First of all, I’d like to thank all MOT testers and garages for taking on some big challenges last year. The changes to the MOT test in May and the updated MOT testing manual were the biggest.
We’ve got a lot planned for this year, so here’s an extra long edition of 'MOT services we’re working on' telling you what we’ll be getting up to.
Risk ratings
As you’ll be aware, we recently changed how risk rating works. Chris Price explained this in some detail in his recent blog post. We made some substantial changes, including more focus on the work testers do.
There’s been a lot of good feedback and that’s really welcome. Changes like this take time to bed in and we’ll continue to develop risk ratings as time goes on.
Although the majority of garages are very professional, looking at the risk ratings has helped us target those that aren’t doing things properly. If, as a tester, you’re concerned you’re in the amber or red band, take a look at what might be putting you in this category. This can include things like time taken to carry out tests and the types of vehicles you’re testing.
Ratings can and do change. We recognise that this is a particular concern for temporary testers who need to provide information to employers. It would be a good thing if you could show potential employers what you’ve been doing to reduce risks, like appropriate training.
I’m sure you’ll all agree that making it easier for us to spot garages that aren’t doing things properly is a good thing. We'll continue to monitor the risk rating model and will adapt it following your comments on the blog.
Annual assessment – don’t leave it too late
One of the things we now look at as part of site reviews is a garage’s approach to staff training. This is one of the things that forms part of the overall risk score for a garage - especially their approach to organising testers’ annual training and assessment.
Experience from previous years has shown it’s sensible to do your training and assessment in plenty of time. This will leave you time to get any extra training done and to practice what you’ve learned.
You’ll then also have enough time to make sure you record the details of your training and assessment correctly. At your next site review, you’ll be able to show that you have an organised approach to carrying this out.
Progress so far on completing the MOT training and annual assessment is still low. Don’t leave it to the last minute!
Registering vehicles correctly
In previous blog posts we’ve mentioned that we’re looking to try and reduce the number of vehicles registered incorrectly during MOT. This means the result will be registered against the wrong vehicle, which is a problem.
While it might seem like a small thing, it defeats the object of all the hard work we do when results are entered for the wrong vehicle! It also means we spend a lot of time sorting it out, rather than doing useful things to improve the service.
Changing vehicle registration screens
In the next few months, we’ll be making some changes to the vehicle registration screens so the vehicle make, model and colour will be even clearer to help testers get the right match. We’re also getting nearer to allowing plug-in to the vehicle diagnostic port. This will mean we’ll be able to get the vehicle VIN directly.
In the meantime, it would be great if you could all be extra vigilant when registering vehicles for test. Our research has also shown you need to take the vehicle registration mark and vehicle identification number from the vehicle. You should not get them from a job card or online look-up service.
This will make sure the MOT result is recorded against the right vehicle. Everyone makes mistakes but recording the information in this way will avoid the vast majority of these problems.
Emissions and MIL
The introduction of the MIL (malfunction indicator lamp) to the MOT test has caused confusion for some MOT testers. In several recent blog posts, we've been asked if it's reasonable to fail a vehicle for the MIL even though the tailpipe emission test was okay.
The answer is yes, it’s perfectly reasonable to fail a vehicle for having a lit MIL even if it passes the tailpipe emissions test. Here's why.
Emissions are controlled/measured by various sensors in the engine management system. If the system detects a fault or abnormal reading, then the engine MIL will illuminate. While the vehicle may pass the tailpipe test with the MIL on, emissions are not likely to be within limits during real world driving.
Coming soon
We’ll soon be launching a new, improved messaging page into the MOT testing service. This will make it easier for testers to navigate and find the messages they need to read.
We’ll also be introducing a notifications system to tell testers about service outages and remind them about the annual assessment deadline.
We’ve been working with developers over the past few months to design and develop these features using feedback gathered from MOT testers at garage visits.
In the meantime, here’s a preview of how the new message screen is likely to look.
We’ll be in contact with testers soon to let them know when they should expect to see these new features.
164 comments
Comment by Tony S posted on
Hi DVSA
Here's one for you.
Reason for rejection; VIN missing or cannot be found, or VIN incomplete, illegible...
Reason for refusal to test; The vehicle has neither a registration mark nor VIN/chassis number...
It seems clear that if there is no chassis number, I / we can test the vehicle and fail it.
The problem is I can't seem to Log it on for test, unless I'm missing some thing.
Look forward to hearing from you
Thanks
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Tony
You need to have either a registration or VIN mumber to create a record.
If you don't have either, there’s a tick box next to reg or VIN that says ‘I cant provide a VIN’.
Hope this helps.
Comment by Tony S posted on
Hi Julia
Can't seem to find any tick boxes next to Vin or Reg, the only thing that is there is a drop down that gives the following information
"Can't provide the registration mark or VIN?
If a vehicle has a registration mark and VIN, you must enter both to find it.
However, you can look up vehicles that have just a VIN, or just a registration mark.
VIN is missing
Search by entering the registration mark. You will see results where the vehicle has no VIN recorded.
Registration mark is missing
Search by entering the VIN. You will see results where the vehicle has no registration mark recorded."
