How much do you trust an indicator?

[Highway Man]

"Numerous".

I have looked back, at all of your posts here, not just ones which might have been found by matching a search term.

There were 4 with links in. I'm not sure that 4 counts as "numerous".


1)


2)


3)


4)


But anyway - let's look at each one, bearing in mind that the context is this sequence:





i.e. I'm replying to your post in which you claimed you'd posted "numerous links" which show the veracity of your claim that "there are loads of MOT testing thugs who have been convicted".

1) A link to an MOT testers forum with anecdotes about dodgy testers and fraud. Not one mention of thuggery. The closest was an unspecific, unsubstantiated comment "There are some characters of people out there nitros44 that would have you done over or got rid of for being honest" and when you read the whole post that it's in the guy does seem a bit "paranoid" / "conspiracy theorist". People being "got rid of" for reporting dodgy MOTs? Really?

And one "I know some one who ate prison food for 6 months", but no indication that there was any thuggery involved. In fact, the £60,000 fine would tend to suggest the significance of the crime was fraud, not violence.


2) Fraud, fake certificates. No suggestion that he was a thug. In fact, if the report you linked to is accurate, he was a victim of violence, not a perpetrator.


3) & 4) Two links, but to the same case, so really only one example.

At last, a thug. But nothing to show that his thuggery was part of, because of, relating to, him being an MOT tester. He'd have been like this no matter what job he did.

But even if we accept that one tangential example as evidence of "MOT testing thugs", it's just one single solitary person.

One MOT tester out of about 64,000. 0.0016%




No - absolutely not proven.

Again, depressing that I feel the need to point this out, but this reply wasn't trolling either. I didn't write it cynically, just to create conflict, or to argue with you for the sake of arguing.

I posted it because you made a claim, I looked into it, I examined the evidence you produced in justification, I found that the evidence utterly lacked merit and thus did not prove that your claim was correct.

Accordingly I am being completely sincere, and genuine, and honest, and not being the slightest disingenuous, when making this reply.

I truly believe that false claims, wherever made, and by whoever, should be challenged and exposed.

Not to sow division. Not to create conflict. Not to argue for the sake of it as some kind of perverse fun.

Not to troll.

But because I believe with all my heart and soul that it is the right thing to do.

People may disagree about that, that's their right, as is expressing that disagreement.

But what they should not do is to impugn my motives just because they disagree.

You really are clutching at straws here, you realise that right?

 

[robinbanks]

Also, flashing your headlights

and something that shouldn't be done at night, no matter how polite one thinks one is being using one's bi-xenon HID light array to blind some poor sucker while intimating "thanks for giving way to let me pass this single file section"

I used to flash my low level fogs, to say thanks, but f*****s just kept flashing their headlights to say "you're welcome", so I switched to dropping my dipped lights to side and back to dipped.. but they didn't seem to realise it was a good idea to copy and kept on dazzling their brights..

..so now I just hold a hand up in front of their lights as a dual thanks and protection

..or I don't bother. Which makes me sad

 

[Ivor Windybottom]

I agree on the flashing at night - I just don't do it any more.

Here's another... quiet road, car coming the other way has one dead light. I'd often give a couple of flashes just to alert them that there may be an issue. You never know, they might work it out and have a look when they get home. I've stopped doing this, many just blare full beam angrily back.

All in all, I've just stopped trying to help, it's just not worth bothering. Let the police stop them and give them a fine.

I had a headlight out the other day. I noticed straight away, I couldn't see where I was going. Just a couple of years ago a fair few would flash. This time, nobody. I think most have decided to hell with everyone else.

 

[blup]

I'd suggest we need the Northern Ireland system - there, MOTs are done at official government centres, not independent dodgy garages. They have no favouritism and don't offer dodgy deals.

What makes you think the government run centres aren’t dodgy

 

[Mottie]

How many of you flashed Volvo drivers back in the day when you thought they were driving about in the daylight with their ‘sidelights’ on?

