[Admin_MT]

[b]This February MOT Testing Magazine will reach its 100th issue. [/b]

The magazine was started 25 years ago, as “[i]MOT Tester and Authorised Examiner[/i]” to give MOT Testing Stations a voice when dealing with the Vehicle Inspectorate – the “VI”, which then became VOSA and now DVSA.

How are we doing?

LET US KNOW WHAT YOU THINK!

We’ll publish the best suggestions in the quarter-century issue.

[Paul S]

One cannot beat a hard copy THINK YOU ARE DOING A STERLING JOB!

Discrepancies between new Manual & DVSA Blog..

What we’re doing to improve the quality of MOT testing

Julia (DVSA) posted on 03 December 2018
Hi You recently posted a comment as follows: ‘if a headlamp adjuster switch is removed for retest is it a pass/fail/advise what?’
You would ‘pass and advise’..

aka ‘special notice’ needs to be put in print

[castrolrob]

or at the very least sent to all testers by some readable format as opposed to hoping it travels by osmosis:shock:

[Paul S]

horror storie:shock:

[castrolrob]

looking at their current post about rag and saying agency/self employed testers could always undergo additional training to improve their prospects with potential employers.i aint expecting my reply to go thru primarily cos I pointed out that I considered it an insult to every tester out there.picture the scenario,a-i want a job.whats your rag?b-red but ive done a course to improve it.c-your testing is so bad you’ve had to do additional training to get it up to an acceptable level but you would like me to employ you.d-no thanks….that’s ignoring the fact that most testers in that position would have to pay for said additional training themselves to make it look like they didn’t know what they were doing to start with.utter madness and I can only assume the idjit dvsa womble who posted it is either in deep denial of these problems,is reading from a pre made script given by those higher up or is simply too stupid to realise the implications of such a process:shock:

[Paul S]

Anyone slacking with the Assessment yet?….. done hrs of training and logged it via Apple and ZX Spectrum . I may need a bacon and egg sandwich for brekkie, if that’s allowed these days .

So reading through a matters of testing blog and someone asks the question regarding a vehicle failing the smoke test at plate value and returns for retest with the plate value damaged and unreadable.
Considering you are always told to test as presented this goes against that

statement needs to be sent out via special notice to be valid.. got a comment like that from dvsa “ Olivia “ that’s lies too. If it failed the retest and you then did another full test what would the result be. You have to test as presented until legal documentation clearly states otherwise.

Carry on regardless…… 😯

[castrolrob]

another part of my comment to them re assesments,theyre trying to give the impression that taking it early will somehow help,utter rubbish,i did mine a few months back and I was forced to wait THAT long because of the state of flux in the manual and the standards being applied.like I said someones in complete denial about all this:shock:

[Paul S]

agreed and February MOT Testing Magazine will reach its 100th issue.. being positive recall info & being able to cut & paste it from the check mot history site onto vt cert as an advisory, THAT is positive road safety.

[castrolrob]

wouldn’t know what cut and paste is(not computer literate)but anythings gotta be better than typing it out manually 3 or 4 times a day

[Paul S]

vsi sometimes informs of a recall yet there’s none showing on check-mot.service.gov.uk.. problem i got is trying to copy the vsi recall text & pasting it into the advisory box as it exceeds the no of characters/words allowed, copying from check-mot.service.gov.uk aint a problem but try doing it from vsi:shock:..stand to be corrected but had vsi recall info about zafira A, when none showing on check-mot.service, thought this recall only affected zafira B models

they do need to drill down vsi

[castrolrob]

yeah,remember em telling us about corsa b pillar cracks on c/d models,top mounts for same,any vw polo a top mount play advise left over from the eighties to name but a few.all they seem to have done is copy anything left from comp 1 rather than providing accurate/modern stuff,ive stopped looking at it,largely worthless.

[Aylesbury Jock]

Mercedes A class, testing rear brakes. The old VSI stated you had to test them with engine off, ignition on, charging the servo before testing each wheel. This is backed up by info from elsewhere. Today’s advice is they must be tested with the ignition off. I have no trust in their accuracy now.I also notice quite a few models having a warning about high voltage at various points around the vehicle as if it were a hybrid, when it’s not.

[Paul S]

same here 2003 berlingo done today & wasn’t a hybrid..

MOT could soon see ANOTHER major update to address outstanding safety recalls

MOT could soon see ANOTHER major update to address outstanding safety recalls

begs the question.. Registering vehicles correctly
In previous blog posts we’ve mentioned that we’re looking to try and reduce the number of vehicles registered incorrectly during MOT. This means the result will be registered against the wrong vehicle, which is a problem.. to say the least:shock:

[Paul S]

The MOT continues to be updated to stay relevant and effective in a changing world,
https://www.pmps-digital.com/aft/2019/02/50/
IGA Director Stuart James explains;. “They DVSA, other agencies, consumers and ultimately the VTS themselves. Here, Testers are not correctly identifying vehicles for test..:shock:
aint called VSI more like MOT advise.. advisory warning in the first instance may not be dealt with so leniently on repeat occasions.”

[Admin_MT]

[Author]

Posts