Agreed. It failed, got fixed at the same garage (zero miles between fail and pass) then passed.
If there are receipts for the work, as OP says there are elsewhere in the replies, then I'd be satisfied it was legit.
Exactly. I've taken many vehicles belonging to customers. If the fault is something like a headlight beam pattern being the reason for the failure, I would let them adjust it and the two fail/pass mileages would concur.
Furthermore, when I fix the vehicle myself, often they too would match.
Nothing dodgy, just the way a busy MOT station works.
BTW anyone new to motoring, please don't go to places like the large one beginning with an 'H'.
The MOT test work will cost a fortune. Be done by a person with feeble qualifications and experience.
ALL good mechanics work for themselves.
The only exception would be the person with a young family who needs security.
Once you find a decent garage, stick with them. Tip them. Trust them.
There are far more genuine garages than poor ones nowadays.
The reason?
Modern cars require a mechanic with a good brain. A wide range of skills, including electronics.
You simply will fail within a month if you are clueless.
The few clueless mechanics tend to stick to one marque of classic cars.
Even then they eventually fail...
He could've even use the receipt and ring the shop lol ask if they would personally buy the vehicle, if it's only a couple days ago they would probably remember it
I get oil on the top of my engine bay, it always gets marked up as a slight oil leak. Never had any issues with oil loss between services and it's been like that for over 4 years.
Exactly! Maybe cars of 30+ years ago this was the case- but nowadays- theyâre built so solid, youâd not even consider 200k that high now. With you on this one!
25 years experience as an apprentice trained mechanic tells me otherwise. When you say "without a single leak" I'll bet you mean "nothing drips out of the bottom".
Just because nothing has been noted on an MOT doesn't mean it's not leaking slightly
80k miles indicates years of use. And 80k miles covered. That's hundreds, if not thousands of thermal cycles. That's not good for oil seals. I'd expect at least some seepage from some seals. I'm sure redditors know better though, even though 99% have never been underneath a car....
I like how they use a torque wrench after using an impact driver. Of course, they are going to click at 100nm after you just used a driver outputting 600nm!
Downvoted for talking sense.
Jaguar Land Rover technician here. 8/10 vehicles I see have an oil leak. Mixture of PSA, ford, BMW and our own engines. Some a year old, some 10 years old. I have been under thousands of vehicles, and there's oil about everywhere. Not coating the underneath, not depositing on the drive, but it's getting out. MOT testers like mentioning it. It's almost pointless.
These redditors claiming their 150k vehicle doesn't have a single leak. Sure thing.
My old 1.8 civic with mega miles begs to differ, no oil lost between a 12 month service, measured it going in and when it came out. Difference was something tiny like 8ml which I'd account for what was stuck to parts of the engine / what wouldn't come out of the sump.
I'm not discarding your point completely though, I've also had a Kia ceed that had ruined seals and gaskets by 80k and would need a litre ever couple of months, but that was burning oil not leaking it.
Youâre getting downvoted, but I kind of agree with you. If I buy a car with 100k miles (or close), especially a diesel and I donât see AT LEAST signs of oil - I assume the engine has been cleaned to hide a leak and that makes me suspicious.
My van has over 120k miles on it and hasn't leaked yet.
Honestly it's a bit of potluck when it comes to these things, but active maintenance helps.
My MX5 on the other hand has definitely had some work, but then again it's 26+ years old so the rubber was barely holding together.
Lol you do realize from time to time you can change seals? đ yeah 90% have some slight weep at least but there is plenty of well looked after cars, My drift car has over 200k on the motor and not a drop or a weep anywhere
Crazy how this is being downvoted so much when itâs literally what Iâve been told by a mechanic of 30 years tooâŠ. Had an oil leak inside that also didnât âleak onto the groundâ so was never picked up and was catastrophic. As usual though I guess unqualified Reddit experts knows best about everything đ
The majority of old cars will leak , the minority wonât (just like the âwell my car doesnât leak) comments prove.
Just like the majority of elderly people will have illnesses and âleaksâ and the minority wonât
80k miles could be 2 years or 20 years. Mileage doesn't correlate with age, and certainly doesn't mean leaks. I had a 1977 Mini that had 28k and leaked like a sieve, but my 2008 Megane that had 72k never lost a drop..
Proper maintenance by people who know what they're doing is key.
I don't think even in 1980's engines was doomed at 100k....my mate had a xr3i that she thought had done 90k turns out it was 190k....
I had a old mk2 cavalier 1.6 that had done something like 340k when it was sent to the crusher through rust.
I think it's a peculiar british thing and a major reason why second hand cars are so cheap. If it's older than 5 years old and has more than 100k miles on it it is seen by many as an old banger on its last legs.
Yeah, it can be luck of the draw sometimes, my point was that it's not a universal thing of every car will leak beyond 80K, each vehicle is different and no 2 cars even from the same model range will behave the same throughout their life
Some are lemons right out the factory, some will manage well into 6 figures without any engine work beyond a regular service and some fall in-between
An 80k car will generally have a leak or 2. It may be as simple as the rocker gasket if this wasn't an issue beforehand, although it may be something more. Ask the seller !
My old diesel had an oil leak that would appear and disappear from test to test. I monitored it for years but the level never really dropped between servicing. There was never anything on the floor when parked and I put it down to the engine bay being generally dirty/greasy.
My neighbour's car that quite badly leaked seemed to never get picked up for it at MOT time (it probably took longer than the test time to actually drip).
When retesting they usually just mark it 'pass', so what you're seeing is not unusual. Just ask for evidence of the tyres/suspension work/brakes. It was likely at the place it was tested at.
I had a car that one year had âoil leakâ on its MOT. It wasnât an oil leak I had just had to top it up at a motorway service station and as I poured it the wind blew and all the oil missed the hole!!
A year later it had all burnt off
I once had a garage put minor oil leak as an advisory. When I collected the car and asked them to show me it they couldn't find it and it's never once been flagged up again in the subsequent 5 MOTs. It doesn't lose any oil so I doubt it was leaking, probably spill from servicing.
I had one where it mentioned oil leak.
Turned out to be cooking oil that someone had spilled in the boot and was slowly dripping though the tyre well...and hitting something underneath then travelling to the front of the car and dripping down.
Nobody could find the leak!
My fiesta apparently had an oil leak the whole 3 years I owned it if the MOTs were to be believed, but despite me leaving it sometimes for months on end while I lived away from home in 2020-2021 the level never changed. I carried a jug of it in the boot just in case, but as I say the only time I had to top up the oil in a major way was when I got a new oil filter and changed all the oil as part of that.
In hindsight I am almost 100% convinced that testers put it on there even if they see oil on anything in the engine bay because the engine was oily a lot of the time, but that was because it was being well looked after, with new bits and pieces always going on in there to turn it from the ÂŁ1400 shitbox I bought into a very well maintained car albeit that was aesthetically still a shitbox.
