Hi I was involved in a motorcycle accident this afternoon which has left me with my beloved Vespa written off! Unbelievably have ended up with only minor injuries and was incredibly lucky to come out of it unscathed. It was the drivers fault and im confident they will hold there hands up howeverrrr my MOT had expired in july! And you've probably heard it all before but i was en route to the MOT centre when the crash occurred!! Will this effect putting in a claim? My insurance is Third party fire and theft. I'm taxed and insured but my mum and dad are panicking over the MOT saying this will invlidate your insurance and you could end up paying for the drivers car damage?!?! Is this true??? If someone can enlighten me this would be hugely appreciated Regards

Hi every one This morning i took my BMW 318 i for MOT and it was failed, both side shock absorbers are leaking oil and they must be changed. Front and rear plus some other issues. Luckily i had the last years MOT Cert, and the notes that failed it last year by Halfords garage in Harrow. The same parts with the same problem! I remembered last year before i go to Germany with my family I took the car to Halfords for MOT and they failed it and the guy told me it will cost me £700 in total and he will do it late afternoon, I had no choice to go ahead with it and same evening paid the £700 cash and got the MOT Certificate and we went to Germany next day... And today the new Garage telling me none of the items in last year’s MOT been changed nor repaired and now the car has more problems and it’s been risky and unsafe to drive it in motorway. He told me Halfords should not Passed the MOT and not giving me any invoice for the job proofs noting been done. ((The car is 10 year old and all the faulty parts are original BMW)) Please advise what to do and how to approach Halfords. Thanks Masoud

removed

I bought a car on Tuesday 28thAugust 2012 from a second-hand dealer. I had a few concerns regarding thevehicle at the time of purchase regarding the brakes, tyres & excessive noise when turning the steering wheel at full but was assured everything was in order, full MOT given and my concerns were merely due to the vehicle having been sat idle for 4 weeks. I immediately took the car to my local MOT testingstation and the repairs required are excessive to the amount of over £1000. In particular my local reputable MOT provider has noted an 'egg' tyre which they believe has been tampered with in order to disguise this serious issue in order to make a saleof the vehicle. The MOT testing station that originally passed the vehicle is next door to thesales garage and they undertake all of the MOT’s for the second hand vehicles sold by the dealer. What concerns me is how a vehicle that failed an MOT & then subsequently passed on the same day (27/07/2012) still has serious mechanical issues relating to the vehicle that were identified at the point of the initial ‘fail’ MOT on the27/7/2012. The vehicle was then classed as having a ‘pass’ MOT and sold with this. My local MOT provider has documented & identified the original ‘fail’ MOT issues still exist !!!!! This vehicle was to be driven by my 18 year old daughter (a new driver) with an‘egg’ tyre that could have resulted in a serious road traffic accident; thank goodness I had the foresight to have the vehicle checked by a reputable MOT testing station on the very same day of the purchase. I have contacted the dealer and they will not refund me for the vehicle which was only purchased 3 days ago and has not been driven since the purchase. I have also tried to call the original MOT Testing station several times but they will not take my calls! I strongly believe the two parties are working incollaboration in order to pass off vehicles to unsuspecting customers when the vehicles are indeed not road worthy and I wish to have both companies investigated. These Companies are selling a lot of vehicles on a weekly basis and need to be investigated before a serious incident occurs!I have reported them to VOSA & awaiting their response & am also now contacting SOGA in order to obtain further advice. Is there anything else I can do? Details of the MOT that passed the vehicle are below and are taken from the government website facility to check vehicle MOT history…. Details regarding the vehicle & the MOT station have been removed at this stage due to potential legal reasons. Date of test: 27/07/2012 Certificate issue refused (Fail) Test class: IV Reason(s) for refusal to issue Certificate Offside Rear Tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm (4.1.E.1) Nearside Front Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover insecure so that itno longer prevents the ingress of dirt (2.4.G.2) Front brakes imbalanced (3.7.A.2d) Advisory Notice issued Front Brake pad(s) wearing thin (3.5.1g) Offside Rear Shock absorber has a light misting of oil (2.7.3) Front brake discs slightly worn Movement in n/s front strut top when raised Date of test: 27/07/2012 Certificate issued (Pass) Test class: IV Test expiry date: 04/08/2013 Advisory Notice issued Offside Rear Shock absorber has a light misting of oil (2.7.3) Front brake discs slightly worn Movement in n/s front strut top when raised

Conmen are exploiting a flaw in new style MoT certificates to rip-off motorists. Watchdogs are warning that the new test certificates can be easily faked by crooks selling secondhand cars to give the impression that a car is road-worthy. The warning comes after a 38-year-old man was arrested by Cleveland Police on suspicion of forging MoT test certificates. He has been released on bail. The Trading Standards Institute has voiced concern over the new system, in which the paper certificates are simply receipts for work carried out and not proof that an MoT took place. Proof of a valid test is kept online by the Vehicle & Operator Services Agency, VOSA. "We are concerned that motorists still do not know that paper certificates are no longer proof of existence of a valid MoT certificate," said Gerald Taylor, the Institute's lead officer for motor vehicles. "The downloaded certificate be altered and abused at will using the simplest of computer software available with nearly every personal computer. "There is also the possibility that unscrupulous traders, and service and repair outlets, could agree to MoT a vehicle and charge accordingly but not carry out the test at all - the prospective purchaser would be none the wiser unless they go online." The advice from watchdog is: if a seller won't let you check a vehicle's MoT online before you buy, walk away. You can check MoT records through the VOSA website, enquiries@vosa.gov.uk or the MoT enquiry line 08703 300 444. http://blogs.mirror.co.uk/investigations/2012/09/beware-fake-mot-certificates.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+mirror%2Finvestigations+%28Mirror+-+Investigations%29

