Honda Jazz MOT common advisories and failure items

[guest1372]

Thought I would start a list of things that MOT testers have noticed and things that people could check prior to their MOT.

Standard things such as wipers, lights, tyres & exhaust are easy enough to monitor, I've had advisories when all my tyres were around 3mm which I felt was a bit cheeky but it was at a national tyre fitter (they were shortly replaced elsewhere).

Advisory notice item(s)
Nearside Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Offside Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Nearside Rear Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Offside Rear Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)

Again at a nationwide tyres and exhaust place, but only after a screwdriver shaped hole was added to a rusty section.

Reason(s) for failure
Rear Exhaust has a major leak of exhaust gases (7.1.2)

This one has a thread of it's own:

Reason(s) for failure
Offside Rear Rear wheel bearing rough when rotated (2.6.1)

Understandable but really down to tester's discretion on when to fail this one:

Advisory notice item(s)
front arm rear bushes splitting
Advisory notice item(s)
Nearside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Offside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)

Quite common but easily fixed/prevented by wiping some grease on the exposed metallic part.

Advisory notice item(s)
Nearside Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Offside Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Advisory notice item(s)
Nearside Brake pipe slightly corroded front to rear (3.6.B.2c)
Offside Brake pipe slightly corroded front to rear (3.6.B.2c)

Advisory notice item(s)
Front Brake pad(s) wearing thin (3.5.1g)

And some general ones when there's nothing else to note, although polishing the headlight covers is now a pre-MOT ritual.

Advisory notice item(s)
Nearside Headlamp deteriorated but light output not reduced (1.7.5a)
Offside Headlamp deteriorated but light output not reduced (1.7.5a)
n/s and o/s front brake back plates corroded
exhaust front pipe joint in poor condition
general under body corrosion (mud which wiped off to reveal paint underneath; lesson don't take a dirty car to MOT)

Most of these are not specific to the Jazz, but the brake pipes, rear wheel bearing and front control arm bushes are ones to watch.
--
TG

[guest5079]

I know things have tightened up since I was approved as a tester.
Flipping eck there were some try ons there!!!!!!!!!!!
If the law states a minimum of 1mm total circumference over 3/4s of the tread how can you get an advisory for 3mm? In my time as a plod there was NO authorised instrument for measuring tread depth. Do testing stations have their own rules.
I used to test vehicles that had spent 12mths running around Bodmin Moor. Mud, if you took it off there would be nothing left. I know now a vehicle can be refused if it is dirty BUT.
A car opposite, when she gets out she has to pick the seat belt off the ground as it does not retract. Failure. Been like it for 3 yrs. Van with the plastic bumper finisher missing exposing rusty steel( that would have been a dangerous parts in my day)should be  a failure so there are still some dodgy testing going on.

[Jocko]

An advisory is just that. It advises you of things that, while not a safety concern at the moment, may develop into one. Tyres are a classic example. The legal minimum depth of tread is 1.6 mm, but even a tyre with more than that can struggle to shift water after heavy rain. Independent research reckon you should change your tyres when the tread depth reaches 3 mm. A driver who is hard on tyres can get from 3 mm to 1.6 mm in a couple of months. I had Pirelli Runflat tyres on a FIAT 126, and I had to replace them every 10K miles. They plain wore out. They stuck to the road like glue but were soft and had very little life in a brand new tyre.
I look at advisories as a bit of free advice from the MOT tester. I then plan to get the work done as and when I feel it is necessary/I can afford it/my mechanic is available!

[JazzyJJ]

A car that parks on our road often leaves circles of oil everywhere it has parked. Im surprised it runs or that the owner doesn't see it. I check the MOT via gov.uk today and it says it passed recently... Is an oil leak an MOT failure? I guess a 'friendly' MOT garage could pass it as you never can prove when the leak started. But then he must be topping it up weekly... it at all.

[guest1372]

I forgot to add this link to the online version of the tester's manual; although it's not as detailed and specific as their online testing system it gives you a good overview of what to check in the month before your test.  Some things are pretty vague but ultimately it's whether the part performs it's job correctly and safely.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/mot-inspection-manual-for-class-3-4-5-and-7-vehicles
--
TG

[guest5079]

Thank you Jocko for correcting my mistake re tyres. I admit after I posted my bit I thought, did I get that wrong.
It IS important to have more than the legal requirement of tread.
I make no apologies for relating this tale:   Vauxhall Cavalier, driven by a carpet salesman, samples in the boot. Rear tyres that could have been sold as slicks. Double bend damp road. Result car written off, no insurance as they refused to pay out. Points on his licence and a fine. His comment, I haven't had time to get new ones. How many times that excuse has been used to me.
Walking my beat, pub car park, local with a Leyland Sherpa van skinny front tyre, I knew he didn't drink more than a pint so I waited. Pointed out the tyre asked how much he spent on beer  and suggested he gave the beer up and buy a new tyre. He did and he thanked me next time he saw me. I did try to do this with locals UNLESS it was blatant and then it was the book.
People do not seem to realise that the tyre is all that keeps the vehicle on the road.
I am sorry to bang on about tyres. I did not deal with this one. Spanish 6 wheel lorry. 5 completely bald tyres. Lorry impounded, court immediately stonking great fine and the lorry only released after new tyres. To this day it is still happening with continental lorries. It is horrifying to think of a 44 tonner with dodgy tyres.
What I did find sad was the number of motorists that hadn't a clue about the state of their tyres.