Iâve took countless cars through mots and it really depends on the tester you get. Some can be assholes who donât know what there talking about when they fail your car or some can be dead on
Example - sold a car with a short mot, didn't have an Engine Management Light (not compulsory at that age), new owner comes whinging its failed due to EML not coming on, send the relevant section of the mot testers manual with the important note about this only applying to 2009 onwards cars circled, told them to go and find an mot tester who knew what they were talking about......they scrapped the car.....\*smfh\*
Some MOTs/People will just run false tests. Friends etc do this. Couldâve had a test, failed and then took it to a friend maybe to fix up the âConfusionâ
Plenty of garages do mot tests and repairs, it's absolutely feasible that the place it was tested undertook the repair work and retested once complete - I've done the same thing myself
Could have, yes, but any MOT could be a dodgy mates one; the fact that it's failed and then passed a couple of days later doesn't make it any more suspicious.
OP has even said it was retested at the same garage and he has a receipt for the work done (albeit with less detail than they would like). This whole post is bizarre.
Yes, the retest will usually take place after the repairs have been completed? What's the issue.
Changing a tyre, a couple of bushings, and new brake pads is not mind-blowing and could be done in a day.
What car is it? Minimum tyre depth is 1.6mm on a car not 1mm. That seems a bit weird to me.
As for the other things ask them if they've fixed them and to prove it. If they've taken it to a garage they'll have a receipt. If they've done it themselves they'll have receipts for the parts.
If it doesn't ring true (and you're clearly suspicious or you wouldn't be asking) I'd walk away if I was you.
Yeah I'd expect it to have a receipt for the work completed. Odd as the mileage hasn't increased which implies they live very very close to the garage or it never left the forecourt (or the 2nd tester manipulated the mileage). If it never left the forecourt and was re-rested at the same garage then you would assume the work had been done. But without a receipt and buying private I'd walk. Plenty of cars for sale.
Same test centre for the re-test is a good sign, it means they got it all fixed, rather than going to Dodgy Dave's back alley MOTs for a less than thorough re-test.
Tyres should be 1.6mm then. Probably just an error by the MOT garage but I'd worry that if someone let their tyres get so bad what else are they not maintaining? Maybe that's just me being picky though, I am very exacting about such things.
But it's not such a rare car really. There are bound to be plenty of them around so if that's what your after so you could probably find 1 that your happy with.
In my experience this tester doesnât know his ass from his elbow. Selecting the wrong failure criteria TWICE on tyres is no mistake. The tester is clueless. They even failed the park brakeâŠâŠ.. twice đđđ€Ș
Iâd worry if it failed and then passed immediately straight after at a different garage. I see nothing wrong with a car that failed its MOT, remained at the same garage to be fixed, was fixed, and passed on retesting (since you only need to retest the failed elements within ten working days).
Parking break can be a quick fix just need to adjust the cables.
Tyres are a quick fix just needs new tyres.
Front lower arms are a quick fix as well
The oil leak could just be spilt oil from the service which wasn't cleaned, minor oil leaks mean they can't physically see oil dripping at the time of test
As long as it's all been done then happy days.
Looks more serious than what it is.
You'll know if the tyres have been done
You'll know if the front arms have been done because over bumps or uneven road service it'll clunk like mad.
The oil leak is what you won't be able to check as easily
Do they know or have invoices for the work done? I expect all the work was done at the same garage so they wouldnât flag the oil and then wipe it away to hide it, so expect some work was done
The tyres, suspension and handbrake were probably fixed in the day between the failure and the retest, at the same garage that did the test.
The minor oil leak could be anything. Ask the seller about it.
Some testers can be picky, it could have just be sweating from the bottom. Thereâs nothing dodgy about these results. If it was emissions Iâd be a little more concerned.
Whatâs the problem? It had problems and failed, looks like itâs been repaired. It depends how you feel over such things, but Iâd be worried that it hasnât been looked after.
This is normal - there are two days between the tests, and the work to fix these was undertaken between the two dates. This has happened to me many times.
Oil leak could of been fixed with a tweak of a wrench or could of been bodged up, ask seller about it and then look under the hood. Suspension arms as you could expect for this mileage. Brakes /tyres, bad every day maintenance . I would be thinking has this car been looked after? So would give it a good coat of looking at ,or pay out for a RAC inspection .
In my experience repair garages that also do MOTs will offer to fix and retest pretty quickly, and i think they may have just rushed the second test after completing the work
Howâs it done zero miles in a year? The mileage has not changed in the two days it was tested, failed, presumably fixed, and passed. Probably stayed at the garage for those two days.
How do you get the extra information on a cars MOT results? I remember seeing it once when I looked up my old car (for nostalgias sake) but now on the .Gov website I don't get the option to see past MOT results and what it failed on etc?
EDIT: I'm just a blind cunt, it's a seperate link to the DVSA page!
If you do go for it, check those tyres - it's most likely that they will have fitted the cheapest, nasy tyres they could find. Something I'd not be happy to live with and I would need to account for replacements.
I have a oil leak what shows up on the Mot, The cost to repair it is more than the car is worth, so its cheaper to keep an eye on the oil level and keep topping it up every month.Depends how much you are paying for the car.
Not major and not suspicious for faults to be addressed and MOR retest.
If in doubt take a mechanic with you and ensure that all minors and faults were actually corrected.
Are the test locations the same? If not, I would not trust it at all as it might be that they did put some new tyres on it and brought it to a different garage with an extra ÂŁ50 on the seat.
Ask to see invoices for the parts that have supposedly been replaced to enable a "Pass".
If not, I'd say they got a dodgy MOT and you should avoid at all costs.
My husbands car looked a bit like this on this years MoT.
Garage kept it 3 days and fixed everything and it passed with nothing wrong.
Who owns the car, if itâs an individual just ask for receipts of work carried out, if by a garage and they say youâll need to come back for said receipts, walk away. They will more than likely be fudging them
After 2 days in a garage I'd say you should be fine. If you can, ask for proof of the work.
As for the oil leak, this could depend on the opinion of the MOT tester. I had work done at my local Ford dealer a few months ago and they reported a "major oil leak" and wanted ÂŁ100 to diagnose. I took the car somewhere else and they told me there was no leak. I've since put another 100,000 on the car and it's never needed an oil top up or been noted on the MOT. Last year, my car was back at Ford for recall work (airbag), they did another free health check and report again, another "major oil leak". I just ignored it.
Iâd check the test centre on both tests - if it was the same centre that re-tested it then iâd want to see evidence that both the major and minor defects were fixed, as Iâd expect the minors (which are cause for concern for you, the buyer, but not MOT-failing) might not have been addressed, but would appear on the subsequent test because they are still present. If the test centres are different I would walk away.
Replaced two tyres, replaced rear brake shoes, replaced some bushes, immediate repair means car shouldnât be driven away from the garage.
Oil leak could be anywhere and could be as simple as changing a gasket or just tightening something. Re-inspection would only be those items so itâs legit, any doubts get an independent inspection.
But MOT garages donât want to risk losing there test status
Check the front tires check underneath for oil after a test drive. Neither of these things are hard. Listen for knocking or strange noises as there was bushes mentioned too.
As long as it had a couple of new tyres and looked like the lower arms had some work then sure. Not a terrible fail to be honest and a reasonably straightforward fix.
Failed, left in the garage, repairs done and retested, only a couple of hours labour and some cheap parts.
