Help! MOT tomorrow. Reversing lights not working! Inspection manual says to check on vehicles first used after September 2009, but doesn't seem to say whether they're an "if fitted, must work" on cars earlier than 2009. (Mine's 1989)
Reversing lights - MOT fail?
- Thread starter Avocet
- Start date
Sponsored Links
Can't fail it on that.
Isn't it good that we have Mottie on this site.
Andy
Andy
Sometimes.
Sponsored Links
Thanks guys - particularly Mottie. So it's the case that before 2009, even if the car has them, they don't have to work?
As it happens, they do now. Nasty problem. Fuse, bulbs, relay all OK, it was the bloody switch! Fortunately, I had a spare in an old gearbox, so I've just been out and swapped it now.
As it happens, they do now. Nasty problem. Fuse, bulbs, relay all OK, it was the bloody switch! Fortunately, I had a spare in an old gearbox, so I've just been out and swapped it now.
Shouldn't but might.
I had a TPMS Sensor fail on a pre 2012 Car. MOT Garage failed it. Passed it when I challenged with them.
Lots of different Date based rules. I guess the Testers are on Auto-Pilot sometimes.
Absolutely can't. You never could but it's harder nowdays since becoming computerised as you have to choose a specific item on the screen. If it's not available for selection, you can only advise on it.
You can actually get an MOT on a car with no lights. If they are covered up, removed or permanently disconnected and can't be tested, they can't be failed. Some people refer to this as a 'daytime' MOT. It's not but the tester will issue an advisory saying that they were covered/removed or permanently disconnected at the time of the test.
I knew about that one, because it's a trick often used on kit cars. However, I've a feeling it's only headlamps now? I think you still need stop lights and indicators?
You don't need stoplights or indicators if the headlamps and sidelights are not fitted/covered up/permanently disconnected.
Stop lamps are not required on vehicles:
- first used before 1 January 1936
- that do not have front and rear position lamps, or have such lamps permanently disconnected, painted over or masked that are only used during daylight hours and not used at times of seriously reduced visibility
- Direction indicators and hazard warning lamps are not required on vehicles:
- first used before 1 January 1936
- that do not have front and rear position lamps, or have such lamps permanently disconnected, painted over or masked that are only used during daylight hours and not used at times of seriously reduced visibility
Like you, I served my time in a Vauxhall dealership in the early 70's. And having done M.O.T's, I knew very well what they could or couldn't fail a Viva on.
The problem is, if I go into a garage, tyre fitting place, and many other places with engineering connections, they guys (often a spotty teenager who is still sh!tt!ng yellow) seem to think I know nothing and sometimes, instead of calling them out, I just keep quiet while thinking to myself "what a lot of sh!te".
My local garage is of the opinion that if it has it then it should work & if it does not then it is a fail. My 1981 Chevette was once failed because the rear fog lamp switch did not have an indicator light in it. Didn't argue just fitted a diode in the switch body. At least I am pretty sure that when any of my cars come out with a pass then they are as safe as can be.
It ticks me off when individual testers make their own rules of how they think things should be. They are not there to make the rules, they are there to test to the standards. Fortunately I know a bit more about the testing scheme than the average punter and they ever did it to me, I'd lodge a formal complaint and they'd get a warning and some points on their licence.
I did that all those years ago. However, after both the garage and the M.O.T. people initially agreeing that my car should have passed the test, they closed ranks and started the ahh but this, and ahh but that routine.
Eventually, as my mum needed an M.O.T. I took it to another place, pointed out the "supposed fail" which they agreed was ok so I submitted it to the test which it passed.
So, it seems that a tester can make decisions outside their remit.
Sponsored Links
