on air driers, slack adjusters etc. There are consequences if a tester answers too many of these incorrectly.
Vehicles are separated into classes for very good reasons, I can't think how including class 5 can improve safety or efficiency, indeed, it could do the opposite. If a class 5 vehicle is presented for test and can be tested, we should just use the class 5 manual...
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Steve
Class 5 (and Class 3) have been in the manual for some time. The decision was taken after due consultation with the industry. We think that you will find that when using the MOT Testing Service after 20 May, it will be much more intuitive and confusion should be reduced.
Comment by kerry norris posted on
totally agree all classes should have their own manual
Comment by Steve Reneaux posted on
How is passing a missing brake reservoir cap an improvement upon vehicle safety? Contaminated brake fluid is now a failure.
We all know that brake fluid is hygroscopic, meaning that fluid in an uncapped reservoir is becoming contaminated just by exposure let alone with water pouring into it!
Please explain DVSA's thinking behind this.
Thank you.
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Steve
A missing brake fluid reservoir cap is a ‘minor’ defect in the Roadworthiness Directive and this how it was transferred into the new manual. However, after further consideration, this was changed to a ‘major’ defect. Unfortunately, this is not reflected in the current, draft online version. We are amending the manual to reflect this.
Comment by mark posted on
Thought we had to follow the roadworthiness directive or we would be fined by the eu
Comment by mark posted on
70% pass rate now you are putting more pressure on why dont you just make it 100% so there wont be any testers left talk about moving goalposts
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Mark
The pass mark is gradually rising to 80% - this mirrors the pass mark for the qualification. The motoring public have a right to expect that testers can demonstrate continuing competence.
Comment by mark posted on
we had a refresher course every 5 years which worked fine ive been testing over 33 years dont talk down to me about been competent
Comment by mark posted on
Just because you can answer multi choice questions quickly on a computer does not mean you can and are testing vehicles correctly. Its the physical aspect of the job that does that, not sitting in an office making up things for other people to sort out
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Mark
Sorry you feel that's the case. Just to assure you, I was just trying to answer your question.
Comment by Stephen posted on
I too have been testing for over 35 years, these newchanges and a new pass rate, what a joke, I have always hated exams/tests feel i'm under pressure all the time. I'd much prefer the classroom approach.
Comment by Harry posted on
Hi Julia [DVSA]
Do you not think a qualified competent tester. Should also be entitled to a fair gradual wage increase, inline with inflation.
More work, should include better rewards.
How is that possible. With no increase in the MOT fee in over eight years?
Comment by kerry norris posted on
i still think that the price of mots should be across the board ONE price for all no price wars for work
Comment by Dave bs posted on
please leave option for manual advisorys
Comment by david b posted on
IF you choose to remove the manual advisory box for us testers then may i suggest then for every failure item you also allow an advisory box next to it?? this then will help us testers cover our behinds and also inform the vehicle owner for future reference.
it is no good asking us to verbally advise customers as you get into the " no you didnt tell me that oh yes i did" situation.
i hope we get to keep the manual advisory option as it is a very useful tool for us testers.
Comment by mark posted on
what do you do if you have not got office on your computer to watch the presentation for changes
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Mark
You don't need to have Microsoft Office to view the presentation at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/mot-changes-from-may-2018-guidance-for-mot-testers.
You have 2 options. You can:
- download the free Microsoft PowerPoint Viewer from https://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/download/details.aspx?id=13
- download an open source alternative for free, such as https://www.openoffice.org/
Comment by Graham posted on
You have made brake pad sensor light on a major which is defined as : 'It may affect the vehicle’s safety, put other road users at risk or have an impact on the environment.' I disagree, pads less than 1.5mm may affect safety. We should keep to failing pads less than 1.5mm / grinding and just advise if light on. In my opinion pad warning light on falls into minor definition : 'No significant effect on the safety of the vehicle or impact on the environment.'
Comment by mark posted on
would it not be a good idea to suspend the assessment this year so we could all get up to speed with all these changes this year and give us long term testers a bit of a fighting chance
Comment by Joseph Mitchell posted on
Is it mandatory to do the 18/19 assessment and CPD before May 20th?
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Joseph
The 2018 to 2019 annual assessment doesn't have to be completed before 20 May. However, because one of the subjects is all about the new manual, it seems a good idea that testers should take advantage of any opportunity to be better acquainted with the changes. If you haven't competed your annual assessment for 2017 to 2018, you will need to complete annual training and assessment for 2018 to 2019 along with a demonstration test before you can restart testing.
