MOT Advisories
 

Interested in knowing peoples opinions on a R75 Diesel 2002 with 90k miles and the following advisories at last MOT, that I am looking to buy

Advisory notice item(s)
Nearside Side repeater slightly discoloured (1.4.A.2f)
Offside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Front Sub-frame corroded but not seriously weakened (2.4.G.1)
Rear Sub-frame corroded but not seriously weakened (2.4.G.1)
Nearside Rear Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Offside Front Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Nearside Rear Road wheel with a slightly distorted bead rim (4.2.A.1a)
Offside Rear brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened (3.5.1i)
fuel tank straps rusty
Offside Play in steering rack inner joint(s) ()
Nearside Rear Shock absorber has slight corrosion to the casing (2.7.2a)
Offside Rear Shock absorber has slight corrosion to the casing (2.7.2a)
Nearside Rear coil spring corroded (2.4.C.1b)
Offside Rear coil spring corroded (2.4.C.1b)
Nearside Rear Suspension arm corroded but not seriously weakened (2.4.G.1)
Offside Rear Suspension arm corroded but not seriously weakened (2.4.G.1)

Walk away, there has to be better, unless it's free.

Sounds like both subframes will need attention as well as all suspension components in the near future.

There's loads of cars for sale, this sounds like a lemon

Unless the advisories have been dealt with, then some of those are expensive fixes, the last two for instance are £240 in parts alone.

Front subframe, unless you are very unlucky, Cliff "Teflon" springs to mind here, are not an issue, rear subframe, well I've seen these with barnacles on the outside and still be structurally sound, but it does make for a challenge when renewing the bits that are attached to it ;)

I would keep looking, there will be better cars waiting out there :)

Brian :D

I'm surprised he has bothered to comment on so many parts with presumably surface corrosion - not unusual on underside parts of 15 year old cars. No corrosion in sills, no broken springs, no leaking shock absorbers, no dangerously corroded/leaking brake pipes. Most 2 year old + rear discs seem to get those comments in my experience, they always have rust or pitting, unless you drive on your brakes! I'm surprised there is play in the inner steering joints, at only 90,000 miles, but it obviously isn't bad enough to warrant a fail, but it will be easy enough to tell on a test drive. By no means a lemon - if it has more than 6months MoT on it, you have time to get underneath, clean up and repaint most of the "corroded" parts. But if you are buying it for however little, it would be worth getting under it first to check just what the tester meant.

The tester is certainly doing a CYA (Google it) on that one!

That was my thinking!

I have to disagree here Andrew, a lot of cars which have lived in Scotland, or next to the seaside suffer quite badly in terms of underbody corrosion.

My wife's car, low mileage, bodywork sound, but the bits underneath are quite frankly vile, something that has been worked upon on a running basis, front subframe replaced when the clutch was replaced, springs replaced front and rear, inner tie rods replaced, the next one will be a refurbished rear subframe along with new upper and lower arms.

Every bolt has been a chore to remove, not one has come out without a fight, and it won't be a clean up and paint exercise on the rear suspension components of this car....that's for certain.

Current mileage is less than most for the year, and here is the history....