If you input just the Reg or Vin and search it comes up as a Mismatch.
Doesn't appear to be a create a new vehicle record option that I can see.
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Tony
On the page titled 'What are the vehicles's registration mark and VIN?', you will see 2 long boxes asking for registration mark and VIN respectively. Under each there is a tick box if you can't provide the information. Tick the relevant one and follow the instructions.
Comment by castrolrob posted on
when you log it in it doesn't recognise it cos of no vin/reg,at that point scroll down the page,at the bottom it says create new record and you go from there,forget the box that says cant provide,its worthless unless someone has already tested it in the same condition(unlikely at best)cos if they aint itll continually come back as not recognised as it doesn't match any prior records.
Comment by adam posted on
hi can we add information how to test and procedure of headlamp washer as some cars have different sequence to operate than others can they be added to vsi when you log a car on so it tells you correct operation way,thier been few cars that fail but as tester you wont know how every car will operate
Comment by Phil posted on
What is the 'Connected site functionality' option that has appeared on our AE screens? & What does it do?
Comment by daz posted on
DVSA is good at telling us that the risk score will root out all the bad testers. If this is true then provide us some data to prove this.How many testers are there in the UK. How many test do they do in a year. How many testers where prosecuted in the UK last year for not doing things right,My guess is its not many , the rating score is then not fit for purpose like the VIC checks that VOSA carried out they did so many thousands of checks with not many prosecutions so they scrapped them cause they were not fit for purpose.
Comment by Stephen Ball posted on
I know it's been asked before. But why heck can't we have a search box in the MOT manual. Trying to find information is hard work...
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Stephen
You're right in thinking this has been asked before. We’re looking into having a search box in the MOT manual in the future but don't have a date currently for this.
Comment by D. posted on
If you go into the section you want and hit CNTRL + F, then search your word. It wont work from the main screen, but better than nothing.
Comment by Stephen Ball posted on
How can we look at our old messages on the VTS device, Just want to see to make sure of odering date..I ordered a new smart card I think 18th Jan and still waiting, This is the 3rd card in 2 months, they take more than 5 days to arrive,
Comment by bert posted on
there was an email sent out saying that DVSA had run out of smart cards, they will be sent as soon as new stock arrives
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi
We sent an email alert on 16 January explaining that we were low on cards so replacement ones won't be going out until further notice.
You can still log on to the MOT testing service by answering your security questions until your new card arrives.
New users who have never had a card before will receive one and will be able to activate it.
Comment by Keith posted on
Annual Assessments
I honestly think this example of an annual assessment question is a complete joke.
An actual assessment completed just a day or so back...
Motorcycle Exam
Question. The exhaust system on a motorcycle is likely to become detached.
Candidate looked up 6.1.2 - Exhaust system with only one available RfR
Exhaust system has a major leak or is insecure ' Major.
This was marked as wrong at the end of the exam.
Candidate contacted the exam board to question the result.
This was the email reply.....
Thank you for your email.
The main purpose of this question is to raise MOT tester’s awareness to some of the unique features of the new manual. The exhaust system, and specifically the security of it, actually sits across two sections of the new MOT Inspection manual. The statement quoted below is in section 6.1.2 of the manual under the heading of ‘Exhaust system’. However, the question actually refers to the criteria within section 8.1.1,which is ‘Noise suppression system’. The criteria in this section states:
b. Any part of the noise suppression system:
i. insecure – Major
ii. likely to become detached – Dangerous."
Theres no logic to this, two seperate Manual sections , with different defect categories for one component. How hard does it need to be ?
Comment by Martin posted on
I was marked as being incorrect on this question.
Clearly the people who set the question and those that approved it do not have a sufficient grasp of the English language to enable them to do the job correctly.
This is not a "unique feature" it is a mistake, one of many that are in both the assessment questions and manual.
Comment by Tony S posted on
Hi
Is there a downloadable version on the manual to store on the computer for when we have a n internet problem?
Can't seem to find one, other than the Draft.
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Tony
We don't provide a downloadable version of the manual to prevent users working with out of date material. Your guide says you should have a backup if this happens such as a mobile internet connection.
Comment by Tony S posted on
Hi Julia
So if the whole country's internet was down, ie; "a widespread broadband communication outage", I'm surmising no mobile connection either, no one would be able to carry out a MOT because we would have no Manual to work to.
If we could download the Manual, then we could download the updated one each time it is updated.
A bit like they old days when we had to put the new pages into the Manual Folder!
I believe that the Guide is downloadable and this is updated from time to time!
Comment by Pete S posted on
No point having a downloadable version, they change it so often it would be out of date the first time you want to use it.
Comment by Paul posted on
Has ( retaining pin) and ( locking device ). Been deleted now ,cannot seem to find anything
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Paul
It is available for some items. However the presence and effectiveness of some locking devices, such as locking fluid or ‘nyloc’ nuts, can't be easily determined. If you aren't certain that a locking device is missing or ineffective, you should give the benefit of the doubt.
Comment by Steve posted on
Headlight levelling systems - the wording in the manual does not specify what type of headlights these
Regulations apply to e.g. halogen -- led etc and the method of testing mentions operating the manual control to check headlights move up and down - on self levelling systems this control is not fitted.
