Now for the serious stuff

lifes2short

Member
Messages
5,821
Several years ago on Hartcliffe Way Bristol a 50mph dual carriageway I was involved in an accident with 15 year old cyclist driving a customer's Merc S500 7pm in the evening.
A serious situation witnessed by a Fire Engine on the opposite side of the road who saved the lad on the scene.
My customer ran a post office and this is what caused the problem.
He had taxed his own car without checking it's MOT which it didn't have.
I was fully insured Motor Trade for business and pleasure all risks.
A few weeks later I'm in Court as it was a criminal offence to drive without a MOT.
My solicitor said just plead guilty.
On the day I thought no I shouldn't be here and decided to give them the story of course they weren't interested just make a plea.
I then said have you seen a 15 year old lads face in a windscreen whilst you are working ?
Mr Wilkinson you should not be here and sent on my way leaving the Court with thieves, drug addicts and prostitutes.
A day of my life wasted but no conviction.

common sense prevailed and good call by the judge
 

RichardSEL

Junior Member
Messages
130
Using the car in the road without a valid MOT would also invalidate your insurance.
That mebe why both shops I use take and return their MOT vehicles from the MOT shop -- they use their Traders' policy?

And we all know how they will try to weasel out of paying for claims at the best times.
Don't. I've been with Footman James for years. With a multi-car enthusiasts' policy.
This years renewal had an underwriter's caveat that the mileage restriction had been reduced to 5,000 -- in total for all three cars <sigh>

No wonder that bloke with an absolutely pristine Dodge Charger (there's another one with a Stage 1 E-Type doing the rounds) you see at rallys and exhibitions never takes it off his trailer! Trailer queens. Don'tcha just luv 'em ;-)
 
Last edited:

RichardSEL

Junior Member
Messages
130
So what's happening with the airbag?

Fixed at local Mas specialist with OEM part. Have replied to DVSA per my post earlier in thread. No reply as yet. Next stop after another 10 days (and counting)
post Recorded Delivery again.

Handbrake adjusted up two clicks nearside only. Passed on re-test. Saved on re-test £610
 

RichardSEL

Junior Member
Messages
130
This has just flooded in from DVSA. Seems to be part stock reply to those pesky MOPs? (Derogitory police term for Members of the Public)

"Thank you for your email enquiry dated 1 December 2020, concerning an MOT Appeal.

DVSA is concerned to receive any complaint where it is alleged that a test certificate has been improperly issued, but in order that action can be taken it is essential that the matter should be reported as soon as possible after the test. You will appreciate that to prove such cases the Department's vehicle examiners have to show beyond reasonable doubt that any defects found existed at the time of the test and to a degree which contravened the Regulations.

For this reason such cases are not normally investigated unless the facts are reported within twenty eight days from the date of issue of the test certificate for mechanical problems and three months for corrosion related problems. I regret that the lapse of time since the test precludes our taking action in this case. You may be assured however that DVSA is concerned that testing stations maintain a proper standard of testing and in no way abuse their position. A close watch is therefore kept on the activities of any testing station which has been the subject of a complaint.

I should emphasise that a DVSA test certificate relates only to the condition of a vehicle at the time of the test and in respect of the items tested. It should not be regarded as a guarantee of the condition of the tested items at any later time nor is it any guarantee of the general mechanical condition of the vehicle. I regret that the department cannot assist you in obtaining financial redress from the testing station which issued the test certificate. I suggest you contact a solicitor, your local consumer Protection Department or Citizens Advice Bureau for further advice.

Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. I am sorry that we could not assist you in a more positive manner.

Over 90% of customers surveyed are satisfied with the service we have provided. Let us know what you think by clicking here.

Kind regards,
Christine | Customer Service Centre Agent
 

RichardSEL

Junior Member
Messages
130
And here is my reply addressed to Christine A Droid (no, I didn't. But the temptation was there ;¬)

"Hello...

Thank you for your prompt reply to my original complaint -- this does at least show that the email path to enquiries@dvsa.gov.uk is working -- my original post dd 8th August was addressed to csccomplaints@dvsa.gov.uk
I am sending this reply in copy to both addresses in the hopes that it assists you in ensuring your published email address (on the form) is actually working.

I'm sorry to learn that you will not accept the photographs, independent assessors' reports, and repair work invoices that were prepared within the time frames that you list.
My allegations against the MOT test station you tell me will not be investigated because of your time frame requirments. I'm sure these were not set to be binary yes/no dates but you can still accept at least the evidence for consideration. A station could be continuing to cause dangerous and otherwise un-roadworthy vehicles to be on the road.