Date tested
20 October 2017
PASS
Mileage
69,809 miles
MOT test number
6616 6172 6308
Test location
View test location
Expiry date
27 October 2018
Advisory notice item(s)
Offside Play in steering rack inner joint(s) ()
What are advisories?
Date tested
27 October 2016
PASS
Mileage
68,439 miles
MOT test number
7040 3583 7317
Test location
View test location
Expiry date
27 October 2017
Date tested
23 October 2015
PASS
Mileage
66,371 miles
MOT test number
3803 2715 5534
Test location
View test location
Expiry date
27 October 2016
Date tested
23 October 2014
PASS
Mileage
64,768 miles
MOT test number
2452 2619 4254
Test location
View test location
Expiry date
27 October 2015
Advisory notice item(s)
Nearside Front Track rod end ball joint has slight play (2.2.B.1f)
What are advisories?
Date tested
28 October 2013
PASS
Mileage
63,189 miles
MOT test number
4264 0150 3340
Test location
View test location
Expiry date
27 October 2014
Advisory notice item(s)
Offside Front Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Nearside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Offside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
What are advisories?
Date tested
22 May 2012
PASS
Mileage
61,645 miles
MOT test number
9474 7384 2127
Test location
View test location
Expiry date
21 May 2013
Advisory notice item(s)
Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Ball joint has slight play (2.2.B.1f)
front brake discs slightly pitted
back box slightly corroded
What are advisories?
Date tested
17 May 2012
FAIL
Mileage
61,595 miles
MOT test number
1955 5893 2153
Test location
View test location
Reason(s) for failure
Nearside Front Windscreen wiper does not clear the windscreen effectively (8.2.2)
Nearside Front Brake pipe excessively corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Offside Front Brake pipe excessively corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Brake pipe excessively corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Advisory notice item(s)
Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Ball joint has slight play (2.2.B.1f)
front brake discs slightly pitted
back box slightly corroded
What are failures and advisories?
Date tested
17 May 2011
PASS
Mileage
56,508 miles
MOT test number
2660 9703 1109
Test location
View test location
Expiry date
16 May 2012
Advisory notice item(s)
Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
What are advisories?
Date tested
16 May 2011
FAIL
Mileage
56,508 miles
MOT test number
5195 2603 1198
Test location
View test location
Reason(s) for failure
Offside Front Track rod end ball joint has excessive play (2.2.B.1f)
Advisory notice item(s)
Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
What are failures and advisories?
Date tested
13 May 2010
PASS
Mileage
50,926 miles
MOT test number
8715 7303 0103
Test location
View test location
Expiry date
12 May 2011
Advisory notice item(s)
Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Ball joint has slight play (2.2.B.1f)
Front brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened (3.5.1i)
nearside front wing mirror missing
What are advisories?
Date tested
25 April 2009
PASS
Mileage
42,969 miles
MOT test number
4430 2521 9178
Test location
View test location
Expiry date
28 April 2010
Advisory notice item(s)
Nearside Front Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
What are advisories?
Date tested
29 April 2008
PASS
Mileage
36,118 miles
MOT test number
9119 6022 8129
Test location
View test location
Expiry date
28 April 2009
Advisory notice item(s)
Nearside Front Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Offside Rear Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
What are advisories?
Date tested
24 October 2007
PASS
Mileage
34,713 miles
MOT test number
3629 6769 7490
Test location
View test location
Expiry date
23 October 2008

The thing is, the car drives beautifully and it's quite easy to see why these were fairly desirable new, however the work I'm about to embark upon in preparation for the upcoming MOT, puts the car firmly in the beyond economical to repair category, and that's with no labour charges, and hefty discount on parts.

If you own one of these cars, then you have a manageable amount of work to keep it in good order, two, well ok still no problem, but three, or four, or five, or indeed as I have at the moment six to care for, then there will be a time when juggling all of them will become impossible.

Never mind, my new two post ramp arrives on Thursday, so I can play underneath the car in comfort :drool4:

Brian :D

Or it might simply just be a rusty old wreck ;)

Cars from the north are definitely ropier in general, compared to ones from the south Phil :cool:

I would hope the tester would have enough experience to find and fail serious rust. I haven't looked at this car's MoT history to see what is a long-term problem, or what has been changed already. True, coastal cars rust from the salty atmosphere, and Edinburgh's proximity to the Forth might well do that. I guess if it's not too far away, it's worth going to check it out. You certainly have plenty of information to knock down the price! It all depends on what you expect/want for the money. I paid £850 for mine, with full MoT; some of those advisory descriptions could have applied to mine, if the tester wanted to c.h.a. But I've had a good look underneath, and the rust on the arms and subframes IS just surface. PS I don't consider mine a bargain, nor do I feel I was ripped off by the dealer. It has had its faults, but I am getting my money's worth out of it.

When I lived in Shetland it wasn't uncommon for a car less than 10 years old to be scrapped due to corrosion.

Hi Michael,

I think that these three comments in particular suggest that this tester is being somewhat pedantic. He might have been hoping to obtain some repairs business from the owner or had a row with his wife that morning or is just keen to convince you how ‘experienced’ he is. ;)

What you should do is organise your own inspection to put these claims to the test whether it be from someone else in the trade, a friend or just do it yourself!

Always remember that this list does not constitute faults which need to be rectified as so many people seem to believe. They are observations which the tester wishes to bring to your attention. They are somewhat subjective. It is extremely likely that if you submitted this car for a test tomorrow at a different establishment, the list of advisories would be much shorter.

Bad news sells newspapers, and it’s easy to make a dramatic case. Keep a cool head is my advice and don’t rely on one tester’s opinion.

Simon

I guess it didn’t have a undertray or he would have been doing more cya, plus his printer would have run out of ink;)
Mick

I would support Simon's advice above. All the items listed should be in the stated condition on a 15/16 year old car unless the parts have already been replaced.

The rear suspension arms are the most expensive item on the list. But these are likely to need replacement on most 75's that are 15 years of age sooner or later.