[VicW]

My son has a repair business that includes MoT's on cars, vans and bikes. Some of the tales are horrendous in their implications for safety and the owners just cannot see the consequences.
A popular misconception is that the MoT is the equivalent of an annual service ( for £55 !!) and while on the subject of tyres they are possibly the major cause of advisories and failure.
The VOSA regulations regarding MoT's can be a bit vague and allow the tester to very little in the way of dismantling to aid inspection.
Some motor cyclists are amusing in that many have an illegal number plate. They stop outside when they arrive, swap the number plate for a legal one and change it back before they drive off after the test. It was legal at the time of the test, something that the police are fully aware of.

Vic.

[Jocko]

The same goes for cars with personalised number plates with illegal spacing.

[guest5079]

When I became a police officer, after the weeks at training school, if you got through, one was posted in my force to a largish town. There you were attached to a tutor constable, who was lumbered with you until he/she and the sgt were happy for you to go it alone. In my 2 yrs probation which EVERY copper had to do,,tyres, number plates, silencers, lights etc were the bread and butter jobs for the proby.
A system was introduced to save time and that was the VDRS ( vehicle defect rectification scheme) which was a pretty good idea. Basically, if you stopped/found a motorist with say a headlight out. A VDRS was issued. The motorist then had the problem rectified and for £10 at an MOT station got the VDRS stamped as done. If the person failed to do the work, it was straight to court. It worked very well as it not only freed up a lot of time it got all the things like number plate spacing, light defects minor tyre transgressions  etc sorted. It also picked up a considerable number of document offences, which now are checked on line. Clearly this scheme has long gone given the number of one eyed monsters on the road. It literally only took a few minutes to write a VDRS up. Modern coppers reckon they have no time so consequently the motorist is literally getting away with murder.

[guest6436]

Thank you Jocko for correcting my mistake re tyres. I admit after I posted my bit I thought, did I get that wrong.
It IS important to have more than the legal requirement of tread.
I make no apologies for relating this tale:   Vauxhall Cavalier, driven by a carpet salesman, samples in the boot. Rear tyres that could have been sold as slicks. Double bend damp road. Result car written off, no insurance as they refused to pay out. Points on his licence and a fine. His comment, I haven't had time to get new ones. How many times that excuse has been used to me.
Walking my beat, pub car park, local with a Leyland Sherpa van skinny front tyre, I knew he didn't drink more than a pint so I waited. Pointed out the tyre asked how much he spent on beer  and suggested he gave the beer up and buy a new tyre. He did and he thanked me next time he saw me. I did try to do this with locals UNLESS it was blatant and then it was the book.
People do not seem to realise that the tyre is all that keeps the vehicle on the road.
I am sorry to bang on about tyres. I did not deal with this one. Spanish 6 wheel lorry. 5 completely bald tyres. Lorry impounded, court immediately stonking great fine and the lorry only released after new tyres. To this day it is still happening with continental lorries. It is horrifying to think of a 44 tonner with dodgy tyres.
What I did find sad was the number of motorists that hadn't a clue about the state of their tyres.

you could have slicks on the Lorries and they would still be fine in reality

[culzean]

you could have slicks on the Lorries and they would still be fine in reality

If you only ever drove on dry roads slicks would be fine,  but with slicks the water has no way of getting away from under the tyre and the wider the tyre the bigger the problem of aquaplaning (which is why narrow pushbike tyres do not really need tread).  It is as well to think that it is a fine and 3 points for EACH illegal tyre,  so if you had four illegals you would go straight from 0 to 12 points in less time than you could say 'well ossifer I have been meaning to get them replaced, honest'.

[guest5079]

Anyone lucky enough to have had the experience of driving on a skid pan, will not agree with slicks being OK. Whilst I appreciate the one I had to practice on was covered in oil and water, a Rover V8 with slicks was the ultimate in skid experience it, was not what you would call fun.
Yes a 44 tonner with slicks on a dry road might be OK? BUT any moisture would be a disaster.

[guest1372]

Just had this comment - was hoping for an 'all clear' this time, slightly surprised as I had checked them earlier when servicing.  MOT done at a tyres/brakes/exhaust type of garage.

Advisory notice item(s)
Front Brake pad(s) wearing thin (3.5.1g)

I just measured them at 4.7mm & 4.8mm so that's around 40% of original thickness if that was 12mm.  Should probably be replaced at 3mm.

Rear shoes were 4.1mm & 4.2mm (originals from 2002 / 100k miles)
--
Edit

The new pads turned up from Eurocarparts 45 minutes after ordering them (not too shabby), they measure 9mm each, so 4.7mm left is actually 52% remaining.   Is there something about MOT testers that they're not deemed thorough if they don't give an advisory on something or is it just a sales tactic?
--
TG

[VicW]

Measuring pad thickness for an MoT is made more difficult by the fact that wheels are not removed during an MoT test.
Trying to see through the wheels makes it difficult to estimate pad life so testers tend to err on the safety side.

Vic.