 

[Ivor Windybottom]

What makes you think the government run centres aren’t dodgy

They may well be, but at least they don't have a repair garage on the side who could do work for you.

E.g. they can't change a light bulb and charge you a fortune for it.

Or they can't offer to remove your DPF for a fee then give you a pass every year as long as you return there (even though they've made it illegal to drive and would fail any emissions test).

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Here's another... quiet road, car coming the other way has one dead light. I'd often give a couple of flashes just to alert them that there may be an issue. You never know, they might work it out and have a look when they get home. I've stopped doing this, many just blare full beam angrily back.

Mine tells you on the dash, when a road light is not working, even so, I like to check at every opportunity - it's not difficult, you can see the reflection of your front lights, in the rear of the car ahead. Tail lights, in shop windows.

 

[Mottie]

What makes you think the government run centres aren’t dodgy

I used to take HGV’s for test at a government HGV test centre when I carried out repairs for a removal company. There were 3 or 4 testers in each lane, presumably to prevent corruption. One checking the outside, one checking the lights, one checking the underside, one checking the brakes etc but unscrupulous vehicle presenters would leave £50 on the passenger seat and a nod from the gaffer at the front of the lane would see the vehicle fly through. They were always being raided and whole lanes of testers were being arrested. Corruption was rife.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Corruption was rife.

and the other sort of corruption is rife, where the MOT garage carries out repairs, they have a financial interest in finding, or even creating faults, to then charge for carrying out the repair. I once took my car in for a MOT, far from home, and witnessed the tester deliberately twisting the bellows rubber cover, on the steering rack, then failing it on that point.

Several large companies, offer cut-price, even free MOT's, as a way to generate repair work. For many decades, I have only used a local garage, which only does MOT's, and know my cars.

 

[Ivor Windybottom]

Yes, I find it can save a lot of money to pay a higher MOT fee. I'm happy to pay the maximum allowable to my local garage. It's not actually very much for the time and equipment involved, you have to question the motives of those charging less.

 

[blup]

I use an independent garage who in turn uses the adjoining mot tester services, I suspect they give a nod when there’s a potential failure to allow the work to be done, and avoid the need for a re test fee. But maybe it’s treated as a “pre MOT” test to get round it.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

I use an independent garage who in turn uses the adjoining mot tester services, I suspect they give a nod when there’s a potential failure to allow the work to be done, and avoid the need for a re test fee. But maybe it’s treated as a “pre MOT” test to get round it.

The vehicle, has to be logged on the system, and logged off, a fixed amount of time later - an hour later I think.

 

[morqthana]

Yes, I find it can save a lot of money to pay a higher MOT fee. I'm happy to pay the maximum allowable to my local garage. It's not actually very much for the time and equipment involved, you have to question the motives of those charging less.

Years ago I used to use a place, which I won't say was dodgy, but their selling point was that they didn't charge you if your car failed. There was no booking, you just rocked up, almost always quite a queue.

 

[morqthana]

You really are clutching at straws here, you realise that right?

Well, you said that there are loads of MOT testing thugs who have been convicted, I asked you how many, and for proof, and you said you'd posted numerous links, and I should look back on this thread.

So I did.

Don't really see how it can be "clutching at straws" to report what I found when I looked where you asked me to.

 

[JP_]

Driving home this evening, stopped at four way roundabout waiting to turn left. Cars approaching from the right. I watched this car not going fast, not going slow, with its left indicator on as if going to, well, turn left. Something made me think 'nah, they're not' so I stayed where I was. Sure enough they kept on coming straight across the roundabout, indicator still going good style.

I tend not to fully trust what other vehicles indicators are suggesting they're going to do, unless they're far enough away for me to complete my move regardless of where they're going. Not infrequently I'll stay put until I see them start to take the turn.

You?

I never trust an indicator, especially on roundabouts. I go when I think I can make it!