I've just sold my car on auto trader to a local guy. He came to view twice and seemed pretty happy with it. He knocked me down on price from £700 to £500 for a 2001 peugeot 307, because it needed 2x tyres and had a blowing exhaust? He was quite knowledgable on cars and seemed to know what he was talking about. The problem came a few days later when he said he had done an online check for mots and "found out" it had had some welding done for its last mot. I did put this on the advert but didn't mention my ex had sorted it for me on the cheap. I originally took it in for an mot and it failed on 3 corrosion points and had some advisories. The quote to fix was more than the car was worth so I phoned my ex and asked if the welding could be done cheaper elsewhere. He's not just a diy guy, he is a trained mechanic. He offered to do it for a lot cheaper and then take it to a garage for it's mot. I agreed and the car was fixed. The new mot was done at a different garage and had none of the advisories that the old fail sheet had. My ex simply said the garage I took it to was keen. I drove it for another 6 months then decided to sell it because it had a couple of dings (small ones) and wasn't looking as nice as it used to. Have I done something wrong here? He's saying the mot was "bent" and I sold him a dangerous car. The 3 welding spots were on the 2 rear seat belt areas and one of the sills. It was undersealed afterwards. The advisories were for slight corrosion, a cv something and a tyre that was low but not illegal. What do I do now? Do I have to take the car back? The tax is due to run out at the end of this month, the v5 has already been sent off. Its going to take about 2 months to get the paperwork sorted with the dvla. I also don't want to take it back if it's going to come back in a condition that I can't resell ie 2x extra keepers, short mot, no tax and stood for 2 months. He's sent a few nasty texts and e-mails saying I'm a liar and other things. Help would be great, thank you.

Hello, really would appreciate some info on this! I was driving in Spain (with insurance, but without MOT) when another driver hit me on the motorway. He did not admit liability and when I took it to a garage the mechanic said the first thing I have to do is get my company to send someone to inspect it. So two questions - will my company know I don't have an MOT, and will it stop them helping me? I'm not looking for money from them as it was not my fault. And second, will his insurance company pay up? Will they look for an inspection? I'd be really grateful for any advice Thank you

Hoping someone can offer some advice on what I should do about a problem I have after buying a used car on ebay. I had been looking for some time at MG Midget classic cars and finally found what seemed like an absolute gem on ebay. The ad stated car was in exceptional condition, and the pictures of it seemed to verify this. I emailed the seller and asked if the vehicle had any problems that he knew about, mechanically, rust, bubbling. He replied the car was perfect, a top end example of the MG midget. As the car was 190 miles away and had a new MOT on it which was 7 weeks I made him an offer for it to which he accepted. We arranged a collection for the following week. Upon seeing the car it looked in very good condition. I'm no expert with cars, but all seemed in order. I took it for a short drive, and it seemed okay, although I noticed the brakes were not great and the steering seemed a bit wayward, but he assured me that as it's an old car, there was no ABS or Power steering on it and old cars drove that way. It seemed to make sense. We exchanged the documents and I paid him the ageed cash. I drove the car back to my home town but became very concerned about the way it was driving on the journey home. A few times on the motorway, I almost lost control of it because the steering was awful, and I was having to virtually jump on the brakes to get the car to stop, so the next day I took the vehicle to a independent registered classic car specialist and paid him £50 to give it a good over. His report back was that the car was dangerous to drive. The brakes were in very bad condition, the steering was faulty and there was excessive corrosion beneath the pristine paint work. The list of problems was quite extensive, and in his opinion should never of been given the 7 week old MOT it had. THe repair bill for the car would run into thousands of pounds. I then contacted the seller with this information to which he stated that the car was old and I couldnt expect it to be perfect and that he doubts the car as deterioted that much since its MOT 7 weeks previosuly. My complaint is that the vehicle was not as advertised and that the seller was aware of this as I have since found advisory notes in the paperwork he gave me that the garage who MOT'd the car advised him that the front sills on both sides had corrosion, track rod ends were worn, brake pipes had corrosion on them and that the car was leaking oil. Refer to the advert description it clearly says the car is exceptional. He even emailed me through ebay with the following ""the MG is a good honest car with no faults to my knowledge and I have had her for 9 years... you have bought yourself one of the best and I hope you will be as happy with her as I have been. No rust, bubbles, scratches etc and all mechanics are in 1st class order....she pulls like a good 'un and does not feel 33 at all"" I have written proof from the garage that MOtd the vehicle that he was aware of the problems and chose not to mention them. The vehicle, which although looks great is actually a death trap with lots of hidden corrosion and rust. The seller is now arguing that I should,nt expect a perfect car for £2300. If it was perfect It would be worth 2 times what I paid. Not what he was saying in his advert and his communications with me. Now I know I should of been more careful when parting with my money, but Have I got a case that he knowingly misled me? Also, he stated that since the MOT he had not driven the car. If that is the case then the MOT should never of been granted for this car. The brakes are in dangerous condition to the point where the independent specialists advised me not to drive it. I have contacted Ebay and they have basically said cars aren't covered by there guarantee.

I have just come back from Kwik-Fit who have failed my car's MOT. Their reasoning was that the passenger side tyre tread was below 1.6mm. I explained that the car had been serviced by a main dealer only 2 weeks ago and they made no mention of this. (They have in the past and always record tread depth on the service documents. They said "We can sell you a new tyre". This really got my blood going as it appeared to be legalised daylight robbery. On returning home I have tried to find an area on the tyre with less than 2mm but to no avail. My first set of tyres on the car lasted for 40.000 miles; according to Kwik-Fit these ones have only lasted 19,000. I know I have been ripped off and have challenged them but they are adamant that they are right. Does anyone know of a good (legal) course of action. I will not simply roll over and take this sort of treatment. Cheers,