Please could you clarify this point.
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Steve
It applies to all headlamp adjusting systems if fitted, so that’s why it’s not specified.
The manual states you need to 'Make sure any manual headlamp levelling devices (driver controls) work by:
• switching on the dipped beam headlamps
• operating the manual levelling device
• checking that the headlamp beams move up and down
• returning the levelling device control to its original position
Vehicles with high intensity discharge (HID) or LED dipped beam headlamps may be fitted with a suspension or headlamp self-levelling system. If these systems have been fitted, they must work.
Sometimes it isn't easy to determine if the self-levelling systems work. In such cases you should give the benefit of the doubt.
Comment by Steve posted on
Thank you for your reply. Could you please verify that self levelling headlamps & the height adjustment controls are one and the same please. My manager spoke personally to a DVSA officer who stated that the height adjustment is not one and the same as the self levelling system.
Kind regards, Steve
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Steve
They are not one and the same thing but they both do the same thing. Self levelling headlamps are exactly as described – headlamps that level themselves depending on the ride height or position of the vehicle (automatically). Headlamp adjustment controls are the manual controls for you to adjust the headlamp aim manually depending on the vehicle ride height/position.
Comment by richard posted on
Any reason as to why a tyre near the wear limit is only classed an advisory , were as say , a ball joint gaiter that hasn't failed is classed as severe = minor ?
Also any news on the trailer socket tester , as I know there is a problem at the moment with the test failure rate. The socket tester seems to have problems with various vehicles.I had a Volkswagen Passat in yesterday , I failed it as everything on the tester was flashing (led rear lamps), trailer socket tested using a lighting board & checked out ok.
Comment by Pete posted on
the SN covering this which allowed P&A was removed in May, so since then I have been failing the one that are not passing with the socket tester. Having tested the tester to make sure it's working correctly.
Comment by Stephen Ball posted on
I asked the a similar question last year. still no reply from DVSA,,
Even today I advised play in a lower ball joint, I didn't think it severe enough to fail. The advisory system needs to be looked at properly .
Comment by Graham posted on
Your towbar testers are led. Some tow bar systems see the lower resistance of the led bulbs and pulse the voltage as it thinks the bulb has blown due to low resistance. Aslong as all of the bulbs on your tester light up (wether pulsing or not) i would pass. Remember if in doubt pass and advise. It is a problem with the testers not the towbar.
Comment by 2002 posted on
It is a shame there is not some way of showing where the latest answers and replays are other than having to scroll down all the post each day.
Comment by richard posted on
I think we could do with a FAQ section, certain things keep getting asked , but no reply to the question.
Comment by Tony . Exeter. posted on
DVSA.
What happened to "you'll only have to use your security card pin once a day when logging in" (October 2018 blog)…….Still waiting.
Comment by Harry posted on
After watching, undercover criminal on channel 5 last night [11.05 pm 14/01/19]. With the two MOT testers handing out dodgy MOT's. I can not see how the new risk ratings. Is going to help, to put a stop, to this criminal practice.
What I did notice is that both of these "so called testers" were dishonest for, what seamed like very little reward and I could not help thinking. If the cut price MOT fee fiasco, was sorted and testing stations could charge a fair price for testing. Then maybe, just maybe it would put a stop, or at least cut down this practice.
I do hope the DVSA, have dealt with the two involved? As they put the whole MOT testing scheme to shame.
I guess the reporters in the program have more resources, but it did not take them long, to find someone willing to hand out dodgy MOT's.
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Harry
This programme was originally aired in 2016 so the cases shown are not new.
We have a team that investigates allegations of MOT fraud. Anyone who suspects fraud at MOT garages can contact us confidentially on 0800 030 4103 and we will investigate their complaint.
Risk ratings is one of the methods we use to identify someone may be testing incorrectly – deliberately or otherwise. But it isn’t the only tool – we do make routine checks, we do collect intelligence and we do follow up complaints from the public about cars that should meet the standards.
Comment by pc posted on
an engine mil on is a fail. tailpipe emissions in excess of requirements is a fail. simple.
scanning for fault codes currently not part of the test.simple.
some commentators are misunderstanding or ignoring the test procedure here.
pc
Comment by 2002 posted on
We had a petrol cat car in to fix and it had failed on the NOX sensor not working and emissions not tested and the EMT mil was not on and a few other strange mot fail things which passed the emissions test with flying colours with out any thing being done.
Comment by pc posted on
how can a nox sensor be a fail when we don't measure nox emissions.
if the co and lambda are ok and the mil is not lit it must have failed for another reason.
Comment by Craig Wilson posted on
Think we all understand mil light on is a fail , but what some testers are saying is when they check the problem it's not emissions related
Comment by pc posted on
it doesn't matter why the light is on at the time of testing. it simply indicates a fault and is a fail.
Comment by brian posted on
had a Mercedes in for a mot test the other day , mil light on so it failed , vehicle presenter had it fixed ,it turned out to be a dodgy water level sensor, enough said.
Comment by jooles posted on
on your statement about the new risk rating you have said there has been a lot of positive feedback ,,could you please tell us from whom ,as i have not seen one comment posted that is positive ,,or better still re post the positive comments ,,some how i dont think that will happen,,,
Comment by jooles posted on
all i am hearing from dvsa is that when are ratings change look at how we are testing ,is this a joke or have they got there heads buried so deep in the sand
they cannot see we are not happy with this rag rating ,so then they tell us to look at this look at that to see why are ratings have changed the only real reason it will change is what comes through the door, and do we have control over that ,i dont think so,,all this is doing is to demoralise testers to a point were a lot will say enough is enough and walk away from testing ,,,,
Comment by brian posted on
it seems that vosa are running the mot scheme like a business with set targets for pass/fail rates this is silly as you test as presented as per manual
Comment by Tim posted on
HI I have recently failed a hymer camper van for rear outline markers not fitted it was over the date and over the size . I explained this to owner she was not happy . She took it to some other garage they passed it ! with out question . She did come to see me at my garage with a tapped phone call from dvsa the lady told her the same as I did about date and size great .But then the owner had her say there van has never had them fitted. And new vans ether she had a picture on new van . Then it can from dvsa it can be passed with conformity cert from makers . This info she thinks I could pass advise … I don't think so
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
End-outline marker lamps are required on vehicles exceeding 2.1m in width (not including mirrors).
This requirement applies in type approval legislation, Individual Vehicle Approval (IVA) requirements and for any vehicle that manages to get registered without either of these approval routes. It is still required under the Road vehicles (Lighting) Regulations 1989.
We have heard of a number of motorhome conversions where end outline markers have not been fitted or have not been wired up. This doesn’t make it legal so this should be attended to.
Comment by Ed posted on
Is it ok to have a test station for only testing your own sales cars and not take any public cars just refuse because you can say your testers are bissy with your own sales cars ?
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Ed
Test stations cannot only test their own vehicles. They must offer an appointment to test any vehicle of a class within their authorisation at the earliest practicable date and time. The only thing they can consider is their existing MOT workload and customer requirements.
I hope that answers your query.
Comment by Eddie posted on
So a company cannot stone wall the customer should they want an mot like a company I used to work for that do no public test unless they have bought the car from them but only then will they test the car if it doesn’t have there minimum 6 months test remaining they don’t even test the car the following year for the customer that bought the car ??
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Eddie
If they can reasonably perform an MOT they should do the work depending on existing MOT workload and customer requirements. You can report a garage if you feel they are not acting correctly on 0300 123 9000 and an area team will investigate.
Disciplinary information is in the guide under section D and Appendix 8.4.
Comment by castrolrob posted on
what generally happens is that if its an old smoker or(lets say)an old mgb for instance they'll be fully booked and will continue to be every time the punter concerned rings em,this is based on the comments of said punters querying how come we don't seem to be booked as far ahead as everyone else (over a period of decades from summa the local suspects).out there in the real world most places don't wanna get involved with junk like that which takes twice as long and is rarely an earner even if their testers are up to testing an old motor.catching folks doing stuff like that is impossible from the opposite side of a modem with the result that we(and anyone else following the rules)tend to get the rough end of the pineapple while the above mentioned folks will NEVER be caught under the current system.your comment about them having to do so and insisting they cant only applies if there were any realistic way of catching them(and that involves going there with cars+staff to do so in the first place)and is at best optimistic.this has been a problem for years and is nothing new,it merely got easier for the folks concerned when they realised they could do so with relative impunity.a phone site assessment every few years will do little to scare them......
Comment by Derek posted on
Since 20 May 2018, there are stricter limits for emissions from diesel cars summarised here.
You must test vehicles to the manufacturer’s plate value (when present),
You must also give a major fault if you:
can see the smoke of any colour coming from the exhaust
find evidence that the DPF has been tampered with.
It now requires the use of the manufacturer’s plate value (when present) The manufacturer's plate means either the VIN plate or a separate plate or sticker, which is likely to be within the engine compartment. The plate or sticker may be marked 24 R followed by a number to indicate the smoke limit. It's usually displayed in a box and often positioned in the bottom right corner of the VIN plate.
The above is information I have been instructed to use when testing vehicles and its all excellent information.
My experience since May 2018 is that this labelling is always fitted by the manufacturer and is only not present if it has been removed post-manufacture or on left-hand drive vehicles.
I have seen vehicles that have been cheating the emissions standards by various unscrupulous and unsafe methods for many years, and you have reported in the past how testing centres have received sanctions for assisting with this. I am now seeing vehicles that are trying to further cheat emission standards by the removal or damage or defacing of the emissions portion of the manufacturer's plate in an attempt to force the use of the higher pre-May 2018 standards which they are not entitled to use.
As the labelling forms part of the original manufacturing of the vehicle I do feel by now we should be in a position to insist that vehicles are tested to the maximum manufacturer figures. This information is available, and to have a default that in many instances is many times higher than the manufactures maximum is surprising and obviously allows the necessary motivation to remove the manufactures plate in the hope of the tester reverting to the higher DVSA levels.
