[Effjay]

Looking for some advice. I recently put my car (2010 Clio) in for an MOT in Halfords Auto Centre. The car failed with 4-5 issues needing to be addressed and they quoted me approx. £580 for the repairs.

I took car to another garage to complete the work & full service and booked it in for a re-test. When car was re-tested they failed it again on another issue which wasn’t detailed in the original MOT.

** Front sub-frame extensions and cross member corroded **

The mechanic advised that he cannot pass the car and apologised for an agency working originally missing the damage on the original check. I raised my concerns and made a complaint with their customer services.

They have since phoned me advising that after further consideration they are now happy to pass my car as the damage should be recorded as an advisory and would need to be fixed before my next MOT.

Can anyone advise further on corrosion and if this should be a fail or advisory?

Also has anyone had their car failed by something missed from the original MOT?

Thanks in advance
[b][/b][b][/b]

[Paul S]

Hello Effjay welcome to the forum
Front sub-frame extensions and cross member corroded
[img]https://www.kamracing.co.uk/shop/media/catalog/product/cache/2/image/486×337/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/u/n/untitled-1_4.jpg[/img]
on the left of above picture is not a testable item as its not really a crossmember more a radiator support. would be an advisory

[castrolrob]

the ministry guidance is along the lines of”if another defect is spotted on retest that would justify failing then fail it”and is summat mostly seen when testing a car that’s already been tested elsewhere.we try to make sure the same guy who tested it originally retests it but this isn’t always possible and so weve had similar.as a minimum we have to sort em another test out cos that’s the end of the free retest,by and large weve always sorted some arrangement to suit both parties to avoid any hassle with the ministry but it aint compulsory.the components your describing are summat of a grey area inasmuch as theyre bolted on and could technically be considered as separate from thesubframe but that puts us well into hair splitting territory.the bottom line is that pass/fail/advise whatever the original test either missed it or didn’t at the very least advise it so its over to the guys who did the original test and/or the ministry.good luck

[Stealth]

There are a couple of issues which are nagging me here.

1. The location of the corrosion, is it within a prescribed area.

2. If not is the corrosion bad enough to affect steering/braking.

[Paul S]

1. The location of the corrosion, is it within a prescribed area.. NO

2. If not is the corrosion bad enough to affect steering/braking.. NO

[img]https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/p160x160/28058552_1820692727949647_2809767582724481439_n.jpg?_nc_cat=106&_nc_ht=scontent-lhr3-1.xx&oh=be9c2ec382d1a695d51c5200e2e24515&oe=5D2BD338[/img]
image taken from facebook of a 2007 Clio front crossmember pass or fail

[Stealth]

Not gonna speculate based on a photo Paul. I’d need to see a real car & be armed with a tape measure.

However, its beginning to loom like the defect should not have failed.

[Effjay]

[user=19996]Paul S[/user] wrote:
[quote]Hello Effjay welcome to the forum
Front sub-frame extensions and cross member corroded
[img]https://www.kamracing.co.uk/shop/media/catalog/product/cache/2/image/486×337/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/u/n/untitled-1_4.jpg[/img]
on the left of above picture is not a testable item as its not really a crossmember more a radiator support. would be an advisory[/quote]

Thanks. This looks like the part (item no 113460360591) I have to order to replace the damaged part.

Knowing nothing about cars myself I was slightly concerned that they failed it and then made it an advisory after I phoned customer service. Maybe just coincidence.

[castrolrob]

as per the prior discussions on this very subject I alluded to in my original reply,as mentioned id expect an advise at the low end of the scale all the way to fail at the top end.i couldn’t shout too loud at someone seeing what looks rotten and failing it be it pass advise whatever,at least hes spotted it.i could shout at some one who saw nuffin tho….

[Effjay]

[user=64]castrolrob[/user] wrote:
[quote]as per the prior discussions on this very subject I alluded to in my original reply,as mentioned id expect an advise at the low end of the scale all the way to fail at the top end.i couldn’t shout too loud at someone seeing what looks rotten and failing it be it pass advise whatever,at least hes spotted it.i could shout at some one who saw nuffin tho….[/quote]

Agree 100%, the mechanic who done the re-test and spotted it was great tbh. He took me in and showed me the damage and explained that he had to fail it although he understood my frustration.

He was off when the original test was carried out so it was an agency worker / contractor who done it and missed it. He advised me to make the complaint to their customer services which I did.

[castrolrob]

if the guys never worked on one he may not be aware its a separate component,in situ it all looks like the same piece as the subframe particularly if the bellypans still fitted but its actually all a separate piece bolted in for bracing/crash crumple zone/radiator support(at least judging by your description),the noughties meganes used similar so as I said I couldn’t shout at any one for pulling it even tho he could be wrong to do so,as stealth below mentioned youd need to see the motor with a tape measure to hand to assess it properly and which areas/components are affected.i know it sounds strange that the guy who actually spotted it could be in the wrong but no one ever said the mot scheme had to make sense:shock:

[Paul S]

agency worker / contractor who done it and missed it? shud have advised it as Front sub-frame extensions and cross member corroded not within a prescribed area & not affecting steering/braking.. which would of been constructive for the presenter/owner Effjay to know & next tester that looks at the motor.

[Paul S]

agency worker / contractor who done it and missed it? should have advised it as Front sub-frame extensions and cross member being excessively corroded not affecting steering/braking.

part no 113460360591 Front sub-frame extensions and cross member is bolted on therefore prescribed area dont apply

[Effjay]

[Author]

Posts