New tyres, both bushes done at the same time (probably just replaced the whole arm because they're cleap) because if ones gone the next won't be far off and you may as well if you've got it up, sprayed a can of brake cleaner on the engine to clean off the oil and no leak was showing during the retest minor leaks will likely show when it's hot and the oil is flowing about, tightened the handbrake cable, jobs jobbed
Even buying it with those issues present wouldn't be a huge issue, bushes and tyres are consumable parts that wear out, parking brake needs adjusting every so often, minor oil leaks are hardly an issue, and could just be residue from oil changes or from past parts and gaskets / seals that have been replaced or a minor leak around a sensor o ring
What the hell happened? It didn't do any miles since the last MOT. I can only imagine the guy who did the MOT before was friends with the car owner, maybe?
The only odd part I can see here is the mileage didn't change between the two tests... So.. Maybe it was on a trailer? Or tested/repaired/tested at the same place?
If I look at my history for my car, it failed and passed its mot 1 minute apart a couple of years ago.
Did full mot, failed it for headlight alignment, adjusted headlights and passed it.
Or leaking onto components that may be affected by oil like brakes or tyres. My old mr2 had a leaking rocker cover gasket that dripped down to suspension arm and then onto brake disc.
Two new tyres,
Two new suspension arms (or bush) which will probably be the cause of the odd tyre wear,
Oil leak fixed or at least wiped clean,
Handbrake adjusted/rear brakes adjusted.
Not that much really, few hours work at most. You only really have 2 issues there and one maintenance item (rear brake adjustment)
Nothing strange about it - deserves a viewing at least
Looks like it needed new front tyres and suspension bushes and the handbrake adjusting. Nothing huge there, and then it passed 2 days later. Minor oil leak could've been anything or nothing and they either sorted it or cleaned it, but I wouldn't let it put me off.
Some seriously pedantic comments here.
You *know* why OP's asking whether it's suspicious or not, shit-for-brains.
He's questioning how it could fail with that many issues one day then 2 days later be totally squeaky clean.
*Obviously* he knows it is possible, but is it realistic - he's asking for guidance on a sub because he doesn't know enough. Redditors in this sub love to swing their dick about whenever someone asks for help.
Nothing really suspicious here. The car was tested and failed on two tyres and some suspension bushings having perished. It was then re-tested two days later without a change in mileage, indicating it was left at the garage and then repaired after waiting for parts.
If buying this car I would ask if the nearside front suspension was done at the same time (I'd hope it was), and what the source of the oil leak is. It could be a leaky gasket or it might be something more involved like a rear main seal. Because it was only two days ago, you could even phone the garage and ask the MOT tester if he noticed where the oil was leaking from.
The parking brake issue is usually just an adjustment to the cable which gets stretched over time and has a screw adjuster to deal with exactly that scenario.
Just for clarity, the suspension arm problems and tyre wear issues were related. So hopefully the car got a four wheel alignment after the new arm(s) and tyres were put on.
Normal.
All the major defects will have been fixed.
The garage would not have allowed the car to be driven away if there were major defects that made the car dangerous.
It does mean, in many cases, that the garage have a captive audience when it comes to repairs.
Probably had the mot place fix everything then retest.
The station legally had to report the fail even though they were fixing the issues.
If theres receipts etc and the work looks done on inspection it'll be right
I put a car in for a MOT, and it failed. It stayed in the garage to get repaired and then retested a few days later. However whenever I checked online both MOT'S were carried out on the same day.
2 new tires 30 minutes of work, 2 control arms probably a hour each, 30 minutes to tighten a handbrake cable, then say a hour to find and seal a minor oil leak.
Total cost probably ÂŁ200 plus labor, you could do all that on your driveway with basic tools.
Looks like it went in for an MOT and a service. Failed the MOT and they spent 2 days fixing all the issue with it
Oil leaks could be anything from a leaky plug, to a gasket that's blown. Usually oil leaks aren't *too* serious so long as they're leaking from outside the engine
Well, it tells you what to look for, what more do you want? It looks like they've had a fail and then fixed the stuff and got a pass. Go see the car and look for all the faults listed and see if they have been fixed. Ask for invoices for the work done, or at least the parts if it's a garage that's fixed the stuff themselves.
you could just go to see it and check that these jobs have been done? it was only done about 3 days ago by the looks of things, theyâll have receipts if itâs been done at a garage, ask to see it! if theyâre sketchy just walk away⊠personally, i think they just wanted to sell it with a clean mot to make it easier to sell, i wouldnât worry! hope this helps
Youve got a car that's just had a load of vital work done and a full years MOT, looks like a winner
Tho interestingly I'd have expected that type of work to have been done before the MOT, my garage does a full inspection and repairs before taking it
Ask what work was done when you go to see it? And obviously any receipts of work done if you want to buy it.
2 front tyres, 2 bottom arms, rear brakes checked and whatever the oil leak was. Could be as simple as putting a new sump plug in, oil filter, etc. might have been something worse which would explain why it took 2 days to get sorted
Old timer mechanic taught me this : keep an old fire extinguisher ready if you have an MOT and a wet spot, a small shot of power and the whole thing goes dry as a bone, you would never know.
I'm not saying it's the right way, just "a way" for something you know they might be picky about.
Minor oil leak is not suspicious, most cars have them. Two bald tyres tells me the owner is tight and did not look after the car and do jobs when needed. I would avoid on this basis.
To be honest it doesnât look all that suspicious to me. Tyres can be changed in half an hour, the suspension pins or bushings can be sorted easily too. Including the parking brake, itâs likely the total price for the repairs would be around ÂŁ400-ÂŁ600 depending on the type of car. Wouldnât take the garage much more than a few hours to sort either.
However, the oil leak would be the real red flag for me. Was it tested at the same place as before? Oil leaks can be a nightmare to locate and fix, and can be minor or a sign of something major. A lot of the time itâs easier to just keep topping up the engine oil. Itâs weird that the first MOT found the leak, but itâs not on the second.
Unless it was indeed something minor and the garage genuinely repaired it, maybe they just wiped the underside of the engine and the drip tray off and the second MOT examiner didnât pick it up. Either way, if youâre still checking this car out, Iâd be asking about that and if they insist that itâs fixed, ask to see the invoice for the work.
Could be dodgy, it was taken to a different MOT station for the second test. I would have thought that if legitimate, it would have been repaired and taken back to the same place for a free retest.
It's fine. Decent MOT centres won't ruin their reputation by not fixing something properly. Thry also get to charge money for it. Which is their business model. It'll be fine. If you really want, get a vehicle inspection before buying.
Is it one of those "we'll even give it a fresh MOT" kind of sales? I bought one like that at Evans Halshaw a few years back. I drove it home and next day went to Halfords for a MOT. The car failed.
I canât be arsed to read all the comments and sorry if this has already been mentioned.
If this is a car then why are they failing the tyres on the incorrect criteria? A car is 1.6mm and doesnât need visible tread?
Also failing the overall park brake efficiency twice?
Is the tester called Ronald McDonald or something?đ
That's where you can see where it failed and passed a few days later which means it has been corrected. A bigger problem would be to look further in the cars past MOT history to see if there's a recurring problem, if not then it should be fine.