My understanding from what I have read is as follows:-
If a vehicle is operated with its exhaust emission exceeding the manufactures specifications (if this is lower than the DVSA default), then the vehicle is not operating in a roadworthy or legal condition.
Comment by castrolrob posted on
unfortunately its not confined to owners trying to cheat the test,i have had many vehicles over the years with all sorts of stickers missing including the vin plate.the majority of these are generally due to accident repairs particularly when the bonnet/landing panel and/or b pillars are involved and in many cases the current owner is completely oblivious to the fact its been repaired at all let alone that theres anything missing.they aint all fraudsters....
Comment by Stephen Ball posted on
When we do the MOT refresher quiz as you call it, why can't we take a break every 15 to mins, my eyes are sensitive to computer lighting.
Comment by Alan posted on
Had a car in for test (I think it was a mercedes). There was no data for when the headlamp washers should work. It wasn't until I failed it and then later looked it up on internet that they should work on every 12 presses of the windscreen washers. It would have been nice to be told in the vehicle specific data how and when they are supposed to work.
Comment by Rui Neves posted on
Can anything be done regarding the diesel emissions loophole
where a vehicle is presented for a re-test after failing the original test due not meeting the manufacture's plate limit.
Problem is that the manufacture's plate has now been removed or scratched out , so the limit is now increased to the default values and we have no control over this .
Comment by pc posted on
Rui you could insist on having the original emissions failure to hand which will have the plate value on it when doing the retest.
Comment by Martin posted on
When you retract the test as presented statement perhaps your advice on emissions retests will carry some weight.
The advice needs to be in a special notice.
Comment by JAMES RAWLINGS posted on
I have tested diagnostic fault in management and they have often been in other systems ie Auto gear box .
this means I have to scan car and then do I fail it ????
Comment by Dave posted on
If the MIL is on during the test. Your meant to FAIL the vehicle. You can’t scan it to see why it’s ON and decide if the vehicle should fail or not.
Comment by Scott posted on
I think with the whole RAG system is to not worry or over complicate it. We had our site visit just before Christmas and ended up in the green. I have looked at this morning and we are now in the red. The reason being is just recently we have had an influx of poorly maintained vehicles which has put our fail rate way above the national average. This will however turn back to green eventually when the quality of vehicles average out.
Comment by BR posted on
Why will VEs not put their foot to the floor on diesel emission tests ? Are they not allowed to do so ? If one goes bang does it come out of their pocket same as it would come out of mine ? The rules say I must put my foot to the floor . Surely the person that set that rule is responsible for the cost of any damage caused by said rule . This does not just apply to DERV . There are a fair few petrol engined vehicles that boil up and go bang too under emissions testing conditions .
Comment by Mot nt posted on
Is a 200 point cessation temporary or indefinate thanks
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi there
All cases are reviewed and decisions made on an individual basis. There's more information in Section I and Appendix 8 of the MOT testing guide.
Comment by Martin posted on
With reference to a previous comment, I to found my rag score to be amber. We work in a very rural area and so test many older 4x4s and farm vehicles. Through no fault of my own my fail rate was higher than "average" for that month due to these vehicles. I wont change the way I test to change rag colour, but this could easily be abused by unscrupulous testers passing items that should have failed. How long before AEs can access testers rag scores and put the pressure on to be in green?
Comment by Tony posted on
Mil light on dose not constitute 100%that there is a fault within the engine management /emissions system most vehicle management systems are linked via can bus systems so a fault with say stearing angle sensor may bring mil light on. Not affecting the real world running /emissions of the vehicle. Needs to be looked into with more detail and soon before a member of the public takes this matter further
Comment by joe digney posted on
agree with steve should be brake recording little or no effort as it used to and not inop on one side
also had problems with supermarket fuel failing emmissions only to advise customer to top up with better fuel and car passed
Comment by Craig Wilson posted on
I dont see how you can log on incorrectly by useing the reg + vin and checking the info on screen
Comment by richard posted on
yeah I'm a bit mystified by this, how are testers getting this wrong ?
Comment by Tony S posted on
Simply for example, noting the vin as 111660 then having a dyslexic moment and typing in 111606, it's easily done and then it's registered against the tester as a mismatch.
Comment by richard posted on
yes, that I understand, but surely you get every opportunity to amend it before & being asked if this is the correct details are being entered.
Comment by Tony S posted on
I get what your saying but if it's one of those moments, you already think you've got it right.
I'm sure everyone has had at least one mismatch!
Comment by Simon C posted on
Using the OBD to read the VIN is a neat idea HOWEVER I can see problems. On older cars, a commonly accepted way of repairing ECU failure is to swap all the cars electronics (ECU/body computer/etc) and keys from an identical but scrapped vehicle. Being identical vehicles in spec, everything works as intended and is significantly more affordable to do than having a brand new ECU installed. On discontinued models especially, a brand new ECU may no longer be possible to acquire either - forcing a swap from spare parts.
Thus if a vehicle has had its ECU swapped, come MOT time the vehicle tested will not match the VIN of the ECU. Absolutely nothing wrong with said vehicle, except the electronic VIN doesn't match the actual chassis and vehicles true VIN. No doubt causing a lot of headaches when vehicles tested for an MOT that has had an ECU swap.
