[Dajmcnn]

Hi, initially I was told my car (Nissan Qashqui) had failed its MOT due front brake pads, but then also advised that brake discs were below min spec and need to be replaced. I asked was this MOT spec or manufactures spec. They advised it was manufacturers spec, I asked if not MOT spec can I just get pads done (yes I know there are circumstances why you should do both at the same time but humour me for a moment) i.e. will it still pass MOT. First I was advised yes, so I said for the time being just do brakes, but then I was advised no. So I went ahead and got both done.
When I got the MOT cert it had the discs down as “advisory” . When I raised the issue again the written response was.
• The MOT failed on the pads been worn.
• The Centre then Carried out a brake inspection and found the brake discs to be below Manufactures recommendations.
• Minimum specifications are 24mm for this braking system.
• One side of the vehicle was at 22.89 and the other reading 23.40 so both brake discs were below the required limit hence why the discs needed changing.
In a telephone conversation I was told they would not have checked the discs had they not had to take the wheels off to replace the brake pads. To me this means that you could have below spec discs but ok pads and no one would be any of the wiser.
The questions I have are
1. Did I need to get disc replaced to pass MOT.
2. How can something be advisory yet effectively still fail the vehicle
3. Am I missing anything ?
Also if the brakes are tested using a guage does it matter what the spec is as long as the pads have the minimum required and the gauge show brakes meet the standard required ?
I have asked for a copy of the MOT regulations as I assume this will be written down somewhere official, but as yet it is not forth coming
I should add that the centre in question is Kwik Fit which always seems to mention disc spec (so assume this is a selling strategy), though haven’t always needed to get discs replaced, hence my suspicion.
Finally from this website “A brake disc or drum will only fail if it is significantly worn. Being worn below the manufacturer’s recommended limits isn’t a reason in itself”

There just seems to be so many contradiction here, so any help would be appreciated

Cheers

[castrolrob]

the fail standard for discs on an mot is VERY minimal,they have to be in danger of cracking in half or similar.service and mot standards are very different,we don’t measure discs on an mot,we aint allowed to dismantle the car so in most cases it wouldn’t be practical even if we did.repairs on the other hand are carried out to different standards,as a for instance new pads on old/worn discs can give brake readings that would fail a retest so you could be in a position where a repair has caused a failure even if the components concerned would individually pass,another for instance would be if the brakes failed on binding,once rectified a faulty wheel bearing(for instance)could be revealed leading to a failure that didn’t originally exist because it couldn’t have been checked in its original condition.having said that its rare and normally at that level the discs should at the very least be useable unless one side was severely worn although no one can be certain from the other end of the internet!the best guess I can give with the info you’ve given is that they have recommended a best practice repair where you have wanted/asked about the cheapest option and that is beyond the remit of an mot and between yourself and the garage concerned.not the first time ive heard similar tho…lastly the mot manual and regs are available as an online resource at gov.uk.take a look,you might be surprised……

[Paul S]

Welcome to the forum Dajmcnn
1. Brake Disc Significantly and obviously worn Rfr 1.1.14 (a) (i), but only at the time of test.
2. They were wrong in advising ‘brake discs were below min spec’ as above it’s a Rfr
3. Yes unfortunately the work has been done so you are unable to appeal the test results with DVSA
Also if the brakes are tested using a gauge does it matter what the spec is as long as the pads have the minimum required and the gauge show brakes meet the standard required is a good question for pads they have to be below 1.5mm but for discs its ‘Significantly and obviously worn’ so with the latter all we have to go on is the manufacturers spec based on a reliable source.
Their website should have been updated on the 20th May “A brake disc or drum will only fail if it is significantly weakened is incorrect its now ‘Brake Disc Significantly and obviously worn’ is the current Mot reg post 20th May.

[Paul S]

made a mistake in that last post

1.1.14 Brake discs and drums
A brake disc or drum must be significantly worn before you should reject it. Being worn below the manufacturer’s recommended limits isn’t a reason in itself.

[Dajmcnn]

Thank you both for the responses, I suppose what I am ultimately after is confirmation that the discs did need to be replaced. From what you’re saying (and sorry if I am being a bit dim) there is every reason to believe that I did not need to get the disc replaced especially in light of the fact that the advisories state “Brake disc worn,pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened….”
Also having gone through the MOT spec on the Gov website (cheers), my interpretation is– , if when changing the pads (due to failure) you see that the disc are to quote- significantly and obviously worn/ Major or insecure, fractured or otherwise likely to fail/Dangerous this would fail the vehicle as such the disc should at the point be replaced.
I can see nothing that even remotely suggests that they need to be replaced if, again quote “Brake disc worn,pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened.
I do appreciate that changing one thing can impact on something else but there was no mention that this was the case at the time.
Thanks for the heads up re the appeal process but my ultimate aim is to get a refund if the work did not need to be done. Again if I have missed or misinterpreted something please let me know
And again thanks

[Aylesbury Jock]

They would not be allowed to fail the discs due to what they find when changing the pads. They can only go on what they find during the test with the wheels on. Any further information from during repairs is irrelevant.

[DB9]

Without a visual inspection of the surface area of the brake discs I’m not convinced over the internet that anybody can advise if the discs should have been changed or not for repairs.

The mot being the minimum standard is looking for a brake disc to be significantly weakened, that’s pretty bad to be honest, and you’d not be driving it very long with discs in that condition.

On the mot the discs would be an advisory capacity if corroded or worn, but a professional repairer will not replace brake pads with corroded/worn brake discs. If your brake discs surface area where the pads make contact are uneven, then a brake imbalance during rate of increase and decrease could be seen and then may even fail the retest. The repairer more than likely observed the worn discs and advised the reception accordingly.

The scenario comes across correct to me, the tester advised the worn discs, but the repairer thought ahead and understood the implications of the worn discs.

[captaincon]

from the information given I hate to say it but the garage got it right they did not fail the disc just advised them.
when they went to fit the pads they double checked the disc and found them under spec.
I would have refused to fit the new pads on the discs from the information you have given.
you could have taken the car away and got someone else to fit the new pads on the worn disc and on re test providing everything checked out then I would have left the advise in place.
I expect you paid well over the odds for the repair by letting them fix it.I would get a few quotes from local firm and compare the price and maybe get a partial refund but don’t use [x] they are always over priced use a small local firm

[Dajmcnn]

[Author]

Posts