Well I'm thinking tester is an idiot lol, said there should be height adjuster for headlights and woudnt have it there set with suspension said there was motors in lights I said they were for wipers he said car had none and there clearly there and working, then couldn't open fuel flap because car was running broke cover for seatbelt and broke interior driver door handle checked everything else and said car was good and emissions really good but aborted test because couldn't test handbrake on rollers when I clearly told him you went ment to lol
Take it back and ask that it is tested by a competent tester. The headlights only need to be self levelling (and have wash/wipe) if fitted with HIDs, which it isn't (or shouldn't be), as you say, there's no adjustment on many other cars, if the aim of the lights is correct then it doesn't need an adjuster as the suspension self levels and keeps them pointing where they should. I assume he also fails all models of Mercedes too as you can't open the petrol flap on them when the engine is running either. Did he try to test the footbrake on the rollers? If he did, you'd best send the bill for a new viscous coupling to him (https://www.ashcroft-transmissions.co.uk/viscous-couplings/range-rover-viscous-coupling.html) as that's the easiest way to destroy one there is. Sounds like idiot is being polite, total dickhead is the description I'd use......
He tested brakes in car park but said how is he ment to test handbrake if not on rollers, says readings Kent to be in 20's but mine was all over shop and trying to come off rollers
The handbrake in on the back of the transfer box.
What a stupid twat..
How is this bloke a tester?
My MOT man put the handbrake on and selects drive in the car park, if it can hold the car while in gear at idle its fine..
Same for my Discovery, lever travel too is a good indicator.
Mine just yanks on the handbrake while driving along at walking pace. Still almost puts him through the windscreen. If some idiot that hasn't read the testers manual tries to test on rollers, it will try and climb off them as by turning the wheels on one axle, it'll turn the others as it's permanent 4 wheel drive so the front wheels will be driving it along.
I puller into layby on way home pulled 3 clicks it held then moved forewards with difficulty but 4 clicks it took over 2500revs and stayed put
Yanking it on while moving wouldn't do the UJ's much good i'd of thought!
Still quite tough though!
Dear oh dear, I wouldn't be going back to that place for MOT again, or for anything else again for that matter.
StrangeRover wrote:
Yanking it on while moving wouldn't do the UJ's much good i'd of thought!
That's why it's done at walking pace. It'll put less strain on the UJ's than me towing 3.5 tonnes up the side of a mountain......
blobthebuilder wrote:
I puller into layby on way home pulled 3 clicks it held then moved forewards with difficulty but 4 clicks it took over 2500revs and stayed put
blobthebuilder wrote:
I puller into layby on way home pulled 3 clicks it held then moved forewards with difficulty but 4 clicks it took over 2500revs and stayed put
Not MOT related, but this is how I toasted my first ever RR handbrake, on the old 1984 classic. 3.5 V8 with the twin carbs and the three speed Chrysler auto box.
Disembarking the ferry back from Stornoway (where I bought it on a work trip) I thought the front wheels were turned up against a low level metal 'wall' and stopping me going forward, so I tried to move; tried to move; tried to move; and finally gave it some serious welly. Turned out the resistance I was feeling wasn't tyres against metal, but handbrake against propshaft! The 55 miles back home, with the remnants of the handrake still on, didn't do it any favours - but that's what the 'park' setting on an auto box is for, right?
Sounds like you had a real 'mare' with your tester.
My missus used to work on the same theory. She had a Merc C180 auto with the foot operated parking brake. I took it in for MoT and it did virtually nothing so failed. Got back home and told her that it had failed on handbrake, "But it hasn't got one?" was the reply. Had to take her outside and show her where it was. She'd never used it once in the time she'd owned it as that is what P is for surely?
donmacn wrote:
blobthebuilder wrote:
I puller into layby on way home pulled 3 clicks it held then moved forewards with difficulty but 4 clicks it took over 2500revs and stayed put
blobthebuilder wrote:
I puller into layby on way home pulled 3 clicks it held then moved forewards with difficulty but 4 clicks it took over 2500revs and stayed put
Not MOT related, but this is how I toasted my first ever RR handbrake, on the old 1984 classic. 3.5 V8 with the twin carbs and the three speed Chrysler auto box.
Disembarking the ferry back from Stornoway (where I bought it on a work trip) I thought the front wheels were turned up against a low level metal 'wall' and stopping me going forward, so I tried to move; tried to move; tried to move; and finally gave it some serious welly. Turned out the resistance I was feeling wasn't tyres against metal, but handbrake against propshaft! The 55 miles back home, with the remnants of the handrake still on, didn't do it any favours - but that's what the 'park' setting on an auto box is for, right?
Sounds like you had a real 'mare' with your tester.
At least I know everything else is found just need fella here to sign off the handbrake and should be a good un
Its at local garage today I told him no to rollers and use tappley he smiled and said I'm to stop stressing over MOT and that before then he has made his mind up, normally on ramp he says that tells him all he needs to know plus its a steep slope to to MOT area so I guess could test there
A
Well its recorded as a fail due to broken exhaust bracket at front (major defect) although government site shows fail it still says MOT valid till 23 nov, he also says he just needs a ramp but its a 5 minute fix which he hopes in next hour or so will be done
The way they work is that they need to show a certain number of fails otherwise it looks like they are not doing the test properly. My tester got an inspection and was asked why he never failed anything for blown light bulbs. He told the inspector that he just fitted a new bulb and passed the car. He was told what he should do is fail it, fit a new bulb then retest so the percentage of fails accurately reflects the number of cars running around with blown light bulbs.
Government site takes 2 or 3 days to update so it won't show the pass (and fail and subsequent pass) for a couple of days.
Even still if I use car to get kids and back abou20-30mins its still been failed so illegal, I never normally see police but sods law I would, I not complaining though I will take the result and 5 min fix
All passed now till end Nov next year lol, he said for age is was a good car, well cared for, new sunroof now lol
I took mine in after 2yrs sitting and it passed with 2 balljoint covers being advised
Hopefully i'm lucky this march when its due again!!!
Yes, I wonder about the percentage of fails. I had mine done a couple of weeks ago (the equivalent here in NSW). I was surprised to see it failed for engine oil leak and transmission oil leak, which it then noted had been repaired and now passed. All in the one session ....... just sayin’ .......
Well this has made me laugh, how did he ever pass the tester exam, what a complete muppet, I’d go in there, get his boss and educate the idiots, also tell him your having your viscous checked Incase he’s buggered that,, I’ve had rangerovers for many years now, but luckily have a good clued up guy who looks after mine ,, any advisories he writes on a bit of paper and leaves in the center consul, lol