Of course there could be a human step of checking the reported VIN against the actual vehicle, but this will bring you square back to the original problem of human error creeping in. Especially when the majority of times it will match, so complacency steps in due to the busy nature of a modern Garage.
Comment by P.logie posted on
A different vin from a used ecu matching the same make, model, colour, fuel type, yes 100% possible.
In fact, highly likely.
But on a car that has been disposed of ?
Very unlikely.
99% of ECUs require vin match, without this programming the used ecu would not be possible.
Someone could change a full ecu set to avoid expense of an auto electrician or dealer visit granted.
However, when placed against the fact that the dvla seem to be pretty well on top of their game with regards to certificates of destruction and hounding the life out of 999.99995% of the population about TAX (that leaves the politicians out btw) and the fact that the dvsa are never going to accept an obd only based vin reading system. We are missing the point.
This is about stopping dodgy mots PERIOD .
By introducing this system and making it mandatory. Every petrol since 2001 and every diesel since 2005 (perhaps 2006 for some asain markets) will have to be placed on the obd diagnostic device to have the vin read.
Putting the vehicle in the mot station at the time of test.
No more MEGA DODGY’S.
Any way. How much is a dodgy mot down in England?
It’s around £100 up here in Scotland. But heck with the right amount of leaning you can get one almost free!
THE DVSA ARE A GOVERNMENT TASK FORCE .
Local enforcement, local compliance officer, or plain old local compliance.
Each and every one of these changes are very cleverly thought out, now really think about it guys.
They are each and everyone of them designed to leverage more control. Enabling them to shut down all the stations that are not compliant.
Tester and station ratings.....
Tester RAG = amber - visit every 6months
Tester RAG = red - visit as often as they want.
Same for stations .
The morale of the story is.
The man is real, he controls the dvsa, he controls you and me. When the man looses control he makes new rules, changes designed to regain control.
The MAN wants all the dodgy mot testers/stations gone. The MAN will get what he wants, we cannot stop it. If we try to stop it the man will invent a new tax, designed just for all those trying to stop it. (Probably a tax on fresh air because that’s about all that’s left)
Gain legitimacy in your testing operations or get out.
Comment by castrolrob posted on
I own an old astra auto,swopped the ecu years ago and yes it was from a scrapped vehicle.chip,transponder + ecu as a kit and Its similar for a lotta vehicles that vintage.many have to have the ecu cleared down before being fitted/reprogrammed to the new vehicle but many don't.mine for instance contains the vin,security code and nos from the donor vehicle not the one its currently running in.ok so its not likely to be a common issue and most of the stuff within the last 10 years or so HAS reprogrammed but given the eml fiasco I doubt a sensible cut off date will be mooted until it starts causing these kinda problems
Comment by John posted on
Can somebody explain the following sentence from the article above? "This can include things like time taken to carry out tests and the types of vehicles you’re testing" I understand that the time taken to carry out a test when compared with the national average may have a effect on the rating but I wasn't aware that I had a choice of which vehicles I could test within my test category.
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi John
This generally refers to the age of the vehicles but you will be testing whatever comes into your garage.
Comment by jim posted on
has a space saver at time of test been taken off the manual , as it was a pass and advise , bit miffed
Comment by Tony S posted on
I think you'll find that this covers it, DVSA could confirm
Tyres on the same axle or on twin wheels are different sizes = Major
Comment by steve posted on
there is still wording issues on the MTS, any chance of sorting that out please . IE Park brake failure , the wording says inoperative but maybe its just not working enough so little or no effort would be better
Comment by richard posted on
yes definitely need this adding ,also a binding brake is only applicable to the service brake in the drop down box, it may well be the parking brake binding but there is no option to list that ?
Comment by Martin posted on
There is in most cases no way of telling if it is service or park brake binding.
The RFR used to be "Brake binding" which was perfect as it did not differentiate between service or parking brake.
Now it assumes it is the service brake binding which is another example of the wording in the manual being incorrect and forcing us to use an unsuitable RFR.
The manual needs rewriting by someone with a good understanding of how a motor vehicle works and has good knowledge of the English language.
Comment by Bruce Slee posted on
Emissions and MIL,
Is it acceptable to use Emissions not tested if the tester feels that there could be a hazard to her/himself or indeed a hazard to the presenters vehicle if revved to the required RPM to obtain what would be a redundant emmisions test result in an illuminated MIL situation.
Comment by elliot posted on
mil light debate, on a vw polo the mil light was on due to insufficient gas in the a/c system
Comment by j s richardson posted on
Can i get a single printout of all the updates to the manual during the last year.
Comment by Tom Edwards posted on
It's illegal to drive without an mot but why is it not illegal to drive on roads not fit for purpose. Pot holes speed bumps. They wreck your car so get it right put the roads back together. The law says MOT is a must it should also be the same for roads.
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Tom
Road condition is dealt with by county councils.
