43 replies to this topic

[Dan]

Original specification or not, if they don't recognise a decent spring washer as a nut locking device they aren't even mechanics let alone MOT testers. They also clearly don't understand a taper pin joint. Whether it's a classic or not is irrelevant. Definitely contact VOSA about this.

[Ethel]

It's alarming that they'd instruct you to modify your car, on what they consider is a safety critical area, on a whim.

[Tamworthbay]

Shows again the value of finding a decent classic friendly MOT station. I use a place called Tamworth engines for mine. There are three guys, one has rebuilt more A series engines than most of us will ever even see. The other two are both mad on older motors and understand how they are put together. It's worth its weight in gold as you don't get stupid issues like this and they are happy for me to have a good inspection underneath so I can make sure there aren't any issues coming up in future. It's a misconception that people are looking for an 'easy' MOT, it's about having someone that understands the cars to make sure they can be as safe as possible but without stupid fails such as a spring washer not being a locking mechanism.

There will be somewhere similar around you, just ask other classic owners who are local and find out who is decent.

[jcab]

Latest update ... I had taken advice here ,, ie the standard genuine fitment parts.

This particular garage is not interested in the standard fitment , they will not back down saying this Ball joint set needs updating with a Nylon Lock.

Any how they have agreed to pass this aslong as I fit the nylon lock nuts which i have bought seperately, as i have paid for the M.o.T i will have to go ahead.

But will change this over to the standard fitment as above.

I cannot reccommend this garage for further use in Bromley Kent. they are dominant that they are correct with new regs.

Thanks for all the answers above.

[Dan]

They are not correct, MOT regs are not (or are very rarely) applied retrospectively and no car is expected to be upgraded if the rules change after it's built. The car was approved when it was built and Minis have passed tens of millions of MOTs quite happily. They are being obtuse and they know it, they need to be made aware of this by VOSA if they won't listen to reason.

Actually I'd draw up a letter explaining that the MOT station has insisted you degrade the material specification of the retaining nut from the original high tensile item. Tell the tester you need to send this to your insurer to make sure you are insured, explain that the MOT tester will have to accept personal liability if anything goes wrong as a result and see if they are willing to sign it. Do this after they have passed the car though, obviously, just out of interest to see if they are willing to stand by their decision.

Edited by Dan, 08 February 2015 - 09:59 AM.

[nicklouse]

As above, get them to sign for responsibility etc and I would still report them to VOSA.

[jcab]

Wow did not expect such a response here but thank you all , I can see that the examiner is wrong in this case , but will not except that he is wrong and insistant on me changing these nuts over , I actaully brought them into him and showed him , they are 3/8" thread same thread as the 7/16" standard Nut from MINISPARES, but are smaller and look inferior but the fact that they have a nylon lock is what satisfies this idiot,... well I think I definately have a case here also judjing by the respnse here,

Once again appreciated , If any one knows of a good M>O>T place near Bromley Kent please advise.

Oh Doubt if he will sign any thing as I also brought in the detailed instructions of the Balljoint from BL as detailed on this thread. he also dismised this as out of date not good enough.

[Ivor Badger]

As above, get them to sign for responsibility etc and I would still report them to VOSA.

 

That seems to be the obvious course. The spring washer is the locking system.

 

Reminds me of the story of an ex boss, a haulage contractor, who got into an argument with the traffic commissioner engineers one day on the merits of using spring washers. He considered them a waste of time, preferred wrong threads as a locking system. He was asked " so Mr Walker, are you trying to tell me the whole of the British motor industry is wrong? "

[nicklouse]

Wow did not expect such a response here but thank you all , I can see that the examiner is wrong in this case , but will not except that he is wrong and insistant on me changing these nuts over , I actaully brought them into him and showed him , they are 3/8" thread same thread as the 7/16" standard Nut from MINISPARES, but are smaller and look inferior but the fact that they have a nylon lock is what satisfies this idiot,... well I think I definately have a case here also judjing by the respnse here,
Once again appreciated , If any one knows of a good M>O>T place near Bromley Kent please advise.
Oh Doubt if he will sign any thing as I also brought in the detailed instructions of the Balljoint from BL as detailed on this thread. he also dismised this as out of date not good enough.

Your last line is telling.

Report the loser. He is not fit to be a tester.

[carbon]

What are the forum rules about naming garages in situations like this?

 

Sounds like the garage has had a reasonable opportunity to see the error of their ways, and are not prepared to budge.

 

For the sake of all other classic vehicle owners in Bromley and thereabouts it would be helpful to know who they are. Then people can then make up their minds where to take their MOT and other business.

 

My opinion is that if a garage is not capable of giving sound advice on a very simple point such as the suitablility of a spring washer as a locking device then they should not be trusted with any repairs, either modern or classic.

[ibrooks]

they are 3/8" thread same thread as the 7/16" standard Nut from MINISPARES, but are smaller and look inferior

 

If the new nylocs are a 3/8" thread then they aren't the same as the 7/16" ones from Minispares are you sure these nylocs are even going to fit on your balljoints?

 

As for naming and shaming - so long as it's personal and factual then there should be no problem so if the OP wants to tell us all the name of this testing station then it's fine.

 

Iain

[mini13]

get a VT17 filled in!

[nicklouse]

get a VT17 filled in!

 and here we are

https://www.gov.uk/g...-of-appeal-vt17

[Wise Old Elf]

I have never appealed a poor failure as the appeal seems to be a bit of a joke. You basically have to have another test and pay full current MOT price. Or I could just use another garage and get the new test done at my convenience. If VOSA was serious about improving standards then the appeal would be free as you have already paid for a test. Has anyone on here every won an appeal? Am I just a cynic? 

[Cooperman]

To be correct here, the locking system is the taper-locking of the tapered ball joint pins in the tapered hole in the arms. The nuts are really only to ensure sufficient initial tension in the pin to ensure that locking takes place. That is why a ball-joint splitter is needed to release the pin. Once fitted the nut does virtually nothing and it does not need to be a Nylok version.

Clearly this garage know little about vehicle engineering and there are two things you need to do now. The first is to inform VOSA that an MoT station has required you to modify your car from original and the second is to tell us who they are so that no-one else goes there only to get their classic car failed.