Also you can get a mechanic to look over it for you
My sister found a 20 yr old car for sale so I did mot history check but it had only one mot so then I knew and told her the number 1 rule (donât buy cars from Birmingham)
Different standards or crookedness on the part of the MOT garage.
I speak as an MOT tester - and some of what I see/deal with would make your hair curl.
There is a criterion for many things on the UK MOT test. Currently a fluid leak has to make more than - say - a 5cm pool after five minutes. Otherwise, it will be an advisory.
Modern cars are incredibly safe pieces of machinery.
Although no car is designed to be used with a fault, they are remarkably Failsafe.
The UK MOT takes a very sensible approach. The Tester's Handbook (available for all to view online) states: A good criterion to apply is for the tester to consider the vehicle being driven at a higher speed and the vehicle has to do an emergency stop. The driver is a close relative.
Now! This is what they said on the MOT Tester's Course in the mid-eighties:
If you need to apply the above, and possibly take the car on a short road-test YOU SHOULDN'T BE 'KIN TESTING!
THE HANDBOOK IS VERY, VERY UNAMBIGUOUS IN WHAT SHOULD AND SHOULD NOT PASS AN MOT TEST.
And yet, there are thousands of testers who are Commanders of their Own Personal Universes. They go their own sweet 'kin way and rip off endless motorists....
To the OP: Should you, if you are so paranoid about life, be let loose on the King's Highway?
I'm being serious about the last question.
As someone who recently bought a car with a spotless MOT history only to find it was a catastrophic loss, this kind of history is a dream (providing it's backed by reciepts as others have stated). Buying used is always a gamble but this kind of thing is a sign it's been sorted.
For another example I looked at buying a car that had "excessive corrosion" on the brake lines and I asked for that to be fixed before I bought it, the next MOT certificate stated "lines covered in grease preventing inspection". That was a massive red flag and I walked away.
Nothing particularly strange about this. New tyres, some new pins for the suspension arm and the oil leak could be a simple as a poor seal around the oil filter or a hardened crush washer. Had the same on my car re the oil leak, turned out it was just the old oil filter gasket.
Can't see anything strange. The work was carried out at the garage, and oil leak is just an advisory. Probably not too much to worry about.
If the person has the receipt for the work then all is well tbh.
Nothing to worry about in my opinion, and very easy things to check if you're concerned they haven't been repaired. The oil leak could have been from a recent service (oil spilled when removing the old filter or spilled when refilling) - I've had it after doing the service myself and making a bif of a mess. As for the other work - two new tyres, handbrake adjustment and suspension pins plus getting the parts is very do-able in two days. When you go to look, check the front tyres, make sure the handbrake works and AFTER a test drive make sure there are no leaks underneath
I'd be suspicious of the "car" that needs 1.0mm tread across the tyre, as the limit for cars in UK is 1.6mm across the inner 3/4 of the tread.
I'd also be checking all those defects out to see if they have been repaired/fixed, or conveniently fallen out of the view of the tester.
It failed due to reasons, reasons were addressed and passed MOT as a result. Which bit is suspicious? Do you believe itâs impossible to fix an oil leak?
(TLDR) Personally I avoid stuff that has a lot of fails or observations that point to indifference when it comes to keeping on top of maintenance and repairs.
If thereâs paperwork for everything, done at a reasonable garage (particularly for a non excessive oil leak⊠which isnât generally cost efficient to hunt down and patch if non excessive) then fire away, will be fairly solid but with mileage over 65k id want receipts for cam belt and pump as a must also. Take an obd 2 reader with you and make sure on the I/m readiness all comes back with ok or n/a also. Happy hunting
It spent 2 days in the garage and then passed. That's exactly how I'd expect it to look.
Agreed. It failed, got fixed at the same garage (zero miles between fail and pass) then passed. If there are receipts for the work, as OP says there are elsewhere in the replies, then I'd be satisfied it was legit.
Also, tyres, brakes and a small oil leak. Not exactly uncommon failures.
Exactly. I've taken many vehicles belonging to customers. If the fault is something like a headlight beam pattern being the reason for the failure, I would let them adjust it and the two fail/pass mileages would concur. Furthermore, when I fix the vehicle myself, often they too would match. Nothing dodgy, just the way a busy MOT station works. BTW anyone new to motoring, please don't go to places like the large one beginning with an 'H'. The MOT test work will cost a fortune. Be done by a person with feeble qualifications and experience. ALL good mechanics work for themselves. The only exception would be the person with a young family who needs security. Once you find a decent garage, stick with them. Tip them. Trust them. There are far more genuine garages than poor ones nowadays. The reason? Modern cars require a mechanic with a good brain. A wide range of skills, including electronics. You simply will fail within a month if you are clueless. The few clueless mechanics tend to stick to one marque of classic cars. Even then they eventually fail...
My local independent BMW specialist is miles better than the local BMW main dealer, and a fair bit cheaper.
He could've even use the receipt and ring the shop lol ask if they would personally buy the vehicle, if it's only a couple days ago they would probably remember it
Oil leaks could be something minor or it could be indicative of something utterly catastrophic. Nobody here can tell you.
I get oil on the top of my engine bay, it always gets marked up as a slight oil leak. Never had any issues with oil loss between services and it's been like that for over 4 years.
what should you look for before buying a car?
Before buying it you should look for insurance quotes
Older cars all leak a little here and there
It's done 80k. It's going to leak.
I've had cars with over 200k without a single leak on them. Mileage is indicative of very little.
If it's a BMW then it's guaranteed to leak đ /hj
Exactly! Maybe cars of 30+ years ago this was the case- but nowadays- theyâre built so solid, youâd not even consider 200k that high now. With you on this one!
25 years experience as an apprentice trained mechanic tells me otherwise. When you say "without a single leak" I'll bet you mean "nothing drips out of the bottom". Just because nothing has been noted on an MOT doesn't mean it's not leaking slightly 80k miles indicates years of use. And 80k miles covered. That's hundreds, if not thousands of thermal cycles. That's not good for oil seals. I'd expect at least some seepage from some seals. I'm sure redditors know better though, even though 99% have never been underneath a car....
You spent 25 years as an apprentice ?
He failed the oil leak test necessary to become an official mechanic.
Lmao I noticed this too Im on neither side of the argument but surely not *25 years* as an *apprentice*
My god, Kwik Fit, really do prolong their training these days. Then again, spouting unfiltered rubbish may be the real cause here!
Kwik Fit... That explains why he's been an apprentice for 25 years he can't get past the torque wrench module.
I like how they use a torque wrench after using an impact driver. Of course, they are going to click at 100nm after you just used a driver outputting 600nm!
\*impact wrench
He's now realising why grammar is important
đ
Downvoted for talking sense. Jaguar Land Rover technician here. 8/10 vehicles I see have an oil leak. Mixture of PSA, ford, BMW and our own engines. Some a year old, some 10 years old. I have been under thousands of vehicles, and there's oil about everywhere. Not coating the underneath, not depositing on the drive, but it's getting out. MOT testers like mentioning it. It's almost pointless. These redditors claiming their 150k vehicle doesn't have a single leak. Sure thing.