Comment by Nigel posted on
Would it not be a good idea to have some regional seminars prior to may 20th to bring us up to date with all the changes.
Comment by david b posted on
super idea nigel i hope DSVA are listening
Comment by mark posted on
just read in the paper if a customer brings test early and it fails they are no longer legal to drive the vehicle is this true and if it is i hope you are going to exlpian to them that they could be fined and not letting us do your dirty work again
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Mark
The responsibility for driving (or not) a vehicle sits with the motorist. As now, if a tester has recorded a dangerous defect we would expect the customer to be provided with advice on the nature and severity of the defect. To support that the failure document is now much starker in warning the motorist to not use the vehicle with dangerous defects – but we do recognise that some irresponsible motorists may still chose to ignore that advice.
Comment by Barry posted on
My observation is the expectation a customer will need have of driving there car away when a dangerous fault is recorded. What responsibility will the tester or facility head have.
This is likely to become an area of conflict.
For my part setting up the expectation that should a dangerous fault be recorded the customer may need to arrange alternative mode of collection, trailer etc.
I will be interested to hear an official view
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Barry
The responsibility for driving a vehicle (or not) sits with the motorist. As now, if a tester has recorded a dangerous defect we would expect the customer to be provided with advice on the nature and severity of the defect. Also, the failure document is now much starker in warning the motorist to not use the vehicle with dangerous defects but we do recognise that some irresponsible motorists may still chose to ignore that advice.
Comment by phil starkey posted on
with the changes that are coming in i see we are moving away from a minimum standard of vehicle safety as drilled in to any tester lucky enough to have been on a refresher course. reversing lights and headlight washers are hardly minimum standard.
Comment by Nigel posted on
Just been reading the updated version of mot manual from may 20th and found section 4 reverse lamps a bit misleading.From 1st sept 209 It says all reversing lamps must work and show a white light to rear. Defect :A reversing lamp inoperative = minor? Yet further down it says Reversing lamps emitted colour, position or intensity not in accordance with the requirements =major. And reversing lamp switch not operating in accordance with the requirements = major defect. How can we tell the difference if the reverse lights are not working because of a bulb failure for example which you state is a minor fault or if the reverse light switch is not working which is a major fault.
Comment by Keith posted on
It would be a good idea to make the Expiry date a lot bigger as it must be between 30/40% of a days Mot’s which have run out by the time they are tested and I have done 2 in the last few weeks which where 8 months out of date and had been driven all that time and most people only find out they have not got a currant Mot when they want to tax the car. I tried out the text reminder service which you have which works well with 3 texts and this needs pushing out to people.
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Keith
You can view the new MOT certificate design at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/mot-test-pass-certificate-samples
The 'Get MOT reminders' text and email service has proved very popular with thousands of people signing up to it every day. We are continuing to publicise the service and remind people on our social media channels. You can follow us on Twitter - @DVSAgovuk
Comment by Bert posted on
looking at the preview of the new certificate, under minor defect registration plate lamp throwing direct white light to the rear, is it not a fail white light to the rear?
Comment by Tony S posted on
Brought this up in the previous post, apparently the number plate lamp isn't bright enough to dazzle the driver behind, so it doesn't matter!!
Comment by Graham posted on
You have a whole year to get ready and plan to book your car in for next MOT. If people cant manage that then it is there own fault.
Comment by Mark posted on
Just had a quick look about all the new rules I am always sinical on here but I do suppose it will work as long as we are not put under too much pressure.My only gripe is when we are told these directives where made in 2014/15 and because we are still in the eu we could get fined if we don't implement them what happens after we leave do we have to retrain again
Comment by Nigel posted on
Its quite clear from previous comments by mot testers that the vast majority want to keep manual advisories but you seem to be ignoring that by saying you are considering removing this option from the system when you have addded the extra list of advisories to save us from entering manual advisories. When will you understand that you are not helping us by removing the manual advisories you are hindering us.
Comment by Paul posted on
I see that your intent on getting rid of manual advisories despite most testers saying that they are very useful. In my opinion all that will happen is testers won't bother reporting things which cannot be good for road safety, where i work we are busy enough without wasting loads of time scouring through menus on your system when we could just type it in manually, anyone who remembers the list you had on the old system will know it was useless i for one never used to use it i just typed in exactly what i wanted to report so I'm under no illusions this new one wont be useless as well. You just don't listen do you and as for it cutting down on testers having to do a lot of typing that's just nonsense.
