I WOULD just stick two nuts and bolts (one on each side) in the mounting holes.who cares it they are in the wrong place :Cigar:
If you removed the passenger seat, but didn't replace it with anything would that be ok? Is there anything to say that to pass an MOT a passenger seat or rear cowl has to be there? My MOT tester is quite by the book as a tester, but as a mechanic is happy to modify bikes to non MOT spec. His own bike wouldn't pass an MOT. He will tell you what you need to do to make your bike pass the MOT and the retest is free if it does fail.
Kin El, wait till I see him unch:unch:unch: :Blackeye::Blackeye::Blackeye:ead: that is not good when he has one sat there
Yes, I've heard that the authorities are not averse to some sneaky "secret shopper" type activity to catch out test stations, and they are apparently intolerant of the slightest breach of the rules - carrying out minor remediation without officially failing the test and doing a re-test is problematic I think. There's a big difference, too, between subjective aspects like "are the exhausts a bit too loud?" and objective ones like "are the pillion footrests fitted?". For number plates I think they can be ignored if (and only if?) the vehicle is pre-2001.
a lot of the test is opinion. whats excessive play/corrosion.roughness in bearings and noise? what vosa has said to me on more than one occasion that they will almost always side with the customer. the only exhaust i have ever failed for excessive noise was on an Subaru owned by a copper. :smileys:. he was fine with it. and swapped it for the retest. knowing fine well it would be removed after the test. but as its a time of test thing what could i do about it?
This is interesting as a few years ago they changed the law regarding integrated back lights....I know this as my rsv4 went in for mot the week after with an integrated back light...I did notice that the new xdiavel has integrated indicators (well the one on the Jay Leno you tube channel did) so that would fail would it not? unless its changed for the Eurozone...can anyone confirm this...?
I had a car fail its 1st MOT because the rear number plate didn't have the BS details present (the small type at the bottom). I thought that was fair enough....... :Rage::Rage::Rage:
Not at all...Please see the original question. if the garage had been consistent, there would never have been an issue, and now I have queried it with people in the know, I find that they have handled the truth very carelessly too. The bike has been MOT tested twice before by the same garage, in the same condition and did not fail. They told me that the law had just changed (not true). So if for doing their 'job properly' is telling lies and applying rules haphazardly and inconsistently, yes they are getting 'flamed'. Look at it another way...would you accept from a business (whatever that maybe) a certain level of consistency, then change the rules, without forewarning, then lie about it.
Yes, and in terms of customer service could they not lend you the pegs for you to then remove after the test if they wanted to be squeaky clean - only 5 mins for a bit of customer service. The business as the 'Care Care Centre' as it was has a nickname replacing the first word with a rude one also beginning with C :Wideyed: I either take mine to Sam at Transits or to Tockwith Industrial Estate - where my mate has his Spray Shop.
Could have fitted, done MOT, then he could take them off? :Angelic: (Carrot Care Centre - erm - nope)
carry out test. fail, carry out retest, pass thats how it works. yip its a pisser but thats just how it works.
That's a very valid point actually.It's his livelihood. The guy that gives me leeway on exhausts and number plates failed the 1st bike I ever took to him on a minor issue (rear wheel slightly misaligned, thank god for single sided swingers now ). He didn't know me and I could have been a secret shopper for all he knew. If I had the same issue these days, I think he'd give me an advisory and tell me to get it sorted, knowing I would.
Hmmm... Had a chat with a friendly copper the other day - asked him how they stood with noisy exhausts. this was because I came away from a generous MOT tester with an advisory on my Termi's. He said that if a tester wants to fail you for a noisy exhaust (rather than having one that's marked 'not for road use' or similar, then you should ask to see the equipment that measured the noise, the test result and the calibration certificate. His view - the Mark 1 Ear isn't sufficiently accurate to be able to assess. His view on how the police would view the loud exhaust was that it depends on how you're behaving, but they would have the same 'ear calibration' issue. Mind you, they have options... like confiscating the bike for a noise test. He did say as well, that they have a lot of discretion. Nick
there is no noise measuring equipment in an mot station. not unless its changed since i stopped testing. testers discretion. if the presenter doesn't agree they can go for an appeal.
I was stopped one morning just past Archway for a routine traffic stop (the type where they wave you in from the road). There were around 10 officers scrutinising all the bikes and mine said to me 'these exhausts say Not for road use, they are too loud', to which i replied 'you should see how many people still pull out on me officer', to which he chuckled and sent me on my way.