Comment by Michael Carruthers posted on
Hi Julia
Can you tell me why DVSA staff involved with the mot scheme don’t have to sit a annual exam when we who are mot testers see more vehicles with defects repair more vehicles with defects have to be tested and your staff don’t this is very unfair I have sent a email to niel Barlow on this subject and had no reply
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Michael
You are right, testers check most vehicles so it is important that they have training and show their competence. DVSA vehicle examiners are currently developed and trained in different ways so don’t do that same exam.
Comment by Michael Carruthers posted on
They might be trained in a different way but are still doing the same if not similar job how can you be sure that they are capable and current you don’t know if the person is up to the job and you cannot have one set of rules for one and not for the other
Comment by Martin posted on
That explains a lot. Any chance of being told what training/exams as it might make some decisions easier to understand.
Comment by Michael Carruthers posted on
Hello Julia
This trained in a different way is not a good reply we all have to go through the same things the same leval of qualification therefore it is not a valid reason for the different rules it also the same for the test fees you as a government body have fixed fees for HGV testing us who test class 3 4 7 vehicles are not under the fixed fee this again is one rule for one and one for the other which in a modern society is unfair I would like to challenge this and would be grateful if we could escalate this further up the chain of command for a more in-depth conversation
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Hi Michael
All our examiners receive thorough in-house training so their skills are maintained to a high level. They are also audited and their work is checked to make sure it meets the necessary standard to work as a vehicle examiner for DVSA.
Comment by Frazer posted on
Regarding MILs, what category would the DPF light fall into? if the lamps on its showing its either getting blocked and not doing its job properly, or has an underlying issue that could have an effect on emissions. would this fall under "8.2.1.1(a) exhaust particulate filter obviously defective"
Thanks.
Comment by Marcus posted on
Think you need to read people's comments on the rag they don't like and is not a good idea as alot aff testers have said you are causing alot of problems for people who are looking for new employment
Comment by Gee han posted on
Pre may 2018 mot test were better and fairer.
Comment by Dave posted on
I agree with you 100%, given that tests, even on older non DPF equipped cars are now carried out to manufacturer plated values, what evidence exists (in light of the VW Scandal) that these plate levels were actually attainable and tested in real world conditions when the vehicle was new, let alone when 10 or 15 years old and with over 200k miles on the clock?.
A friend owns a car derived Van made in 2005, its plated value is 1.1 which is far tighter than many cars several years younger who also attract cheaper RFL. To add insult to injury despite now having to have his van tested to stricter plated smoke limits every year (when previously 3.0-1m was considered perfectly acceptable for the last fourteen years), he is also still expected to pay £250 a year for his RFL, whilst a newer car with a higher plate limit such as 1.5 or 1.7 attracts a RFL of over £100 per year less, and both are Euro 4, yet a higher maximum smoke output plate level 'rewards' the owner with a cheaper annual RFL!. Proof enough that the whole 'system' is nonsensical.
Ever likely these stickers are increasingly going walkies, removed by their owners prior to an MOT being obtained, as its not even a fair game. Expecting a car several years old to be as efficient as it was when it was brand new and tested under 'ideal' conditions with no allowance made for wear and tear, or a bit of leakage from its piston rings due to life in real world conditions is just ludicrous, regardless of how well the vehicle is maintained.
I remember when the MOT existed purely to ensure the road safety of the car and its passengers, now it seems to exist largely to embrace and win over the tree huggers. Its quite laughable when you consider that Northern Ireland hasn't smoke tested Diesel cars for well over a decade and where are the protests?, and the worldwide pressure for them to change during that period, given that pollution is a global problem?.
Comment by Concerned Citizen posted on
What if no MIL is lit but fail tail pipe test. As you said Emissions are controlled/measured by various sensors in the engine management system. If the system detects a fault or abnormal reading, then the engine MIL will illuminate. So in that case if there is no MIL lit, it should be considered passed according to the logic you have applied.
Comment by Tony posted on
Well said
Comment by Jon posted on
The mil is a separate test item to the emissions result. The mil could be on for numerous reasons.
Comment by andy posted on
whatever happened to the feature that was going to implemented to only put the 6 digit pin in once a day??
Comment by Test pirate posted on
Good to see changes and Clarification on certain things. But the system still needs major rethink !!!!!! More clarification about Alloy wheels and the repairs ??? Badly welded ??? Should any "cracked alloy" Be repaired ????
Comment by Pete posted on
Hi can you answer a question for me.
When the system is down as it is at the moment 19:30 pm Jan 9th and seeming the manual and guide is exclusively on line how do we view them if we need to check something? Although it says from the system down/contingency screen that the manual and guide is still available it take you to the content screen but, when you click into a section it brings you back to the system down screen.
Maybe you should think about adding a new refusal to test option or abort test option until this problem is solved. Luckly enough I'm just trying to do my annual training and not a test, as I can see this being a very big headache if I was and need to check something.
Just another of the many oversights of the new system I guess?
