MOT failure due to brake lines

[ajstoneservices]

I've just had another van fail it's MOT due to "excessive corrosion" of the brake lines.

The same garage used to fail them with suspension faults which I would have them repair at a cost of several hundred pounds. But after three different vans failed with the same fault I started to become a little suspicious and decided to have the repairs carried out elsewhere.

The mot was due on a vauxhall combo which failed due to "excessive corrosion" of the rear brake pipe/line.

On inspecting the old pipe/hose set for this excessive corrosion I came to the conclusion that that "excessive" must be subjective because I honestly couldn't see anything other than light surface rust and slight pitting. I asked the mechanic that replaced it if he thought it needed replacing and he said he didn't think so

So today I've had a sprinter fail I've been under it with a wire brush and again cannot see any sign of excessive corrosion, if I did, I would have it repaired pronto.

Now before I make a complaint about this garage I really would like to konw what "excessive corrosion" means in the world of motors because it clearly means something different in the world I work in.

I've attached a few photo's to see what you think.

Untitled

• ajstoneservices
• 10 Feb 2014
• 1

Untitled

• ajstoneservices
• 10 Feb 2014
• 1

Untitled

• ajstoneservices
• 10 Feb 2014
• 1

 

[TheVictorian]

They look in good condition to me, I can't see a fail on any of the bits in your photo.

"What if I think it has wrongly failed?

You must complete an appeal form (VT17) obtainable from any MOT testing station or by calling the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (VOSA), on 0845 600 5977. Completed forms need to be returned to VOSA within 14 working days of the test along with a full test fee. VOSA will then offer an appointment within 5 working days to recheck your vehicle. If your appeal is successful some or all of the test fee will be refunded to you. Do not have your vehicle repaired before your appeal is considered, as any change to your vehicle may affect the outcome of the appeal.
"

 

[Peter.N.]

It seems to be very difficult to find an honest, reasonable MOT garage, we are fortunate down here in Dorset to have a very good one, I have never had a dispute with him on anything he has failed, but its rather a long way for you to come.

I would be inclined to take your photograph of your 'excessively corroded brake lines' to a few other MOT stations and ask if they would fail them.

Peter

 

[Burnerman]

To be fair, it only takes one suspicious part of the brake line to fail the MOT......and thats not in the areas that you show.
Popular spots are:
Where the pipes pass through chassis clips
Where the pipes make sharp turns around the rear axle
Where the pipes change from solid to flexi
Where the pipes enter the wheel cylinders.
The garage should happily point out where the issue is.
John

 

[ajstoneservices]

Hi John, hoped you'd be along

The area they failed it on is the area shown in the photo. We have also checked the whole length of the lines front to back.

We rang the garage this afternoon and told them we want them to inspect it again tomorrow and see if they still think it should have failed. Will let you know what they say.

 

[Burnerman]

My apologies for jumping to conclusions
From those pics, there's nothing wrong with those brake pipes at all....
maybe in the first pic where the pipes enter the clip there's a bit of grot, but nowt really!
Lets know!
John
P.S How old is the Sprinter?

 

[ajstoneservices]

One of the lads took it back this morning and the tester took a look and said "any" pitting is a fail however light.

It's now been booked into another garage tomorrow afternoon to see what they say.

Sprinter is 2005 with 110718 miles on the clock.

 

[Avocet]

He's talking rubbish when he says "any pitting is a fail". Here's what the Inspection Manual says:

2. Check all accessible rigid brake pipes for:
a. fouling by a moving part
b. kinks c. chafing, corrosion and damage.
3. Examine flexible hoses for signs of weakness under pressure with brake fully applied.

Reason for Rejection

1. A rigid brake pipe inadequately clipped or otherwise supported.
2. A rigid brake pipe:
a. fouled by moving parts
b. kinked
c. excessively chafed, corroded or damaged. (my bold).

Note that it doesn't say "any" corrosion, it says "excessive". If he wants to make something of it, appeal. VOSA will send a standards monitoring inspector round to have a wee chat with them. They generally don't like that!

Although there is, of course, a degree of subjectivity in all this, I've not known them fail until there is flaky corrosion on them that's bad enough to get a finger nail under and pick bits off. It's worth bearing in mind that the whole idea of an annual MOT test is to assess whether or not the car stands a reasonable chance of going for another year without suffering failure of the component in question. I think it's pretty obvious that there's at least another year in those pipes - probably another 5!

 

[greasedmonkey]

My wifes car recently passed its MOT with an advisory "slight corrosion on front O/S brake pipe".... This was a lot worse than anything in your pictures. MOT guy told me if I cleaned them up and gave them a god coat of grease they will be good for another few years.

 

[Mursal]

Yes about the grease, but messy

We sandpaper, then primer, a coat of black paint and then Waxoil, all before it goes in for test. Quite a cheap preventative fix, those back pipes can be difficult on some cars/vans to replace.

After inspection sometimes they tell us that "The pipes are sticky" ..............
But they cant fail you for a sticky pipe

 

[ray99]

Unbelievable that those pipes as shown in your pictures would fail an MOT.
In my opinion ( as a BMW senior technician ant MOT tester with over 40 years experience) your only course of action should be to appeal. This idiot needs sorting out.
In any case the Ministry always say that "benefit of doubt should be given to the vehicle presenter"
As a WORST case scenario you should have had a "pass and advise".

 

[ajstoneservices]

So it went in for an mot this morning at 10am. I have only just returned home

It failed...................................................................................but not because of the brake lines. They have nothing wrong with them

No it failed on the following:

1) Parking brake efficiency 10%

2) Nearside stop lamp not working. It was yesterday

3) Registration plate lamp not working (we didn't check that)

4) Rear brake application uneven.

5) Parking brake efficiency below requirements


Unbelievable that those items were missed by the other bloke. The parking brake shoes were on the metal


So I'm £185.74 lighter but well happy to have a van with an mot. And more importantly, to have found a decent garage.

Will post the failure sheets later.

 

[Peter.N.]

Pleased you have it back on the road anyway and also that you have found a decent garage. I am afraid its a fact of life that many will try and make some work for themselves as there is not a fortune to be made doing MOTs.

It seems to be better in rural areas or at least where we are but even then standards vary immensely.

Peter

 

[ajstoneservices]

I'm struggling to understand how the first tester could miss the parking brake etc and fail the brake line. I may yet make a complaint to vosa.

Untitled

• ajstoneservices
• 12 Feb 2014
• 1

Untitled

• ajstoneservices
• 12 Feb 2014
• 1

Untitled

• ajstoneservices
• 12 Feb 2014
• 1

 

[Burnerman]

Something bloomin' way off here.....
It seems like a fair price for the brake work though, so another year on the tarmac!
John
I wonder if the testers name was Pugh