I will take the matter up with Trading Standards as you suggest. Your recommendation that I also contact the Motor Ombudsman is impotent. The trader concerned has to be a member of that service for it to intercede. The dealer for whom the MOT station acted is not a member.

I feel that, following from your fresh Chief Executive appointment as from 1st January 2021, I should also take this up with my democratically elected representative. Please let me know who currently is the relevent Minister?
 

RichardSEL

Junior Member
Messages
130
DVSA's 'droid replied to above with the usual pre-prepared drivel.

"Over 90% of customers surveyed are satisfied with the service we have provided. Let us know what you think by clicking here."
 

Saigon

Member
Messages
778
This has just flooded in from DVSA. Seems to be part stock reply to those pesky MOPs? (Derogitory police term for Members of the Public)

"Thank you for your email enquiry dated 1 December 2020, concerning an MOT Appeal.

DVSA is concerned to receive any complaint where it is alleged that a test certificate has been improperly issued, but in order that action can be taken it is essential that the matter should be reported as soon as possible after the test. You will appreciate that to prove such cases the Department's vehicle examiners have to show beyond reasonable doubt that any defects found existed at the time of the test and to a degree which contravened the Regulations.

For this reason such cases are not normally investigated unless the facts are reported within twenty eight days from the date of issue of the test certificate for mechanical problems and three months for corrosion related problems. I regret that the lapse of time since the test precludes our taking action in this case. You may be assured however that DVSA is concerned that testing stations maintain a proper standard of testing and in no way abuse their position. A close watch is therefore kept on the activities of any testing station which has been the subject of a complaint.

I should emphasise that a DVSA test certificate relates only to the condition of a vehicle at the time of the test and in respect of the items tested. It should not be regarded as a guarantee of the condition of the tested items at any later time nor is it any guarantee of the general mechanical condition of the vehicle. I regret that the department cannot assist you in obtaining financial redress from the testing station which issued the test certificate. I suggest you contact a solicitor, your local consumer Protection Department or Citizens Advice Bureau for further advice.

Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. I am sorry that we could not assist you in a more positive manner.

Over 90% of customers surveyed are satisfied with the service we have provided. Let us know what you think by clicking here.

Kind regards,
Christine | Customer Service Centre Agent
I was really determined not to have any more involvement in this thread. But you referring to pesky MOP’s, then feeling that you had to explain (above) what it meant as far as the police were concerned with regard to us general public sort of speaks for its self and also p1sses me off, so please just get over it.
 

Simon1963

Member
Messages
819
A question guys, if a car is mot’d and has advisories do those advisories stay in the mot system until they are fixed. Or is it just the opinion of the tester at the time and a different tester might not pick them up?
 

philw696

Member
Messages
25,119
A question guys, if a car is mot’d and has advisories do those advisories stay in the mot system until they are fixed. Or is it just the opinion of the tester at the time and a different tester might not pick them up?
As an ex tester you hope the individual will get them done before the next test where they might become a fail.
Sadly many do not.
 

philw696

Member
Messages
25,119
and indeed a different tester may not pick them up
Exactly it's all down to the individual tester at the moment cars are tested.
You know straight away when you start doing a test if it's a well serviced and looked after car.
People used to say they can't afford to service the car but usually have the latest IPhone etc.
 

Simon1963

Member
Messages
819
Thanks for the answers guys. I thought that might be the case. So basically when a car goes in for an mot the tester doesn’t see any previous mot history?
 

RichardSEL

Junior Member
Messages
130
I was really determined not to have any more involvement in this thread. But you referring to pesky MOP’s, then feeling that you had to explain (above) what it meant as far as the police were concerned with regard to us general public sort of speaks for its self and also p1sses me off, so please just get over it.

Yes, policing is a person business. I belonged to a Service, others felt they belonged to a Force.
A few months before my retirement Met got in teams of business management types who'd come from industry. As directions to experienced officers on the street became ever more strict in terms of what they could and could not do for a given scenario, so the resentment and ill feeling grew. This was added to by the deliberate attempts to "get rid of" officers on the old employment contracts with maximum seniority. For one of those you could employ 1⅓ new entrants.
But even senior management teams baulked at the directive that victims of crime (VIWs) should be termed "Customers"
The over-arching direction expected of Call Receipt (999 and 101) operators -- where the "incident" is non-violent -- is to get rid of it into reference storeage and not assign a "unit" all the while placating the MOP

Had your home burgled on a weekend? No chance of Scene of Crime Officer (SOCO) getting to you then. Most would be on an overtime ban. But you can't clear up the wreckage until they'd been on the Monday or you'd destroy evidence.
 