Comment by Badger posted on
download the manual and save to a PDF file
Comment by Carlos posted on
It would be nice to be politely reminded to do your annual assessment instead of told you will be suspended if you don't do it last year I did mine from a hospital bed as I'd had an operation there are many reasons the training may or may not be done be a bit more human in your approach
Comment by James posted on
With regards to the MIL illumating a customer of mine filled his car from a national supermarkets local fuel station and and later that day his MIL came on and stayed on, after reading the ecu it gave a code of bank 1 lean mixture. To prove a point to the owner we drained the fuel tank and fuel system and refilled it with quality fuel from a high quality fuel retailers turned of the mil and sent him out to do his days work. That was a week ago and his mil has stayed off just proving that poor quality of fuel can effect car emissions.
Comment by Dave posted on
You would think that with some premium fuel producing fewer emissions and soot output and being better for the environment that the duty charged on it would be lower, in order to make the pump price of it equal to, or slightly less than the price of regular fuel and more in-line with the cost of Supermarket fuel in order to appeal and encourage mass take up?.
Surely encouraging several million motorists all packed onto a relatively small island to use a less polluting fuel can only be a GOOD thing? and less polluting fuel (with the tests to prove it) should be rewarded with a reduction in duty, assuming of course it REALLY is about the health and well-being of 66 million complete strangers. But actions speak far louder than words.......
Comment by Stephen newman posted on
Very good idea to have a local average
Comment by Lee Heywood. posted on
My Rag rating has been green red and amber. Average age of the car hasn’t changed and I test as presented and have not changed my applied standards.
What is likely to be causing the discrepancy ?
Comment by Bill posted on
It would be helpful if the system could identify the areas of concern that have moved the tester into the red or amber risk rating sector so that the tester would have a chance rectify it.
Comment by greg caira posted on
I never now where to post comments/queries relating to the MOT as there are so many different blogs.
As this is the latest blog then maybe here is a good place!
Does 'headlamp levelling device inoperative' really need to be a MAJOR failure? The cost of rectification is usually new headlamps required and I find many people NEVER use them or know they exist. I personally have never found the need to use them even when my vehicle is heavily laden.
Can you explain the meaning of the square box containing the diesel smoke limits for the vehicles they are present on?? Is it the limits declared for when the brand new vehicle leaves the factory or a limit that the the manufacturers state will never be exceeded???? Exactly what is the idea or meaning of that figure???? And why is it not present on ALL vehicles.
Once again it seems unfair to penalise owners of older diesels with a square box figure and others continue to be tested to 3.0
Comment by JIM ANDERSON posted on
What's going on? I have just noticed that I have jumped from green to red overnight with no explanation. I can only assume that it is because my failure rate is slightly higher than the national average, even though it always has been. We test vehicles first, and service them last, which will always give us a higher fail rate than garages who do it the other way round. We are also in a rural area, with a lot of rough roads. This system will have the effect of making testers hope that a vehicle is going to pass or fail before the test even starts, which just isn't right.
Comment by dave bs posted on
this has also happened to me with no explanation
Comment by Mike posted on
Chris i have read that the dvsa will take into consideration the location of rural mot stations, we have an above average fail rate on springs
Comment by Mark Pendlebury posted on
Not many insanely ridiculous speed bumps in rural areas
Comment by Philip Hook posted on
I find I am rated as amber in my personal file as a tester, not to happy about this, quite a few of my averages do not match national averages, I can only test what comes into workshop, I will not adjust to fall in line with Mr Average. Also your comment about looking at time taken to do test can affect your RAG score, since when did time come into a test ?, it takes as long as it takes & to the best of my knowledge there never has been a set time.
Comment by Steve Neill posted on
From what we have learned in the news, very few vehicles would pass emissions limits in real world driving conditions, especially those that are regularly used for school runs.
Many vehicles fail the basic emissions test, but go on to pass the vehicle specific test, some by the skin of their teeth, yet the warning light is not lit, and many fail the emissions test outright also with the warning light not lit, as has always been the case.
Comment by colin posted on
Hi
this years class 1 & 2 assessment covers floating discs and radial brakes, as these are not mentioned in the manual, what do you require us to know about them?
Comment by Andrew Smalley posted on
When are you going to twig the engine management light does far more than the imission,, is it relevant that a smart charge system may have a problem ?? , and the positive feedback back you claim is strange try joining either of the mot testers forums with over 13000 members to see the real world thoughts on your constant tampering with the system and the lack of clarity
Comment by raza datoo posted on
nice to see improvements taking place
Comment by 999gb posted on
how do some people get their comments on straight away I thought they all have to be looked at for 3 days before they got on(if at all)Lets see when and if this gets on!
Comment by Julia (DVSA) posted on
Comments are posted and replied to on a regular basis. Some replies may take longer where specific questions are asked and need a more technical answer.
Comment by James Robertson posted on
I saw that someone had already asked for an explanation of the comment that a tester's rating can be affected by the type of vehicle - and the answer was that this related to the age of the vehicle. This question and answer now seem to have disappeared, but, withe respect, it didn't make sense to me anyway. A tester has no control over the type r age of the vehicles which are presented to testing - so how can a tester's rating possibly be affected by these factors?
Comment by Chris posted on
The roads where test are terrible. They are either full of speed bumps or potholes and sometimes both. A good majority of these cars fail on either a broken coil spring, shock absorber, ball joint or suspension arm bushes. How can I get my average up when at least 50-60% are defective? Could you add in a local average to the system too?