MOT history check

General Discussion Forums Car Talk
2

Hi, Iā€™ve just been on the government MOT check site to check the history of my car and it shows the dates the MOTs were done, but if I want any further information, historic advisories etc, it now requires I enter the VIN number.

Is this a new thing or am I doing something wrong? Iā€™m not bothered at the moment, but if I was looking to buy a second hand car this sort of information is important.

Thanks.

D

Sorry, an update. Looks like because there were no comments or advisories then nothing shows on the page. Just looks like the layout has changed slightly.Ā 

3

https://www.check-mot.service.gov.uk/

Ā 

works for me

Rich.

4

Hi Combemartian, Iā€™ve just checked & Iā€™m able to see the historic advisories for any vehicle on there without the VIN number, however the VIN numberā€™s required in order to view the test certificate & also to see the location at which the test was performed.

The facility to see the certificate & the locationā€™s a fairly new thing on that website.

Edit - just seen your update!

5

Originally you could see all details, garage etc. without any need for any VIn number or certificate, but I guess they got rid of that due for privacy reasons. With that information it would be easy to track anyoneā€™s historical location in the country by the car they drive/have driven.

6

Thanks for the replies guys. I think it was the ā€œ view test certificate ā€œ that throw me as I hadnā€™t seen that before. If only all lifeā€™s problems were so easily solved ??

7

Just been checking a cars history and one of the advisories was ā€œ engine oil below minimum ā€œ
Surely oil level isnā€™t a MOT check.

also an advisory for ā€œ surface rust ā€œ but no mention of where.Ā 

Seems odd.
D

8

On a similar note, my car had its MOT today and had two minor advisories which the tester pointed out during the test.

For the last two years there has been an advisory regarding an oil leak from the gearbox on each certificate, and I know there is a leak as it leaves a spot on the drive when I return from a run, although it is from the rear crank seal as it is engine oil.

So why has it disappeared from the list of advisories as I am fairly certain that it has not cured its self?

Now my question to all you MOT testers out there and there must be some, is why do different testers feel the need to advise on different things?

Is it perhaps a human trait that we are unable to leave an empty box on a form and have to write something in it, or is just that on such a structured document it is the only space for a little creative writing?

Any how it passed for another year so all is well!

Dave

9

I suspect some advisories, and perhaps some minor fails are all about keeping their stats looking good for audits. eg. the classic car failed on headlamp aim, but got a free retest and pass automatically. I had a fail and retest years ago on a headlamp aim. Literally, the time between tests was 2 minutes. I doubt they would have had time to find the screw driver, let alone adjust the headlamp. Maybe it had failed, and they passed it without changing the aim, maybe the fail was made up. I never had an issue with headlamp aim in the 8 years since.

Sometimes the advisories are useful, sometimes, they leave you wondering.

10

I have a Skoda Octavia as well as my MX5. Every MOT I have had done at the garage I use has an advisory that says something like ā€œundertrays fitted obscuring some underside componentsā€. Itā€™s slightly annoying as it shows an advisory on every MOT but the garage are very good so I just live with it.

11

Mine is in today,worst day of the year sat waiting for the news.I hate itā€¦

1 Like
12

Ah yes, headlight alignment!
At last years fun day out I was informed that the n/side windscreen wiper was not clearing the screen properly.
Nothing to do with the hot dusty day and the polish that must have got on the screen during its spruce up, but fear not as conveniently next to the testing bay was a stand of new wiper blades.
Still got recorded as a ā€˜Majorā€™ fail.
Next was the innocent question ā€˜has it been involved in an accident recentlyā€™ to which I answered yes a minor incident, this prompted yes thought so as both head lights are out of alignment. Funny as only the n/side was nudged. Second Major fail of the day then the use of the magic screwdriver, must be standard MOT testerā€™s issue and 30 secs later all fine now sir!
My wife just says I am getting old and cynical, but I do wonder sometimes.

13

Years ago, shortly after I moved to where I now live, I took my then 12 year old

Peugeot 106 diesel to a local Ford new car dealer for an MOT.

For an older car, the Peugeot was in good condition.Ā  But when I collected it,

the garage had put ā€˜advisoriesā€™ on everything under the sun. There was about 16 of them.