RichardSEL

Junior Member
Messages
130
Meanwhile, back on the MOT station hunt. The following has just flooded in from someone at DVSA who does understand what I'm trying to achieve via their enforcement team:
"Thank you for your email enquiry dated 7 December 2020, concerning <VRM redacted>

DVSA is concerned to hear that an MOT testing station have incorrectly issued an MOT against a vehicle. While you are not within the timescale to carry out an MOT appeal, DVSA will accept any evidence which you have regarding this matter and submit your details to the local DVSA intelligence unit who will investigate this matter further.

Please supply any evidence which you have regarding this matter for the details to be forwarded. All information received by DVSA is analysed, prioritised, and treated in a sensitive manner.

DVSA do not routinely give feedback on information received. However, feedback may be requested by providing a full name, and postal or email address. Your request will then be considered, however there may be occasions where feedback cannot, or will not be provided.

Any complaints which you have can be addressed by ourselves, alternatively if you are unsatisfied with our response you may escalate your complaint to our tier 2 public liaison team.

Further details on this can be found in the below link

I hope that this has assisted with your enquiry, however, should you require any further information please do not hesitate to contact us again."

Best I can do for now...
 

RichardSEL

Junior Member
Messages
130
Thanks for the answers guys. I thought that might be the case. So basically when a car goes in for an mot the tester doesn’t see any previous mot history?

I've just had my Merc SLR MOT-ed. The MOT tester could'nt find the VIN number in the usual places but eventuallydid find it on an engine bay cross member. He said that new regulations mean that he would'nt have been able to issue an MOT irrespective of whether the car meets MOT regs if that'd not been found.

Moral? They're tightening the screw every day against the private motorist. Irrespective of whichever party's in power IMO. And first in line are petrol heads with a decent CC engine under their foot

He also mentioned that the colour listed on the previous MOT record was "grey". But now it's Black. And asked why. Welp, this was before my ownership but by looking back through the record was able to point to the conversion to Glass Fibre SLR bodywork in 2005 by Dreamwerks Baveria but the respray not done until returned to UK -- so it was plain grey primer bodyshell on arrival back over here. Luckily that difference wasn't grounds to refuse an MOT (with no advisories)
But watch this space, I betcha some paper-shuffling DaFT wonk will read this and think: "that's a good idea, I can advance my career with this..."

Rather a long way to say, yes MOT testers do have access to previous MOT results: at least in the same way as we do -- reasons for failure and reasons for advisories are listed on the web site look up. I don't know if they have any more access... As of 2011 there was no more MOT certificate info available via PNC control rooms than that -- apart from any PG9 and /INF info filed as mentioned -- the PG9 info would carry the CAD number of the stop so that would have to be accessed
 
Last edited:

RichardSEL

Junior Member
Messages
130
This has just flooded in from Hugh Bonniville (great series W1A...)
16 December 2020
Our ref: 2012/00793
Dear Mr <redacted>

Thank you for your further email of 7 December about your MOT appeal. I’m replying in line with the second stage of our complaints procedure.
I appreciate the circumstances, and I am sorry for any inconvenience this issue has caused you.
I acknowledge you are dissatisfied with the responses you received from our customer service unit (CSU), however, there is very little I can add to what you have already been told.
We have limited jurisdiction and only consider complaints reported within twenty-eight days from the date of issue of the test certificate for mechanical problems and three months for any corrosion-related issues.
Unfortunately, as you submitted your complaint outside of the accepted timeframe, we are not able to look into the specific concerns you have raised in your complaint. I understand this issue might frustrate you, but we cannot retroactively accept any evidence submitted after the deadline has already passed.
While we cannot respond to your specific concerns about your MOT appeal, please be assured the DVSA closely monitor the activities of any testing station which has been the subject of a complaint, to ensure that repeat incidents do not occur.
I appreciate that Grace’s advice to contact The Motor Ombudsman was not relevant in this circumstance. I am sure it was not Grace's intention to misadvise you. All our agents want to provide the best level of customer service, disclosing every potential option for you to pursue your complaint.
We cannot provide any compensation for the test certificate you received from the test centre. I understand you will be taking this issue further with trading standards, other than this course of action we can only recommend seeking further legal advice.
At this stage, I find that we have done everything possible to advise you, and there is nothing further I can add that would be of assistance. I appreciate this is not the response you had expected.
You have now reached the end of our complaints process. If you are unhappy with how we have dealt with your complaint, you can ask us to refer your complaint to one of the Department for Transport’s independent complaints assessors. You need to do this within three months of receiving this response. The ICA cannot look at complaints about legislation and government, departmental or agency policy. Further information about what the ICA can and cannot look at can be found on GOV.UK.’