The advisories should be looked at in relation to the overall condition and desirability of the car e.g. the bodywork, interior and how it drives. My approach would be to get a local expert member to assess the car's condition.

Advisories are "magical" . So many times I have had advisories one year which have "disappeared" the next time :eek:
But , sometimes they are serious advice :shrug:
If you are able to make your own judgement , then have a look ; if not then walk away :}

Varied opinions on here, but just remember that a tester is now in some ways accountable when things go wrong with a car after it has been tested. This can become quite a nasty business if the tester gets it wrong, or missed. I would suggest that this is considered in everybody's objections to advisories.
Testers can be faced with "Points" awarded against them, just like driving offences.
Testers can be faced with substantial fines (Worst cases)
and finally face imprisonment if found to be simply abusing the system.

My testing works on a firm, but fair basis and due consideration the vehicle age etc, but the rules are the rules, DVSA will not stand for too much manipulation despite how many changes are made to the testing manual since May this year.

Simon, earlier in the year when I presented one of the fleet for MOT, I had an advisory for a discoloured side repeater lamp, and it was amazing when I fitted a nice new orange bulb, that it flashed orange once again rather than the pasty off white ;)

Fuel tank straps, well a full tank of diesel including the weight of the tank and fuel pump and associated hardware is just shy of 65 kg, and not taking into account the free surface affect of the fuel moving within the tank as the car is driven..........I recall a post by CLF where Alan had replaced the tank cradle straps on his car, and simply folded up the original such was the extent of the corrosion.

This of course was a car which had been MOT tested within a system where there is absolutely no incentive whatsoever to "create" work for the tester ;)

Distorted wheel rim, I would be quite happy to be notified of such a defect, especially when it is the inner bead of a wheel that has been damaged and looking at the car from the outside all appears to be perfect.

Bad news sells newspapers??? perhaps just for once Simon, you might wish to step back and ask yourself why you are so critical of anyone with any connection to the motor trade?

As far as it appears to any outsider looking in, you are the perfect judge of your car, and no one else could possibly know better than you.

So when I checked out the advisory items issued to my own car last week, I found what the tester to have noted to be quite fair, and not pedantic, but rather sound advice and a valuable second opinion to my own pre MOT checks.

What would you prefer I wonder, an MOT carried out where the tester overlooks obvious defects, or a one where a perfectly valid assessment of a vehicle condition is reported to the owner, who can then make arrangements to repair at their discretion.

In the case of the OP's question, I would not buy the car he is asking about, but that is only my opinion, no more or less.

Brian :D

MarinaBrian; you are slipping back into your old habits already. I must remind you that there is room on the forum for views other than your own which you have already stated. Repetitious argumentative posts are not welcome.

Anyway, I thought you were going to be so busy with your multi-million pound contract that there would be no time for you to visit the forum. :shrug:

Simon

I do not see anything amiss with Brian's post, only his own experience with one of his own car's at MOT time....:}

Many MOT advisories can be taken with a pinch of salt. I’ve had some on my cars which were contradictory to each other.

As for the MOT test in its current form I would scrap it altogether.
By that I mean take it away from garages and place it in an independant location like HGVs are and also the MOT in Northern Ireland.

My V6 received a fail on its first test after I purchased it stating it required new discs. The car had done 36k. I fitted new discs to get the pass then immediately removed them and fitted them to my 75 diesel as it had done at that time around 105k if I recall correctly.
That was about six years ago and only recently did I remove the “failed” discs and fitted new discs to the car as I thought the originals were getting a bit worn.

On my Jaguar XF I received a fail at 43k stating it required new rear upper arms at a cost of £760. I had no option but to give the rogue dealer the go ahead but a few weeks later I re fitted the original parts and got a pass at another test station. The car was due to be tested one year later when it was written off.

So two examples of where the MOT test failed me unneccasarily and I have to say the only two fails I have received since the MOT test began.

As for the OP I would say the tester in question may have been a bit over zealous but I agree most 75’s of this age will be very rusty in the suspension areas.
Of the three I’ve owned I’ve had to completely overhaul the suspension on all three, it’s just what you have to do to keep an otherwise perfectly good car in tip top condition.

Mine failed on inner and outer sill rot. On asking the garage to do it they said take it round to the local welder, it will be cheaper than us, so 2 hours later that job was done. The DANGEROUS FAIL was a cut in a tyre exposing the cords, but of course I drove it home. Also failed on suspension arm outer ball joint, but I had to take it back to the garage for this to be done on the retest as a previous owner had grossly over-tightened the ball joint taper bolt, and also the clamp bolt which was stretched and also sheared on removal!. Took two guys an hour to shift the ball joint from the sub-frame.