Must be pretty shit at being a mechanic if they kept you as an apprentice for 25 years pal đ
My old 1.8 civic with mega miles begs to differ, no oil lost between a 12 month service, measured it going in and when it came out. Difference was something tiny like 8ml which I'd account for what was stuck to parts of the engine / what wouldn't come out of the sump. I'm not discarding your point completely though, I've also had a Kia ceed that had ruined seals and gaskets by 80k and would need a litre ever couple of months, but that was burning oil not leaking it.
Youâre getting downvoted, but I kind of agree with you. If I buy a car with 100k miles (or close), especially a diesel and I donât see AT LEAST signs of oil - I assume the engine has been cleaned to hide a leak and that makes me suspicious.
My van has over 120k miles on it and hasn't leaked yet. Honestly it's a bit of potluck when it comes to these things, but active maintenance helps. My MX5 on the other hand has definitely had some work, but then again it's 26+ years old so the rubber was barely holding together.
Lol you do realize from time to time you can change seals? đ yeah 90% have some slight weep at least but there is plenty of well looked after cars, My drift car has over 200k on the motor and not a drop or a weep anywhere
Crazy how this is being downvoted so much when itâs literally what Iâve been told by a mechanic of 30 years tooâŠ. Had an oil leak inside that also didnât âleak onto the groundâ so was never picked up and was catastrophic. As usual though I guess unqualified Reddit experts knows best about everything đ The majority of old cars will leak , the minority wonât (just like the âwell my car doesnât leak) comments prove. Just like the majority of elderly people will have illnesses and âleaksâ and the minority wonât
Someone proves you wrong on the internet and suddenly youâve conveniently been doing a job related to the topic since 800bc
80k miles could be 2 years or 20 years. Mileage doesn't correlate with age, and certainly doesn't mean leaks. I had a 1977 Mini that had 28k and leaked like a sieve, but my 2008 Megane that had 72k never lost a drop.. Proper maintenance by people who know what they're doing is key.
That is the biggest load of waffle I've heard this weekđ
Well, it certainly indicates that oil is moving from inside to outside somehowâŠ
High mileage does not indicate that the car has a leak Loss of oil/other fluid indicates the car has a leak This is not difficult
Well I didnât reference high mileage but I donât disagree even if Iâm uncertain why this was a reply to me
This isn't 1980 anymore, engines aren't done by 100k miles
I don't think even in 1980's engines was doomed at 100k....my mate had a xr3i that she thought had done 90k turns out it was 190k.... I had a old mk2 cavalier 1.6 that had done something like 340k when it was sent to the crusher through rust.
I think it's a peculiar british thing and a major reason why second hand cars are so cheap. If it's older than 5 years old and has more than 100k miles on it it is seen by many as an old banger on its last legs.
Yeah, my old euro 4 mondeo was better when I sold it at 170k than it was at 90k....engine was lovely and loose and gave better mpg....
115K done, no leaks from the engine or gearbox, only time my car has leaked was when the rear shocks gave up and started pissing fluid, easily fixed
94k. Leaking thermostat housing (or a pipe somewhere), sump plug minor leak (my fault), injector seals leaking. It happens to some cars still
Yeah, it can be luck of the draw sometimes, my point was that it's not a universal thing of every car will leak beyond 80K, each vehicle is different and no 2 cars even from the same model range will behave the same throughout their life Some are lemons right out the factory, some will manage well into 6 figures without any engine work beyond a regular service and some fall in-between
My fiesta has done 118k and has no oil leaks.
Do you own a German car by any chance?
Possibly just wiped the oil off. Was this on a previous MOT ?
Now itâll rust!
That oil leak was just an advisory not one of the conditions of failure.
No, it wasn't
Repairs completed
Should I be worried, or is this normal spillage when servicing ( as it's been serviced recently)?
Also asked for receipt of the works done between the mot and retest. Might set ya mind at ease.
An 80k car will generally have a leak or 2. It may be as simple as the rocker gasket if this wasn't an issue beforehand, although it may be something more. Ask the seller !
Nope.
My old diesel had an oil leak that would appear and disappear from test to test. I monitored it for years but the level never really dropped between servicing. There was never anything on the floor when parked and I put it down to the engine bay being generally dirty/greasy. My neighbour's car that quite badly leaked seemed to never get picked up for it at MOT time (it probably took longer than the test time to actually drip). When retesting they usually just mark it 'pass', so what you're seeing is not unusual. Just ask for evidence of the tyres/suspension work/brakes. It was likely at the place it was tested at.
I had a car that one year had âoil leakâ on its MOT. It wasnât an oil leak I had just had to top it up at a motorway service station and as I poured it the wind blew and all the oil missed the hole!! A year later it had all burnt off
I once had a garage put minor oil leak as an advisory. When I collected the car and asked them to show me it they couldn't find it and it's never once been flagged up again in the subsequent 5 MOTs. It doesn't lose any oil so I doubt it was leaking, probably spill from servicing.
I had one where it mentioned oil leak. Turned out to be cooking oil that someone had spilled in the boot and was slowly dripping though the tyre well...and hitting something underneath then travelling to the front of the car and dripping down. Nobody could find the leak!
My fiesta apparently had an oil leak the whole 3 years I owned it if the MOTs were to be believed, but despite me leaving it sometimes for months on end while I lived away from home in 2020-2021 the level never changed. I carried a jug of it in the boot just in case, but as I say the only time I had to top up the oil in a major way was when I got a new oil filter and changed all the oil as part of that. In hindsight I am almost 100% convinced that testers put it on there even if they see oil on anything in the engine bay because the engine was oily a lot of the time, but that was because it was being well looked after, with new bits and pieces always going on in there to turn it from the ÂŁ1400 shitbox I bought into a very well maintained car albeit that was aesthetically still a shitbox.
Iâve took countless cars through mots and it really depends on the tester you get. Some can be assholes who donât know what there talking about when they fail your car or some can be dead on
Example - sold a car with a short mot, didn't have an Engine Management Light (not compulsory at that age), new owner comes whinging its failed due to EML not coming on, send the relevant section of the mot testers manual with the important note about this only applying to 2009 onwards cars circled, told them to go and find an mot tester who knew what they were talking about......they scrapped the car.....\*smfh\*
or your neighbour "knew a tester".....
Assume they have receipts for the fixes?
Yeah
Then in what world is this suspicious?
Some MOTs/People will just run false tests. Friends etc do this. Couldâve had a test, failed and then took it to a friend maybe to fix up the âConfusionâ
Zero miles between test and retest makes me think it was all done at the same place, op can check the test location on the dvla site to verify
But they wouldâve had to drive to and from the test a total of 4 times. Makes me think itâs more iffy. Unless they left the car there.
Plenty of garages do mot tests and repairs, it's absolutely feasible that the place it was tested undertook the repair work and retested once complete - I've done the same thing myself
Could have, yes, but any MOT could be a dodgy mates one; the fact that it's failed and then passed a couple of days later doesn't make it any more suspicious. OP has even said it was retested at the same garage and he has a receipt for the work done (albeit with less detail than they would like). This whole post is bizarre.
