MOT failure

[simple]

Gutted, failed on

Nearside rear suspension component mounting prescribed area excessively corroded (2.4.A.2)

same with the offside rear.

Now I would agree the rear jacking points (the areas he was describing) are a bit rusty, was going to grinder/wire wheel them off & rustoleum them after a bit more bodywork, but surely these points are not suspension components, or are they?

Extremely cheesed off to say the least. What now, the rest of the van passed no worries.

Condolences & helpful replies would be much appreciated.

[Damien]

Rusty arches or holes in inner arch directly above jacking point are usual problem areas. Prescribed area is anything within 30cm of suspension mount, generally regardless of structural design.

People will say it shouldn't of failed, but it depends on how you read the guidelines.

[simple]

Thanks Damien, can you get the jacking points anymore & how much to repair them both? Then I can move on (boo hoo).

[..lee..]

prescribed areas include " load bearing members " ie where the thing is bolted to and any of its " supportive panneling " ie in a monocoque body its pretty much any part of body shell within that 12 inch sphere / circle.


not wanting to stir the "pooh" up but a small hole possibly the size of a 8mm drill bit for example, caused by corrosion, within a " prescribed area " would fail mot.

now if you took a 15mm drill bit and " enlarged " that hole so it was clearly not caused by corrosion any more it would have to be assessed under the heading of a " modification " and as a result the tester would in his or her opinion have to decide whether it seriously weakened the structure. in most cases you can pass such " modification " and advise.

the same would not apply if you were to cut a couple of feet out of your chassis so no stupid ideas ok.


lots of mot rules can be used to your advantage if you know them well enough. just dont compromise safety for the sakeof money and time.



lee.

[fullsunian]

First place to go is usually the outer sill above the jacking point/rear arm mount and yes its within 30 cm so is fail...
IAN

[fullsunian]

prescribed areas include " load bearing members " ie where the thing is bolted to and any of its " supportive panneling " ie in a monocoque body its pretty much any part of body shell within that 12 inch sphere / circle.


not wanting to stir the "pooh" up but a small hole possibly the size of a 8mm drill bit for example, caused by corrosion, within a " prescribed area " would fail mot.

now if you took a 15mm drill bit and " enlarged " that hole so it was clearly not caused by corrosion any more it would have to be assessed under the heading of a " modification " and as a result the tester would in his or her opinion have to decide whether it seriously weakened the structure. in most cases you can pass such " modification " and advise.

the same would not apply if you were to cut a couple of feet out of your chassis so no stupid ideas ok.


lots of mot rules can be used to your advantage if you know them well enough. just dont compromise safety for the sakeof money and time.



lee.

Interesting coz that is exactly a question that came up when I went on an MOT course...As you say yes pass and advise

[simple]

Thanks chaps, the sills are all ok, little bit of surface rust to bodywork at base of rear arch, jacking points are intact, just surface rust and a bit of flaking. If it's a fail it's a fail, now to get it fixed.
Can you get the jacking points anymore, is it just a case of cutting off old, welding on new? Can it be done with interior intact (just put it all back after sorting sill out).

Would it not be suitable to clean up the jacking point & weld up some new steel around the outside?

Any thoughts or past experience in this area welcome.

[fullsunian]

Thanks chaps, the sills are all ok, little bit of surface rust to bodywork at base of rear arch, jacking points are intact, just surface rust and a bit of flaking. If it's a fail it's a fail, now to get it fixed.
Can you get the jacking points anymore, is it just a case of cutting off old, welding on new? Can it be done with interior intact (just put it all back after sorting sill out).

Would it not be suitable to clean up the jacking point & weld up some new steel around the outside?

Any thoughts or past experience in this area welcome.

I don't understand? So your saying that it failed without being rotten through..i.e a hole or two? So it failed for just being rusty?
If thats the case, take it somewhere else
IAN

[simple]

No Holes, except the one at the bottom thats supposed to be there. Just rusty

[fullsunian]

No Holes, except the one at the bottom thats supposed to be there. Just rusty

Shouldn't of failed

[Damien]

Has the grommet fallen out leaving a hole which looks remotely like a rust hole?

If so clean up the area, underseal it and fit new grommet, if needs be open up the hole to get a bigger grommet to fit.

[fullsunian]

Go back to garage that tested it and ask exactly why it failed and where it is exactly excessively corroded. Ask where the holes are then ask for a VT17 form 'notice of appeal'. See what happens then. Don't do any work on van till its gone to appeal....
IAN

[..lee..]

" excessive corrosion " as detailed in the appendices of the testers manual states it doesn`t have to hole. " crumbling " is considered excessive corrosion and as happens all the time on seperate chassis vehicles like land rovers you can fail say a chassis member " within a prescribed area " for " excessive corrosion " take it in the workshop hit all the crumbling rust of the chassis and as long as it doesn`t appear to be significantly weakened it then becomes a pass.

the small plastic hammer " CAT " COROSION ASSESSMENT TOOL is designed to do this exact task. the problem arrises when the customer is watching the test. the tester often feels that by tapping the " crumbling rust " sufficiently it may lead the owner to belive the tester is trying to " make a hole " in all cases it should be the opposite.

most testers will " myself included " favour to fail the area as it is legally a fail whilst in the " crumbling state " and suggest to the owner that welding " MAY " not be nessesary and if cleaned and represented in a acceptable way it will then pass.

check inside the jacking point for any holes as this is often missed buy the owner when repairs are undertaken.

if the tester has correctly failed the area then there will be one form or other of " excessive corrosion " within that area. another possability and something that happens quite often is that testers get the o/s and n/s of the underside of the vehicle confussed, this is due to their constant change in direction whilst under the vehicle and their left or right then ebcomes both their o/s and n/s.

so have a quick check of the other side to be safe.

lee.


http://www.motuk.co.uk/manual/contents.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[..lee..]

trouble with an appeal test is that you have to fork out the full price of the test again and if its inspected and found to be correctly failed then you loose your money.

if it turns out to be wrongly failed then you dont get any form of compensation. its down to you then to take the tester through the courtes with the vosa evidence and claim all losses back. more cost and time again.

appeal test is a last resort in my opinion as it almost allways ends up with the owner out of pocket and with nothing other that the satisfaction that a bad tester has lost his job.

most tidy testers will / should show you where the problem is.

[clartsonly]

most tidy testers will / should show you where the problem is.

and even how to fix it yourself