75 CDTi shocks

[steveandjanes75]

Originally Posted by berkshirelad

A common fault on the diesels is not the hydramount, but the lower engine mount.

Lastly, you must report the MoT tester/garage to VOSA. For someone who is not mechanically aware, the faults you described that have been missed could prove to be fatal.

That's interesting, but I am sure its the Hydramount.
When I switch engine on it knocks as it fires, ditto on switch off, but no knock while ticking over or smooth road driving. Go over bumps in road however, and the knock becomes a rattle, as if something is loose, its the same knocking sound, just faster, its like metal on metal bouncing up and down.
I know I have a bad NSF shock, but this knock sounds as if its in the engine bay directly in front of drivers knees, not the shock.
To isolate it, we wedged a steel bar down from above onto the hydramount against another fixed part of the car to restrict hydramounts movement. Then the engine switches on and off without the knocking, Thus why we think Hydramount!!!
Re VOSA, we are waiting on them to come look at the car.

Also although I am not automotive mechanically minded, I am in the building trade, carpentry, electrical, plumbing welding etc. I wouldn't want anyone to think I was biting off more than I could chew.

[steveandjanes75]

I will have to wait to do repairs until VOSA have looked at it.

[wmj]

If one of the reasons you bought the car was because it had a years MOT and therefore were not expecting to have to pay for any repairs to components that had just passed, I would expect you have legal redress. If the MOT test proves to be shoddy and probably done to help the seller get a better price, you may be able to pursue the seller or MOT tester for the cost of repairs. It may be possible to issue a small claims against one or both at little or no cost to yourself.

[berkshirelad]

Originally Posted by wmj

If one of the reasons you bought the car was because it had a years MOT and therefore were not expecting to have to pay for any repairs to components that had just passed, I would expect you have legal redress. If the MOT test proves to be shoddy and probably done to help the seller get a better price, you may be able to pursue the seller or MOT tester for the cost of repairs. It may be possible to issue a small claims against one or both at little or no cost to yourself.

Bought at auction so Sale of Goods Act doesn't apply

[wmj]

Originally Posted by berkshirelad

Bought at auction so Sale of Goods Act doesn't apply

You would not be using the sales of goods act. You would be pursuing costs for the repairs to a component or components that you would rightly have expected to be in a sound and safe condition because they had passed an MOT two days before the sale of the car. Your argument would be that when you bought the car it was listed with a two day old MOT and you used that information as a basis for your valuation and subsequent purchase price. Had the car been sold as seen without a valid MOT or sold with a failure certificate, would you have bought it for the price you paid? If VOSA find the MOT tester has blatantly passed components that were clearly a fail and take any action against the MOT tester, you should have a case to pursue for compensation. It would be up to the seller or MOT tester to convince a court that they didn't knowingly pass on a dangerous car for sale. Or convince the court that you have not lost out financially due to the negligence of the MOT tester.

It's one thing buying a car at auction and something breaks on the way home or it has issues that you didn't spot when you checked it over. It's a completely different issue when someone passes off a car with a 12 month MOT as mechanically safe to help increase the value of a sale at auction. It may or may not stand up in a court but under small claims it will cost very little to find out. It may be easier and cheaper for the seller or tester to just pay up for the repairs to make the issue go away. There is only one way to find out.

[steveandjanes75]

Update!

VOSA have just called me.

Got a phone call from Gillingham Kent VOSA with real concerns about it. They say things do not ad up. Evidently it failed an mot in March and then passed in May, but the fail and the pass recorded the same mileage, which is strange but not impossible if off the road, but it was 0 miles different, not even driven between the two different MOT test centres.
With my assistance VOSA have booked it in annonimously for testing next Thursday at the same test centre that passed it. The test centre will not know until we arrive with the car, that it is a VOSA inspector who is going to test it in front of them.
If it has the same faults as the fail, their in for it!
Watch this space

[steveandjanes75]

I shall be looking into what legal action I should take if it can be proved it is a dodgy MOT.

That will more likely be with the garage that issued who will be liable for costs as I would not have paid what i did, auction or otherwise, if it did not have an MOT.

[steveandjanes75]

Originally Posted by wmj

You would not be using the sales of goods act. You would be pursuing costs for the repairs to a component or components that you would rightly have expected to be in a sound and safe condition because they had passed an MOT two days before the sale of the car. Your argument would be that when you bought the car it was listed with a two day old MOT and you used that information as a basis for your valuation and subsequent purchase price. Had the car been sold as seen without a valid MOT or sold with a failure certificate, would you have bought it for the price you paid? If VOSA find the MOT tester has blatantly passed components that were clearly a fail and take any action against the MOT tester, you should have a case to pursue for compensation. It would be up to the seller or MOT tester to convince a court that they didn't knowingly pass on a dangerous car for sale. Or convince the court that you have not lost out financially due to the negligence of the MOT tester.

It's one thing buying a car at auction and something breaks on the way home or it has issues that you didn't spot when you checked it over. It's a completely different issue when someone passes off a car with a 12 month MOT as mechanically safe to help increase the value of a sale at auction. It may or may not stand up in a court but under small claims it will cost very little to find out. It may be easier and cheaper for the seller or tester to just pay up for the repairs to make the issue go away. There is only one way to find out.

Exactly! Well put.

I will update you after VOSA have tested it next Thursday.

[steveandjanes75]

Well VOSA have spent an good hour with a fine tooth comb re MOT testing the car this morning, and yes it would have failed today but only on one point. The air bag warning light is on. It was on when I got the car but it cannot be confirmed it was on when it was MOT'd. VOSA did include 5 other advisories, stone chip on w/screen, oil mist on N/S/F shock, dim headlamp, rear exhaust box deterioration on outer skin, O/S/F lower tie rod end cover split but still preventing ingress of dirt.
But none of the above advisories are bad enough to warrant a fail.

Re my local garage/MOT test place saying my wishbone bushes were really knackered. The vosa guy said there was not even enough wear on those bushes to warrant even putting it on as an advisory.

Vosa guy said my local mot test centre who told me it should have failed we're being far too cautious or maybe exaggerating.

The garage will have their knuckles wrapped for failing to include the advisories on the pass certificate, but that's all. So all in all I felt very guilty to have put the garage owner to all the worry of having this VOSA inspection today. But even he personally said to me, it will keep him on his toes.

The strange thing is, as I said in my first post, it did actually fail an MOT a month before at a different MOT place who listed some of those advisory items as the reason, and then later this garage passed it with no advisories. And today the VOSA inspector tells me the guy who checked my car after I bought it was either over cautious or exaggerating. Well if that's the case, that means the other MOT tester was also over cautious for failing it before! I just wonder if the VOSA inspector was being lenient in favor of the garage today, and if I took it somewhere else for a test myself again, it would fail? I AM NOT GOING TO DO THAT!
I just get the feeling the MOTs are rubbish.