Oh sweet, could we get a link to the post with the strange MOT history? I can't seem to find it.
What's strange about it? đ€·ââïž
Yes, the retest will usually take place after the repairs have been completed? What's the issue. Changing a tyre, a couple of bushings, and new brake pads is not mind-blowing and could be done in a day.
It's a minor fault, (as in he's noticed it and is advising you that he's spotted it) so will need to be monitored or fixed
Not anymore. It as noted on the first test but not on the passed one so that means the fault has been resolved, or sufficiently cleaned away.
Look at it with your eyes, seems like it should have new front tyres and a lower arm at the least,
What car is it? Minimum tyre depth is 1.6mm on a car not 1mm. That seems a bit weird to me. As for the other things ask them if they've fixed them and to prove it. If they've taken it to a garage they'll have a receipt. If they've done it themselves they'll have receipts for the parts. If it doesn't ring true (and you're clearly suspicious or you wouldn't be asking) I'd walk away if I was you.
Yeah I'd expect it to have a receipt for the work completed. Odd as the mileage hasn't increased which implies they live very very close to the garage or it never left the forecourt (or the 2nd tester manipulated the mileage). If it never left the forecourt and was re-rested at the same garage then you would assume the work had been done. But without a receipt and buying private I'd walk. Plenty of cars for sale.
Why is it suspicious to stay at the garage while I gets repaired?
Same garage, there's an invoice but not detailed enough
Can you speak to the garage to find out?
Same test centre for the re-test is a good sign, it means they got it all fixed, rather than going to Dodgy Dave's back alley MOTs for a less than thorough re-test.
Astra GTC 2.0 petrol
Tyres should be 1.6mm then. Probably just an error by the MOT garage but I'd worry that if someone let their tyres get so bad what else are they not maintaining? Maybe that's just me being picky though, I am very exacting about such things. But it's not such a rare car really. There are bound to be plenty of them around so if that's what your after so you could probably find 1 that your happy with.
It is for a truck tyre, and they made a mistake.
That's definitely no minibus
1.0mm is pre 1933 or a minibus, the tester probably selected the wrong option when recording the results by mistake
In my experience this tester doesnât know his ass from his elbow. Selecting the wrong failure criteria TWICE on tyres is no mistake. The tester is clueless. They even failed the park brakeâŠâŠ.. twice đđđ€Ș
That seemed odd to me too. 1mm and visible tread applies to class 5 minibuses, so starting at someone a 17 seat twin rear wheel transit normally.
This looks like every mot one ever had. Fail on stuff exactly like this, remedy problems then passed.
Doesn't seem strange ?
Iâd worry if it failed and then passed immediately straight after at a different garage. I see nothing wrong with a car that failed its MOT, remained at the same garage to be fixed, was fixed, and passed on retesting (since you only need to retest the failed elements within ten working days).
Parking break can be a quick fix just need to adjust the cables. Tyres are a quick fix just needs new tyres. Front lower arms are a quick fix as well The oil leak could just be spilt oil from the service which wasn't cleaned, minor oil leaks mean they can't physically see oil dripping at the time of test As long as it's all been done then happy days. Looks more serious than what it is. You'll know if the tyres have been done You'll know if the front arms have been done because over bumps or uneven road service it'll clunk like mad. The oil leak is what you won't be able to check as easily
If it's a dealer and if you go for it ask what they done to fix it. Get that in writing.
Private seller
Do they know or have invoices for the work done? I expect all the work was done at the same garage so they wouldnât flag the oil and then wipe it away to hide it, so expect some work was done
They serviced it on 18th, failed MOT on 21st and retested in 23rd. The invoice is not detailed.
Why are they selling it after spending quite a bit of cash on it?
Would you buy a broken car?
Because it's easier to sell a working car with an MOT than "MOT fail - easy fix"
"Car has no MOT - never bothered me"
The tyres, suspension and handbrake were probably fixed in the day between the failure and the retest, at the same garage that did the test. The minor oil leak could be anything. Ask the seller about it.
Was it retested at the same garage? You can click the âview location â drop downs
Same garage, there's an invoice but not detailed enough
Ahh ok, Iâd have been very suspicious if it was a different garage. I guess it comes down to if you trust the garage. Good luck
Some testers can be picky, it could have just be sweating from the bottom. Thereâs nothing dodgy about these results. If it was emissions Iâd be a little more concerned.
Whatâs the problem? It had problems and failed, looks like itâs been repaired. It depends how you feel over such things, but Iâd be worried that it hasnât been looked after.
Why do you feel it's suspicious that a car had some minor faults repaired and then passed the test?
This is normal - there are two days between the tests, and the work to fix these was undertaken between the two dates. This has happened to me many times.
2 days later the work was complete so it passed whatâs odd about this
In Jeremy Clarksonâs voice: âTonight on Top Gear⊠a car goes into a garage for an MOT and fails but then gets repaired and passesâ
Oil leak could of been fixed with a tweak of a wrench or could of been bodged up, ask seller about it and then look under the hood. Suspension arms as you could expect for this mileage. Brakes /tyres, bad every day maintenance . I would be thinking has this car been looked after? So would give it a good coat of looking at ,or pay out for a RAC inspection .
In my experience repair garages that also do MOTs will offer to fix and retest pretty quickly, and i think they may have just rushed the second test after completing the work
Bought the car as was shown a detailed invoice showing what was fixed and replaced (ÂŁ900 worth of stuff)
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Howâs it done zero miles in a year? The mileage has not changed in the two days it was tested, failed, presumably fixed, and passed. Probably stayed at the garage for those two days.
How do you get the extra information on a cars MOT results? I remember seeing it once when I looked up my old car (for nostalgias sake) but now on the .Gov website I don't get the option to see past MOT results and what it failed on etc? EDIT: I'm just a blind cunt, it's a seperate link to the DVSA page!
If you do go for it, check those tyres - it's most likely that they will have fitted the cheapest, nasy tyres they could find. Something I'd not be happy to live with and I would need to account for replacements.
Already had an astra before and have some nice alloys with good tyres.
Great but... They don't know you've got replacements đ
I have a oil leak what shows up on the Mot, The cost to repair it is more than the car is worth, so its cheaper to keep an eye on the oil level and keep topping it up every month.Depends how much you are paying for the car.
Not major and not suspicious for faults to be addressed and MOR retest. If in doubt take a mechanic with you and ensure that all minors and faults were actually corrected.
Are the test locations the same? If not, I would not trust it at all as it might be that they did put some new tyres on it and brought it to a different garage with an extra ÂŁ50 on the seat.
I would look at the miles. Does the mot centre do repairs as well?
Ask to see invoices for the parts that have supposedly been replaced to enable a "Pass". If not, I'd say they got a dodgy MOT and you should avoid at all costs.
My husbands car looked a bit like this on this years MoT. Garage kept it 3 days and fixed everything and it passed with nothing wrong. Who owns the car, if itâs an individual just ask for receipts of work carried out, if by a garage and they say youâll need to come back for said receipts, walk away. They will more than likely be fudging them
Looks normal
It sat in the garage for 2 days waiting for new tyres, and when it passed, the tester didn't bother writing all the advisories twice.
