Car fails first MOT..

Mercenary Keyboard Warrior

Mercenary Keyboard Warrior

Mercenary Keyboard Warrior

Soldato
Joined
4 Aug 2007
Posts
22,408
Location
Wilds of suffolk
So a car fails its first MOT, this is done at 35 months after first registration, so car in theory does not need an MOT for another month.

BMW main dealer has just advised other half that they should not have let her take her car due to it failing MOT.

The issue has already been fixed but BMW couldn't do it, didn't have the 2 tyres, so its already been to kwik fit and its now rubbered up. Going back for retest tomorrow.

Now I know for older cars if you fail an MOT it doesn't invalidate your old one. But could it be slightly different for the first one?

(I know driving a car that has just failed an MOT but has an in date effective old one is not best practice since it could be argued the driver should remove a known faulty vehicle from the road).

So shes saying she wont drive it as the gates of hell will open if shes spotted, I am saying shes fine since she doesn't need an MOT, and she has fixed the known fault, the fault was the issue and that's now fixed, would have made a no diff if the car was 1 day or 100 years old if the driver knows of a fault that makes a car unroadworthy.

Anyone know for sure?
 
It hasnt got an MOT because it's less than 3 years old so it isn't invalid. It will need to pass an MOT before it's 3 years old, that is pretty much that.

If it only failed because it had 2 bald tyres (Honestly, this sort of stuff is really irritating, why was she driving around on illegal tyres waiting for the MOT tester to spot them? Does she not bother to glance at them?) and now it has 2 new tyres then why on earth wouldnt you drive it?

Is there more to this or is purely the two tyres?
 
[TW]Fox;25629989 said:
It hasnt got an MOT because it's less than 3 years old so it isn't invalid. It will need to pass an MOT before it's 3 years old, that is pretty much that.

If it only failed because it had 2 bald tyres (Honestly, this sort of stuff is really irritating, why was she driving around on illegal tyres waiting for the MOT tester to spot them? Does she not bother to glance at them?) and now it has 2 new tyres then why on earth wouldnt you drive it?

Is there more to this or is purely the two tyres?
Click to expand...

No was purely two tyres. About 2 months ago she said it was acting funny, I went out and looked at the tyres they were getting low but legal. I also checked the pressures, they were fine. I wizzed it round the block and said its fine but you do need to get those tyres pretty soon. She hasn't.
TBH its a company lease and the issue is the transport dept will not authorise tyres until about 1.8mm left. She does mega miles some weeks, cars on 93k or something now, and I suspect shes left it knowing that in Jan it was going in anyway.

In her defence she says she checked the tyres. I just don't think she understood how to do it, these damn pesky tread wear indicators making it complicated ;)

Thx fox I was 99% certain she was ok but it just raised some doubt with me.
 
Housey said:
BMW have no control over what she doesn't do or not do with her car. If they said that to me I would nail their nuts to a wall, though in the same way my car would not fail due to bald tyres.
Click to expand...

Yes but.

I realise that in original post I didn't mention its leased as it wasn't relevant to the actual problem.

I suspect they were saying they should inform the lease company that its not roadworthy who may well have turned round and said keep it until it is.
 
''we shouldnt have let you leave without selling you some overpriced tyres''

is what they would have said in a totally honest world.
 
Isn't it about £2500 potential fine per bald tyre and 3 points on your licence, not to mention

bald tyres = death
 
Amazing how many cars come in at work with a puncture that turns out to be the tyre is so worn that it no longer holds air such as this: Picture

In answer to the OP, the MOT fail, first MOT or not doesn't stop you from driving the car until the due date, and they can't stop you from taking the car. Although as mentioned, depending on how bad the tyres are, they can certainly strongly advise that you don't take it.
 
[TW]Fox;25630728 said:
Quite. We don't know how bad the tyres are, if they had cords showing perhaps the dealer had a point!
Click to expand...

Ok so got the paperwork now, 1.1MM on both

Hardly a disaster, yes illegal, but not imminent failure territory.

Just to justify my comment above saying its not a disaster, when I passed my test the limit was 1MM so 20ish years ago the tyre would have been legal.
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
Ok so got the paperwork now, 1.1MM on both

Hardly a disaster, yes illegal, but not imminent failure territory.

Just to justify my comment above saying its not a disaster, when I passed my test the limit was 1MM so 20ish years ago the tyre would have been legal.
Click to expand...

You let your missus go out with 1.1mm on her tyres?

I don't care what the limit was 20ish years ago, that's awful.
 
wingman said:
You let your missus go out with 1.1mm on her tyres?

I don't care what the limit was 20ish years ago, that's awful.
Click to expand...

I dunno shes an adult ya know, shes the driver so shes responsible for ensuring her car is road legal.

When she asks me to check something for her I do, however I don't attempt to control what she does.

Its funny but we didn't just all fall off the roads when we hit 1mm years ago just like we don't now when we hit 1.6mm. I don't really like her companies policy on tyres as the timing becomes very critical but the transport director sets the policy so she has to comply.
 
Got to echo the points that other people have made.

1.1mm across a tyre, regardless of 1.6mm over the central part of the tyre and bald shoulders etc, is illegal and stupid. Especially if you drive for a living!

Tyres are a lot less efficient at shedding water once they're <3mm. I'd not want to be driving around in winter with sub 2mm tread, especially with the crap weather we have had as of late!
 
andy_mk3 said:
There's a reason it changed. 20 years ago we didn't have average family hatchbacks weighing over 1.5 tons with 150bhp+
Click to expand...

Well partly true, we wern't so far off in my family, RS Turbo and Cavalier GSi were the cars we were running at that time, so pretty damn close on both metrics.

Don't get me wrong shes stupid for getting into this position and I think shes learn't her lesson now, and will be a little more vigilant to check or get checked her tyres.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom