vec c advisory notice

[denzilbud]

hi all had my mot the other day and she passed but it has a few advisorys could someone explain what the rear radius arms are and what is the cheapest fix,i had a quote of £256 for front discs replace,tracking,rear radius arms

[denzilbud]

would it be easier to change the rear shocks instead of the top bushes

[denzilbud]

anyone as im supposed to be ringing the garage back to arrange for the work to be done or not,what are the top suspension bushes

[Birchy63]

Not sure what to say about the rest but as for the brake discs, LMF sell them with pads for £78

http://www.lmfvauxhall.co.uk/store/home.php?cat=2698

They'd buy them for probably £50 wholesale so where is this other £200 going? im sure as hell it won't take 4 hours to change them..... :/

The garage will fit "standard replacements" too, which probably won't be as good. The price quoted puts into question their honesty and if it were me i'd be looking elsewhere.

They may have been trying to drum up extra trade with the advisory notes, as ripping people off on MOTs is much harder to do now that all the info goes into the VOSA central system, making it near impossible to fail a car for things that aren't faulty.

[nikroc]

Bit rich for me personally..diy...cheaper n you get the satisfaction of knowing you done it!!

[darkmandonny]

rear radius arms are what conects the hub to the body and shock bushes are easy changed

[darkmandonny]

They may have been trying to drum up extra trade with the advisory notes, as ripping people off on MOTs is much harder to do now that all the info goes into the VOSA central system, making it near impossible to fail a car for things that aren't faulty

talking as a mot tester this statment is pure rubbish no offence but nothing has changed with the test ie standards only recording vehicle details are diffrent.was done to help testers with wording and make stealing mot books and stamp safer

[Birchy63]

talking as a mot tester this statment is pure rubbish no offence but nothing has changed with the test ie standards only recording vehicle details are diffrent.was done to help testers with wording and make stealing mot books and stamp safer

Doesn't the failure information go onto a central server? and so does that not mean that if someone chose to exercise their right to get a second opinion elsewhere and the next garage found that nothing was wrong, there would be grounds for trading standards to step in?
The facility do that is certainly there, so why not use it?

That's the way I assumed it worked..... Of course it also means that the next dodgy garage could go with the previous findings and add a few more things on top

I think most of them are dodgy anyway, especially those that used to do the "half price MOT" that actually cost them more in labour to carry out than the fee they charged the customer..... Seriously it's going to fail, its a forgone conclusion

My old Seat Ibiza failed an MOT for exhaust bracket worn and rear brake light bulb, It wasn't until I saw the photo (a month later) from the speed camera that clocked me on the way to the garage (literally 1/4 of a mile away) that I realised my brake lights were actually fine It was only £10 or so, but I was not a happy bunny.

Anyhow, my car goes to my brothers place for MOTs now (main Toyota dealership), it'll only ever fail if there really is something wrong and when parts need changing they let me pick/buy the parts I want, so I don't get the universal/generic rubbish.

There was only one garage I know of that had always done a fair trade, they were so fully booked that you'd need to book 6 weeks in advance just to get your car in for a service. Then they changed hands, tried to pull a fast one on me (so i stopped going there) and now 2 years later, everytime I drive past it's like the Mary Celeste.

[GARY3306]

Doesn't the failure information go onto a central server? and so does that not mean that if someone chose to exercise their right to get a second opinion elsewhere and the next garage found that nothing was wrong, there would be grounds for trading standards to step in?
The facility do that is certainly there, so why not use it?......

Yes, the R'sFR (Reasons for rejection) are entered into the VOSA database, and that failure (and advisory) information is retained until the car is represented for test and passes, or goes over the 10 working days following a failed test. So yes, there can be the scenario where a person takes their car to one testing station, it fails, they then take it to be tested somewhere else and it passes (quite why you'd want to pay two test fees though....?). You would then have grounds to, in the first instance raise the question with the test centre that failed the vehicle originally. It may or may not escalate from there. The testers manual is there for one reason and one reason only, and that is so that (in theory) every NT (nominated tester) at every testing station in the country will apply the same standards, to wit you should be able to take your car into a TS in Newcastle, then take it to another TS in Southampton and get exactly the same list of faults. In practice of course, this will not happen all the time, everybodys perceptions are different and therefore what one NT will call a failure, another will pass and advise. There is basically 3 decisions you can take towards a testable component, and that is PASS, FAIL or PASS AND ADVISE. If there is doubt in the testers mind as to whether the component is unserviceable or 'just about there', then he should pass and advise, and NOT fail it anyway 'to get the business'

[darkmandonny]

as stated above said very well in my book!