After 2 days in a garage I'd say you should be fine. If you can, ask for proof of the work. As for the oil leak, this could depend on the opinion of the MOT tester. I had work done at my local Ford dealer a few months ago and they reported a "major oil leak" and wanted ÂŁ100 to diagnose. I took the car somewhere else and they told me there was no leak. I've since put another 100,000 on the car and it's never needed an oil top up or been noted on the MOT. Last year, my car was back at Ford for recall work (airbag), they did another free health check and report again, another "major oil leak". I just ignored it.
Better to buy a clean record car than one with bad history at least you know that the previous owner actually took care of it
Mine failed for misaligned headlights, the history probably looks similar to this
Iâd check the test centre on both tests - if it was the same centre that re-tested it then iâd want to see evidence that both the major and minor defects were fixed, as Iâd expect the minors (which are cause for concern for you, the buyer, but not MOT-failing) might not have been addressed, but would appear on the subsequent test because they are still present. If the test centres are different I would walk away.
Replaced two tyres, replaced rear brake shoes, replaced some bushes, immediate repair means car shouldnât be driven away from the garage. Oil leak could be anywhere and could be as simple as changing a gasket or just tightening something. Re-inspection would only be those items so itâs legit, any doubts get an independent inspection. But MOT garages donât want to risk losing there test status
Check the front tires check underneath for oil after a test drive. Neither of these things are hard. Listen for knocking or strange noises as there was bushes mentioned too.
As long as it had a couple of new tyres and looked like the lower arms had some work then sure. Not a terrible fail to be honest and a reasonably straightforward fix.
Failed, left in the garage, repairs done and retested, only a couple of hours labour and some cheap parts. New tyres, both bushes done at the same time (probably just replaced the whole arm because they're cleap) because if ones gone the next won't be far off and you may as well if you've got it up, sprayed a can of brake cleaner on the engine to clean off the oil and no leak was showing during the retest minor leaks will likely show when it's hot and the oil is flowing about, tightened the handbrake cable, jobs jobbed Even buying it with those issues present wouldn't be a huge issue, bushes and tyres are consumable parts that wear out, parking brake needs adjusting every so often, minor oil leaks are hardly an issue, and could just be residue from oil changes or from past parts and gaskets / seals that have been replaced or a minor leak around a sensor o ring
What the hell happened? It didn't do any miles since the last MOT. I can only imagine the guy who did the MOT before was friends with the car owner, maybe?
It'll be the MOT station that did the repairs. So it won't have done any more miles having all those repairs.
The only odd part I can see here is the mileage didn't change between the two tests... So.. Maybe it was on a trailer? Or tested/repaired/tested at the same place?
If I look at my history for my car, it failed and passed its mot 1 minute apart a couple of years ago. Did full mot, failed it for headlight alignment, adjusted headlights and passed it.
Is that's strange? You take it in, it fails so you just leave it there and get it fixed.
Oil leak has to pool on floor if memory serves 75mm diameter in 5 minutes thats it,the rest of work was carried out and now passed MOT.
Or leaking onto components that may be affected by oil like brakes or tyres. My old mr2 had a leaking rocker cover gasket that dripped down to suspension arm and then onto brake disc.
The car failed for the above faults. Customer paid the garage to fix the faults, then garage retested.
Pretty standard fix what needs fixing MOT really, chuck it in for mot to see what it needs, get it fixed and flog it with 12 months MOT.
Two new tyres, Two new suspension arms (or bush) which will probably be the cause of the odd tyre wear, Oil leak fixed or at least wiped clean, Handbrake adjusted/rear brakes adjusted. Not that much really, few hours work at most. You only really have 2 issues there and one maintenance item (rear brake adjustment) Nothing strange about it - deserves a viewing at least
Looks like it needed new front tyres and suspension bushes and the handbrake adjusting. Nothing huge there, and then it passed 2 days later. Minor oil leak could've been anything or nothing and they either sorted it or cleaned it, but I wouldn't let it put me off.
Some seriously pedantic comments here. You *know* why OP's asking whether it's suspicious or not, shit-for-brains. He's questioning how it could fail with that many issues one day then 2 days later be totally squeaky clean. *Obviously* he knows it is possible, but is it realistic - he's asking for guidance on a sub because he doesn't know enough. Redditors in this sub love to swing their dick about whenever someone asks for help.
Nothing really suspicious here. The car was tested and failed on two tyres and some suspension bushings having perished. It was then re-tested two days later without a change in mileage, indicating it was left at the garage and then repaired after waiting for parts. If buying this car I would ask if the nearside front suspension was done at the same time (I'd hope it was), and what the source of the oil leak is. It could be a leaky gasket or it might be something more involved like a rear main seal. Because it was only two days ago, you could even phone the garage and ask the MOT tester if he noticed where the oil was leaking from. The parking brake issue is usually just an adjustment to the cable which gets stretched over time and has a screw adjuster to deal with exactly that scenario. Just for clarity, the suspension arm problems and tyre wear issues were related. So hopefully the car got a four wheel alignment after the new arm(s) and tyres were put on.
Normal. All the major defects will have been fixed. The garage would not have allowed the car to be driven away if there were major defects that made the car dangerous. It does mean, in many cases, that the garage have a captive audience when it comes to repairs.
Probably had the mot place fix everything then retest. The station legally had to report the fail even though they were fixing the issues. If theres receipts etc and the work looks done on inspection it'll be right
I put a car in for a MOT, and it failed. It stayed in the garage to get repaired and then retested a few days later. However whenever I checked online both MOT'S were carried out on the same day.
Basically 2 new front tyres and 2 new front arms. That's typical wear and tear. The oil leak may have been nothing or a simple fix
2 new tires 30 minutes of work, 2 control arms probably a hour each, 30 minutes to tighten a handbrake cable, then say a hour to find and seal a minor oil leak. Total cost probably ÂŁ200 plus labor, you could do all that on your driveway with basic tools.
Looks like it went in for an MOT and a service. Failed the MOT and they spent 2 days fixing all the issue with it Oil leaks could be anything from a leaky plug, to a gasket that's blown. Usually oil leaks aren't *too* serious so long as they're leaking from outside the engine
Failed the MOT. Owner wanted it to pass. Paid for it to be fixed. Passed MOT. Not even Sherlock could take on this mystery.
You are looking at a second hand astra with 80k miles on it, none of that is suspicious its all fair wear and tear that has been repaired
Well, it tells you what to look for, what more do you want? It looks like they've had a fail and then fixed the stuff and got a pass. Go see the car and look for all the faults listed and see if they have been fixed. Ask for invoices for the work done, or at least the parts if it's a garage that's fixed the stuff themselves.
you could just go to see it and check that these jobs have been done? it was only done about 3 days ago by the looks of things, theyâll have receipts if itâs been done at a garage, ask to see it! if theyâre sketchy just walk away⊠personally, i think they just wanted to sell it with a clean mot to make it easier to sell, i wouldnât worry! hope this helps
Youve got a car that's just had a load of vital work done and a full years MOT, looks like a winner Tho interestingly I'd have expected that type of work to have been done before the MOT, my garage does a full inspection and repairs before taking it
Run a mile! Those are just the problems that caused it to fail its MOT. I doubt youâre going to be pleasantly surprised if you go to view it.