Was that something you discussed at the vision mixers guild annual dinner last evening SDItoo :shrug:

The last I noticed, I was allowed to give myself time off from work to come out and play ;)

Brian :D

Its hard to know precisely what the tester means unless you have a look. Corroded but not seriously weakened could mean it's covered in rust or the corrosion could be the size of a postage stamp. Both would fit the description.

There are 4 paragraphs which have absolutely nothing to do with MarinaBrian’s own vehicles:

Para. 2: attempt to discredit me.
Para. 3: as above.
Para. 5: provocation.
Para. 8: attempt to discredit me.

Also Graham, in respect of paragraph 5, it surely cannot have escaped your notice that such remarks are directed at me and me alone. Other members, particularly MGJohn, frequently post even more critical comments of the motor trade which do not attract MarinaBrian's attention. That is because he is deliberately targeting me; in other words a personal vendetta. The reason for that is that he did not get his own way in the debate over timing belts.

Simon

It was something which you posted publicly on this forum a short time ago, and which I read.

Now, would you mind confining your posts to the thread topic please.

Simon

Graham - it feels to me that your assessment of Brian's post is not quite on the mark. As a minimum, it is possibly doing Brian a disservice by diluting his intent.

If one reads certain parts of Brian's post which follow

Brian clearly responded to Simon's post and addressed it to Simon. Brian could have quoted the OP and then given his view on the technical matter in hand. Instead, I read Brian's post as a response aimed directly at Simon.

The reason I highlight this is that we see similar posts from a few members which comment on another poster rather than confine it to the subject matter.

I don't have an axe to grind in the irritations between Brian and Simon - I have my own feuds to manage :D. But, I do think that it is not worthy of a moderator to dismiss Simon's point out of hand by stating that Brian's post is something that it is not and vice versa. Of course you may take a view on the degree of transgression by either party, but that is a different matter.

Personally, I find it strange that anyone would expect a list significantly different to the one in the OP for a 15-year old car unless work has already been done in each of the advisory areas.

To keep mss happy, I'll first address the OP - I find that at most MOTs tend to completely ignore the colour of the indicators and repeaters - I see so many cars where the bulbs have obviously lost their coating that the indicators are flashing white. It's refreshing and proportionate to make these advisory if there's any doubt as to their colour.



As already mentioned the rust issues are going to be quite subjective and will require personal inspection and assessment. All else seems rather simple- exchange steering racks can be had for around £100 (at least mine was couple of years ago) if needed - or maybe it's just the inner track rods for which I think there is an alternate part available.


If you're able to do the work yourself then it may well be worth it. If not then you'll have to take labour into account. Just remember that once done you'll have a car that you know it's condition underneath. Spend the same money on a replacement and you could find yourself back in the same situation next MOT...



Now I'll address the other matter.


Well MSS - that is the nature of debate to refute an argument

(argument: a reason or set of reasons given in support of an idea, action or theory.) To who else should someone wishing to refute address themselves?






[QUOTE=mss;2669857]Brian could have quoted the OP and then given his view on the technical matter in hand. Instead, I read Brian's post as a response aimed directly at Simon.
[/QUOTE}


He could have, but isn't bound by forum rules to do so. If that is the system you prefer then try stackexchange mechanics.



This however is first and foremost a discussion forum. If someone makes a counter argument to yours then debate the point - not the man.

And that exactly was the point of my post. Debate the point, not the perceived characteristics of the man i.e Simon. As a reminder, I was referring to the following:


Just because it is not against the forum rules does not make it good etiquette or practice.

Knowing the history I find all the points made by Brian valid. All of those are positions previously stated or taken by Simon - On the other hand the response by Simon - "attempt to discredit me (x3), provocation (x1)" signifies some reading what you want to read between the lines. I think that's all that needs saying - let's get back to the OP eh? :getmecoat::wantpics:


Pictures of the rust are what's really needed for anyone else to help decide on the rust issues.

No point reading between the lines. Look closely between them - there's nothing there!:D

I don't recall ever mentioning figures Simon, apart from in PM to one person ;)

Anyway back to the day job :drool4:

Brian :D

Correct, there is nothing there at all, simply an oversensitive soul :cool:

Brian :D

That depends upon the individual’s powers of perception Nick, and an appreciation of MarinaBrian’s tactics which I have thanks to him targeting me for the past four months. When it’s your turn, you too will gain a deeper understanding.
This is the post of yours (20.08.18) which I remembered:
The “multi-million pound” comment is hyperbole which was inspired by your word “large” to illustrate the high opinion you have of yourself.