About the only thing they didnā€™t ā€˜adviseā€™ on was the brand new, still gleaming silver,Ā 

rear exhaust box which Iā€™d fitted 2 weeks earlier.Ā 

That was the last time I used any kind of new car dealer to do an MOT.

Ā 

Nowadays, and for the last 3 or 4 years, Iā€™ve downloaded one of those MOT checklistsā€¦,

and go round the car. I use a 75 point one.

If Iā€™m really keen to see an MOT with a clean pass, and no advisories, I get my local garage

to do a full pre-MOT.

Out of interest, I do a fair amount of noting random number plates, then checking their MOT history

on a phone app.Ā  Absolutely incredible the number of failures on silly things like light bulbs not working,

or wipers. These are the basics really.

Ā 

Ā 

14

Yes bulbs not working I can understand, although years ago I had a Volvo 144 which had a bulb failure system, cleaver really as the lighting system was split into two circuits and the and the cleaver box of tricks compared resistances. Still did not stop a failure for a side light out even though all was fine when I dropped it off.

With regard to wipers yes if they are damaged or not clearing the screen properly, then fair enough but mine was in good condition and not damaged, and in the middle of the heatwave we had last year there was little chance it was going to clear a dusty screen with a quick squirt of water. I put the new blade in the boot and the old one back on and it worked perfectly all winter.

If they must find fault why not a quick word and a replacement rather than a ā€˜major failā€™ followed by and immediate ā€˜Passā€™

Or is it a case of a discount MOT with the fee made up with little extras.

I noticed that my local tyre/exhaust centre is offering and MOT for Ā£29.95 including collection and return to your home, one wonders!

15

I had my mk3.5 MOTd on Tuesday and they nearly failed it on an oil leak until I explained Iā€™d just treated all the suspension with ACF50.
I agree with the above post that suggests maybe test centres like to put in a few simple fails in to keep the DVLA Gestapo off there back. Me, cynical?
D

16

When they updated the systems just a few years ago and because I had a change of reg number at that time (transfer of reg from my MK2 to Mk3) they had the MOT history dating back to 2007 on my Mk3. My Mk3 had its first MOT in 2010, go figure. Turns out they had mixed up the history of both cars, I fired an email to them and it was corrected. Only problem now is the current MOT history says my Mk3 has picked up an advisory for a slightly distorted wheel bead rim, wasnā€™t there before the mess up.

17

 

Couldnā€™t possibly comment. I never go near places that offer ā€˜discountedā€™ MOTā€™s. 

The real fee is Ā£55. 

In Germany, I believe that MOT testing places only do MOTā€™s, no repairs.

So, no ulterior profit motive.

 

18

Lights and wipers are a favourite and simple way to get a few quid on top of the MOT fee.

I was however surprised recently when my wifeā€™s car got an advisory for a nail in the rear tyre.

I obviously had it fixed straight away, but couldnā€™t believe that is an advisory that can be ignored and is not required to be fixed.

19

I have mixed feelings on advisories.Ā 

I am fortunate in having a trustworthy local garage that that works on the common sense principle

They know me well, and know that if they suggest a repair or replacement part then it will be done without fail. Consequently my ā€œadvisoriesā€ tend to be just verbal.

Sort of, ā€œHave a look at this mate. Iā€™d fix that in the next week or two if I were you.ā€ This May it was perished tyre valve stems, even though they were less than two years old.

He actually gave me four valves to fit and I did indeed fit them within the week. The year before was chipped edges to the front brake pads, and they were replaced as soon

as MX5parts delivered new ones.

Now, good mechanics are not daft. They can make an educated guess at wether their advice will be followed or ignored. Lets say a car comes in that does 15k miles a year

and it has an owner that pays little attention to the test, and it has a part (lets say a tyre or pads) that will need replacing in three or four months, then they give an advisory.

Is that good or bad ? I know people that donā€™t even dip the oil from one service to the next. Would you buy a car from a person like that ?

Ā 

So what do advisories tell us ? Next to FA in most cases. IMHO

Ā 

Paul G

Ā 

20

It could be worseĀ 

Barrie