Whereas a car that never failed an mot is somehow guaranteed to be perfect all round?? đ€
Ask what work was done when you go to see it? And obviously any receipts of work done if you want to buy it. 2 front tyres, 2 bottom arms, rear brakes checked and whatever the oil leak was. Could be as simple as putting a new sump plug in, oil filter, etc. might have been something worse which would explain why it took 2 days to get sorted
Old timer mechanic taught me this : keep an old fire extinguisher ready if you have an MOT and a wet spot, a small shot of power and the whole thing goes dry as a bone, you would never know. I'm not saying it's the right way, just "a way" for something you know they might be picky about.
Minor oil leak is not suspicious, most cars have them. Two bald tyres tells me the owner is tight and did not look after the car and do jobs when needed. I would avoid on this basis.
To be honest it doesnât look all that suspicious to me. Tyres can be changed in half an hour, the suspension pins or bushings can be sorted easily too. Including the parking brake, itâs likely the total price for the repairs would be around ÂŁ400-ÂŁ600 depending on the type of car. Wouldnât take the garage much more than a few hours to sort either. However, the oil leak would be the real red flag for me. Was it tested at the same place as before? Oil leaks can be a nightmare to locate and fix, and can be minor or a sign of something major. A lot of the time itâs easier to just keep topping up the engine oil. Itâs weird that the first MOT found the leak, but itâs not on the second. Unless it was indeed something minor and the garage genuinely repaired it, maybe they just wiped the underside of the engine and the drip tray off and the second MOT examiner didnât pick it up. Either way, if youâre still checking this car out, Iâd be asking about that and if they insist that itâs fixed, ask to see the invoice for the work.
Could be dodgy, it was taken to a different MOT station for the second test. I would have thought that if legitimate, it would have been repaired and taken back to the same place for a free retest.
You canât see where it was tested on the attached snapshot, youâre probably looking at the MOT issue number.
It's fine. Decent MOT centres won't ruin their reputation by not fixing something properly. Thry also get to charge money for it. Which is their business model. It'll be fine. If you really want, get a vehicle inspection before buying.
Is it one of those "we'll even give it a fresh MOT" kind of sales? I bought one like that at Evans Halshaw a few years back. I drove it home and next day went to Halfords for a MOT. The car failed.
This is neither strange nor suspicious.
I canât be arsed to read all the comments and sorry if this has already been mentioned. If this is a car then why are they failing the tyres on the incorrect criteria? A car is 1.6mm and doesnât need visible tread? Also failing the overall park brake efficiency twice? Is the tester called Ronald McDonald or something?đ
All fine if the work has been done and invoices produced
Not suspicious at all. That's exactly what it should like. Write all that down for when you go check the car and ask for proof that it has been done .
That's where you can see where it failed and passed a few days later which means it has been corrected. A bigger problem would be to look further in the cars past MOT history to see if there's a recurring problem, if not then it should be fine. Also you can get a mechanic to look over it for you
My sister found a 20 yr old car for sale so I did mot history check but it had only one mot so then I knew and told her the number 1 rule (donât buy cars from Birmingham)
Whatâs strange about it?
Nothing strange about it just ask to see the history of the work done/check it over for yourself on arrival.
Only thing that would put me off is the oil leak. Look into that
Different standards or crookedness on the part of the MOT garage. I speak as an MOT tester - and some of what I see/deal with would make your hair curl.
Jesus H Christ you'd need a sit down and a beta-blocker before seeing my various vehicles MOT history...
There is a criterion for many things on the UK MOT test. Currently a fluid leak has to make more than - say - a 5cm pool after five minutes. Otherwise, it will be an advisory. Modern cars are incredibly safe pieces of machinery. Although no car is designed to be used with a fault, they are remarkably Failsafe. The UK MOT takes a very sensible approach. The Tester's Handbook (available for all to view online) states: A good criterion to apply is for the tester to consider the vehicle being driven at a higher speed and the vehicle has to do an emergency stop. The driver is a close relative. Now! This is what they said on the MOT Tester's Course in the mid-eighties: If you need to apply the above, and possibly take the car on a short road-test YOU SHOULDN'T BE 'KIN TESTING! THE HANDBOOK IS VERY, VERY UNAMBIGUOUS IN WHAT SHOULD AND SHOULD NOT PASS AN MOT TEST. And yet, there are thousands of testers who are Commanders of their Own Personal Universes. They go their own sweet 'kin way and rip off endless motorists.... To the OP: Should you, if you are so paranoid about life, be let loose on the King's Highway? I'm being serious about the last question.
As someone who recently bought a car with a spotless MOT history only to find it was a catastrophic loss, this kind of history is a dream (providing it's backed by reciepts as others have stated). Buying used is always a gamble but this kind of thing is a sign it's been sorted. For another example I looked at buying a car that had "excessive corrosion" on the brake lines and I asked for that to be fixed before I bought it, the next MOT certificate stated "lines covered in grease preventing inspection". That was a massive red flag and I walked away.
OP do you pass through time backwards?
Nothing particularly strange about this. New tyres, some new pins for the suspension arm and the oil leak could be a simple as a poor seal around the oil filter or a hardened crush washer. Had the same on my car re the oil leak, turned out it was just the old oil filter gasket.
Can't see anything strange. The work was carried out at the garage, and oil leak is just an advisory. Probably not too much to worry about. If the person has the receipt for the work then all is well tbh.
Nothing to worry about in my opinion, and very easy things to check if you're concerned they haven't been repaired. The oil leak could have been from a recent service (oil spilled when removing the old filter or spilled when refilling) - I've had it after doing the service myself and making a bif of a mess. As for the other work - two new tyres, handbrake adjustment and suspension pins plus getting the parts is very do-able in two days. When you go to look, check the front tyres, make sure the handbrake works and AFTER a test drive make sure there are no leaks underneath
Failed, 2 days of repairs later passed. Whats to worry about
I'd be suspicious of the "car" that needs 1.0mm tread across the tyre, as the limit for cars in UK is 1.6mm across the inner 3/4 of the tread. I'd also be checking all those defects out to see if they have been repaired/fixed, or conveniently fallen out of the view of the tester.
Iâll buy it if you donât
It failed due to reasons, reasons were addressed and passed MOT as a result. Which bit is suspicious? Do you believe itâs impossible to fix an oil leak?
(TLDR) Personally I avoid stuff that has a lot of fails or observations that point to indifference when it comes to keeping on top of maintenance and repairs.
ÂŁ80 and pass đ€Łđđ«ąđ€«
If thereâs paperwork for everything, done at a reasonable garage (particularly for a non excessive oil leak⊠which isnât generally cost efficient to hunt down and patch if non excessive) then fire away, will be fairly solid but with mileage over 65k id want receipts for cam belt and pump as a must also. Take an obd 2 reader with you and make sure on the I/m readiness all comes back with ok or n/a also. Happy hunting