Simon

"When its my turn?" What on earth does that mean when its at home. I was merely lightening the thread with a wee bit of humour....

I think he's organising a hit on you, did you change your cambelt recently?

No. I have a Honda and its chain drive....

Four months Simon :confused:, I thought it only took you three months to dither your way through a KV6 belt change, during which you spent most of your time criticising everyone from the manufacturer of the engine for stipulating belt changes on a time and mileage basis, or anyone else who had carried out this task before in a timely fashion, as it simply isn't possible to carry this task out commercially without making grave errors, or worse not making reference to both RAVE and INA technical data ;)

Meanwhile back on thread, advisories can be a useful tool, as it is very easy to miss something while checking your car prior to presenting your car for test, and having a second pair of eyes look at it is no bad thing, and contrary to Simon's opinion not every single MOT tester is cynically inventing defects in order to drum up business :cool:

Brian :D

P.S. I would have been much more impressed if you had included the phrase "locked horns" somewhere in your description of the perceived "vendetta" you believe I have against you Simon :)

Gah, how can I possibly hope to compete with that statement :duh:

You too are going to go into the little book :D

Hopefully, Mac61 has got enough advice, professional and other to work out what his next step is. Mods, may I suggest that we close additions to this thread before people start to think we are the Victor Meldrew club? I hate it when the things that bring us together start driving us apart.

Problem with closing threads Andrew, is it is seen rightly or wrongly as censorship ;)

I would have thought that the recent spate of closed threads would prove that it isn't an effective tool when used too liberally.

Anyway, talking of Victor Meldrew, what do you make of the closure of Hartside?

Brian :D

On the contrary, this thread and other similar threads should be made stickies for all and sundry, and their allies/supporters, to ridicule each other.

We can demonstrate that no longer are Rover drivers representing the elite of society in terms of class, etiquette, fairness and intelligence. Rover drivers, as demonstrated by the membership, now represent the broad spectrum of society. There is no differentiation or discrimination on the basis of the elusive aforementioned values.

:D

Yes; from the completion of my timing belt replacement you deliberately challenged virtually every post I made. With the recent brief lull, you have now resumed your campaign of childish bullying.
I said nothing of the sort. It is, though, perfectly obvious from this forum that many do. You need to (1) come to terms with that and (2) try to improve the standard of your English comprehension (unlikely of course, because you’re absent from your desk bullying in the playground).

You gave your opinion early in this thread. I later gave mine. You must not then continually pick holes in my contribution, laced with sarcasm and personal abuse. No-one else on the forum does that. Why are you so insecure that you have to behave in this appalling way?

I have reported you to the moderators for the second time in this thread.

Simon

For goodness sake. Can yous both just try and act in a civil manner? Is it so hard, really.

I really enjoy reading this sort of stuff keep up the good work cos it makes me giggle so much.
Gets better each time :D
think i will keep paying my subs just for this.




I dunno what the problem is with you both but the is an ignore button ?

Simon, I am trying. The issue here is that MarinaBrian is not prepared to allow me to post an opinion contrary to his without launching a nit-picking attack on everything I say. When he does this, I believe that I am entitled to defend my right to the same freedom of speech that he has, and to defend myself against his unwarranted attacks.

MarinaBrian will take no notice of your reasonable appeal Simon. Pete, the Club Director, has been in contact with him about his disruptive behaviour on the forum. I fear that further words are now necessary since he is completely unable to control himself as everybody else on the forum manages to do.

Simon

Another snippet from the vision mixers guild dinner Simon?

I will put this in plain language so there can be no room for ambiguity either by you or any other person, you had better get your facts straight before you come out with any more tosh like that, is that understood?

Well he has not said anything wrong at all you are looking at this the wrong way

I think you really are trying to get him off the site. ya an NAUGHTY WORD-NAUGHTY WORD-NAUGHTY WORD- get over it move on simple


Why dont you just shut up and end it all sd1too you like big kid get an grip ov ya self man god sake grown man telling tales to the owner my god would not even dare say that on an mans car site i told the owner of the site god sake its an world we live in now

I wonder which are worse, these two or the other pair that won't leave each other alone.

Like moths to a flame...

Please keep your arguments away from this thread, in fact please keep them away from this club.

Now, if it's not too much trouble back on topic.

Oi, in my case it's all his fault! :D