Yours sincerely
Greg Sanders
Corporate Reputation
customerservices@dvsa.gov.uk
 

RichardSEL

Junior Member
Messages
130
And at risk of causing a cardiac to some in here who think we all should just lie down and accept whatever bol* were told, my reply:
Dear "Greg" Sanders
Thank you for your email of waffle.
I don't know you so I don't know why you refer to yourself as "Greg"
I have already received "permission" to forward further details of the MOT saga you reference.
So your email also carries no relevence or merit despite coming from a department pretentiously named "Corporate Reputation" that we, the general public, are paying for compulsorily through our taxes under threat of imprisonment

>You have now reached the end of our complaints process.

No, I tell you when I have reached the end of my complaint's process.
Now, are you going to tell me who my responsible Minister is or not (third request)?

Thank you
"Dick" <redacted>
Head of Values & Deliverance
 

RichardSEL

Junior Member
Messages
130
"Greg" of Corporate Reputation <snigger> replies:
Thank you for your further email of 16 December about your MOT appeal.
I would politely remind you the DVSA does not tolerate inappropriate comments about the names of our staff members.
It is standard procedure for members of staff to provide their full name when responding to correspondence. I believe you might have misinterpreted I used the moniker 'Greg' to appear overly familiar, however, in reality this is my name.

The corporate reputation team deals with all complaint related enquiries from our customers. You state we fund our services through public taxes, however, this is incorrect. It may help if I explain that we are a self-funded agency. That means we pay for all our operations from test fees.

I acknowledge my previous response did not fully address your question about which departmental minister has responsibility for the DVSA, and I apologise for this oversight.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State with responsibility for the DVSA is Baroness Vere of Norbiton. Further information about the portfolio of our minister is available online.

I find that we have done everything possible to answer your concerns, and you have reached the end of the complaints process.
I appreciate that you wish to take this matter further with your local MP, however, this will not change the outcome of our complaints procedure.
The correct process to escalate your complaint further is for you to request that we refer it to the independent complaints assessor (ICA).
If you would like us to refer your complaint to the ICA, please let us know as soon as possible.
Yours sincerely
Greg Sanders
Corporate Reputation
 

RichardSEL

Junior Member
Messages
130
Hello...

No-one gives a care <edited by author> about what you "tolerate" or don't "tolerate".
You are not my superior, you are a public servent.
So used to palming off the general public with meaningless waffle that you now do it automatically, without actually reading the file, I've proved

>I appreciate that you wish to take this matter further with your local MP, however, this will not change the >>outcome of our complaints procedure.

You are under democratic control. Not your own. I've not mentioned my local MP (an inneffective Corbinista socialist) If questions need to be asked as to the effectiveness of your procedures, then they will be. And no huddling around drawing the wagons in a circle will hide the evident impotence of your "systems", and the way you handle us Members of the Public

As far as my action is concerned about the MOT carried out last December in Rotherham, I am quite content to forward all the necessary paperwork, repair receipts, assessor's reports, etc to the DVSA's team for onward consideration. And the non-receipt of my complaint both by email and recorded delivery letter to the Minister for who's details I had to request three times

The ICA route does appear to be useful. In this instance, I will consider that when I get a reply from the Minister (who'll probably refer me back to it anyway under your guidance)

Yours ever
Team "Dick" <redacted>
Head of Values & Deliverance
 
Last edited:

jw38

Member
Messages
130
I've been watching this saga with great interest from my side of the pond. It has become so very obvious that "government", in both of our countries, no longer exists to serve its citizens. Rather, it exists to continually feed the beast that it's become. As you wrote, we don't exist to serve our government...government exists to serve us. Or at least that's the way it's supposed to be. Keep fighting the good fight!