EICR opinion please

[Harry Bloomfield]

By law, every local authority runs a garage that does just MOTs, not remedials. This is how they maintain their fleet. They also have to open the testing site to the public. No doubt the garage will be in some inconvenient location, but it's there. And they don't publicise it of course.

Yes, I am aware of that, and I go to a local independent garage, which does no repairs. My point was, that no MOT inspector should have any financial interest in passing or failing a vehicle they are inspecting. Likewise with all and any tests, including the EICR - those carrying out tests, should be completly independent.

 

[JohnW2]

Main issue I have with MOT's is the tester finds a 'fault', then quotes to fix it.

That's obviously a similar issue - but at least MOT testing is highly regulated and, at least to some extent, 'policed'.

If an MOT were in the business of 'inventing' defects and then attempting to charge for (unnecessarily) 'rectifying them, they might well eventually get 'found out' and, quite apart from the (non) future of their career in MOT testing, the police would probably be interested in what again sound to me very much like 'fraud'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

Yes, I am aware of that, and I go to a local independent garage, which does no repairs. My point was,

There certainly used to be a good few of those around. However, I wonder how it now works because my understanding is that, at least for some types of defect identified in a 'fail' MOT, it is no longer legal to drive the vehicle away from the testing station before the defect is rectified, even if there were a prior 'Pass' MOT which had not yet reached its expiry date.

If that's true,what now happens in that situation? Does the vehicle owner have to pay to have it towed or 'trailerd' to somewhere where the defect can be rectified, or what?

that no MOT inspector should have any financial interest in passing or failing a vehicle they are inspecting. Likewise with all and any tests, including the EICR - those carrying out tests, should be completly independent.

That would be the ideal, for MOTs, EICRs and anything similar. However, the practical problem is that those with 'evil intent' would very probably get around any attempts at 'enforced independence' by 'coming to arrangements with friends' etc., or even by having 'multiple identities'!

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

There certainly used to be a good few of those around. However, I wonder how it now works because my understanding is that, at least for some types of defect identified in a 'fail' MOT, it is no longer legal to drive the vehicle away from the testing station before the defect is rectified, even if there were a prior 'Pass' MOT which had not yet reached its expiry date.

Perhaps if it is a significant defect.

Would that also mean that it is no longer allowed to drive a car without a valid MoT to a test appointment?

If it does, that presents a bit of a problem.

 

[JohnW2]

Perhaps if it is a significant defect.

Indeed - it's what they call "a dangerous problem" .....

Driving a vehicle that’s failed​

You can take your vehicle away if:

• your current MOT certificate is still valid
• no ‘dangerous’ problems were listed in the MOT

Otherwise, you’ll need to get it repaired before you can drive.

Would that also mean that it is no longer allowed to drive a car without a valid MoT to a test appointment?

One is still allowed to drive a car with an expired MOT (or if it's never had a required MOT!) to a pre-booked MOT test, but the above would seem to over-ride it if an unaddressed 'fail' MOT is 'current'.

You cannot drive or park your vehicle on the road if the MOT has run out. You can be prosecuted if caught.
The only exceptions are to drive it:

• to or from somewhere to be repaired
• to a pre-arranged MOT test

If it does, that presents a bit of a problem.

As above, it would seem that the former, but not the latter, of those scenarios does now 'present a bit of a problem'!

Kind Regards, John

 

[ebee]

Lol.
I am aware of someone wanting to convince DVLA that they needed to drive their car without tax and mot because tgeir own repair garage was hunderds of miles away.

DVLA were not considering playing ball on that one unsurprisingly

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

If that's true,what now happens in that situation? Does the vehicle owner have to pay to have it towed or 'trailerd' to somewhere where the defect can be rectified, or what?

Yes, it would have to be, and I think always was illegal to drive a vehicle on the road, which was unfit..

 

[ebee]

It might be difference between MOT-worthy or Road-worthy perhaps

 

[JohnW2]

It might be difference between MOT-worthy or Road-worthy perhaps

Indeed. I didn't actually include the last sentence (here in {my} red) of this in what I previously posted:

Driving a vehicle that’s failed​

You can take your vehicle away if:

• your current MOT certificate is still valid
• no ‘dangerous’ problems were listed in the MOT

Otherwise, you’ll need to get it repaired before you can drive.

If you can take your vehicle away, it must still meet the minimum standards of roadworthiness at all times.

Kind Regards, John

 

[SUNRAY]

So the 'early next week' has been today.

Opinions on what this should be on EICR please

More pics to follow when internet access catches up.

 

[JohnW2]

Opinions on what this should be on EICR please

There surely can't be much scope for doubt or debate about that, can there?

Kind Regards, John

 

[Risteard]

So the 'early next week' has been today.

Opinions on what this should be on EICR please

View attachment 311636


More pics to follow when internet access catches up.

Depends which issue you are referring to, although there is a very definite C1 observation to be made there.

 

[Adam_151]

Missing fusebase / blank - (C1)
Missing 'spark cover' where - It is necessary to maintain a suitable IP rating (C2)
...............................................................and where re-wireable fuses are fitted (C2)
45A device in way not rated to accept it (C2)
Undersized wiring on 45A fuseway (C2) could be a C1 depending on what it goes to, looks like 1mm
No schedule or labelling (C3)
RCD is of type AC (C3)

Sounds like a laundry list, but I'm guessing sunray could probably fix most of them in half hour with bits from his bucket of spares

 

[plugwash]

It's at the kind of point though, where if you don't have a bucket of wylex standard spares, then replacing the unit may well be the most reasonable option.

 

[JohnW2]

It's at the kind of point though, where if you don't have a bucket of wylex standard spares, then replacing the unit may well be the most reasonable option.

That's obviously true for many, but I suspect a good few others (like me!) do have a bucket full of what would be needed, without much opportunity to make any use of them!

Having said that, although it is metal, I think (but am not certain) that the RCD (of which there is only one) says that it is a 100 mA one, so that might be another reason for 'starting from scratch'.

Kind Regards, John