Comment by Tony S posted on
Fully agree with that, it's a lot easier to type some of them.
Then the next year you can copy from the MOT history and paste it if needed.
Comment by Julie posted on
We have been using an app called vehicle smart to check MOT on Campervans. We have seen vehicles fail and then a few days later pass with no advisory faults. These fails are major and, couldn't be fixed overnight. The advisory faults featured words 'excessive corrosion' cuts in tyres and warnings of low tread, these faults were listed over and again for as many as four years. This is something that needs looking at. Make it compulsory to repair advisory faults before the next MOT.
Comment by Messmaker posted on
All well and good investing in new equipment but when are we going to see a fee increase to cover said new equipment.
Comment by Dave s posted on
Noticed in all the press releases , they are making a big issue out it is now a fail (DANGEROUS) for a brake disc to be MISSING , firstly never ever came across this , secondly if i had i would have refused to test, or crashed the car bringing it the workshop or marked it DANGEROUS
Comment by Benjamin Absin posted on
How about check MOT history for Northern Ireland?
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Benjamin
We don’t deal with MOT testing for Northern Ireland, but we're working with our counterparts there to see if, and when, it may be possible to add the NI data to the service. It's still a work in progress, but we'll update you on this blog as we progress.
Comment by Chris Rayner posted on
Manual advisory should stay as the tester can log defects seen on test not relating to mot but could cause issues further in vehicles life which could affect forth coming mots and ie vehicle safety thanks
Comment by John Revill ( 1 ALQ11) posted on
Concern over removing manual advisory facility.
Maybe with class 4 cars it may be possible, but with so many variations of vehicles and modifications
i.e. Ambulances, Motorhomes, class 4&7 goods vehicles ( tail lifts & attachments) etc.. this facility is a life line to give positive feed back to the presenter. ( As well as covering the backs of the MOT tester)
Please leave the manual advisory facility in place.. its a life line!
A builder's vehicle will present a whole load ( literally) of issues not found in the likes of a 3 year old class 4 car as would a specially adapted people carrier with disabled attachments/ loading /securing devices..
I'm very willing to try to explain better with more examples. If you wish to get in touch, I'm pleased to try to explain.
Hopefully some one from DVSA will be at the RMI event in Nottingham April 24th.
Thanks, JR
Comment by John Butler posted on
Looks like you guys are looking into loads of new ideas its great that you are using the people on the the frontline and listening to there feed back .
Comment by Michael Bowtell posted on
brake performance not tested, can you add a PRS for this pease
Comment by Graham posted on
In what circumstance would you need to prs brakes not tested, you either test them or you dont. If you are doing a prs on braking system, for example quick brake pipe, you would prs brake pipe, then test brakes at end of test.
Comment by Ryan posted on
Taking out the manual advisory box will be a mistake. Testers use it to cover there own backs because i guarantee DVSA will not stand behind its tester should complaints start happening i.e Brake pipe burst a week after an MOT but not been picked up on because of plastic trims etc..
Comment by Martin posted on
Sorry but you will never be able to legitimately say there is no need for manual advisories , you have already had a near 100% response telling you as much on a previous blog.
If you fully intend to do away with manual advisories just tell us you are instead of pretending what we say counts for anything.
Comment by lloyd chalke posted on
ok rusty only 70 to scroll through then great a lot better ha ha
Comment by John Forsyth posted on
Hopefully all of the MOT centres will work to the same standard. This might mean that all of the old smoking diesels will be off the road and those of us with Euro 6 diesels are vilified. I also hope that polluting vans, lorries and buses are forced of the road.
Comment by David Aitken posted on
Do not get rid of the free text advisorys, there will always be something that you haven't come across before!
Comment by Gary posted on
All sounds ok but I think doing away with the manual advisory is a mistake. Suppose we’ll have to wait and see how it goes
Comment by Mark posted on
Can't wait for all these changes it will be like starting all over again after over 33 years just what I needed at my age thanks Mr Barlow
Comment by Jonathan Moore posted on
Great news to hear we are getting a training package in April, i had printed out the draft manual and gone through it but some 'hands on' material will be a big help!! Look forward to having a go with it.
Comment by Tony posted on
There is a need for more class 1 and 2 defect related reasons for refusal and advisory. As it is more car orientated.
Comment by Andy posted on
Sounds promising, let's just hope that it is a marked improvement to the system we currently have to use.
Comment by Adrian at Coastal. posted on
I have tried the new look up a defect function and as yet have been able to get it to work!.