Another massive disappointment with an SLK 320 Automatic.

[AWanderingLancastrian]

The problem is its all down to opinion when testing.
I've seen testers throw the book at 15 year old cars with surface rust on springs, brake pipes,
slightly damp shocks, play in steering rack, corrosion on brake discs, slight play in top mounts,
thin pads etc etc, where the car would pass if 6 years old in the same condition due to age looks etc.

I have done it my self walking across the garage forecourt with a set of old manky keys in my hand
looking at an unloved piece of crap listing to one side with a cracked screen not a straight panel and
full of rubbish empty plastic bottles crisp packets McD's bags and even dirty nappies once.
It can sway your opinion before the test starts but once up on the ramp and your in test mode
the bias goes away and its back to business and a pass is a pass but opinion can fail a car
if the tester really wants to where there's a grey area.

Hi Westheath. If that is the case then there might be a good case for discrimination within the MoT testing bay based upon the very valid points of observation that you have highlighted.
The very fact that there is often proven abiguity with failures and moreso with advisories leaves the whole MoT process open to question.
Non so more as the new rules that are now laid down - in my considered opinion very skewed to not only creating work for people that could well know nothing or even at best very little about some of the more specialists marques and their idiosyncrasies that can often occur due to the practice of multiple earthing bring into play warning lights.

My BMW 325Ci Automatic periodically shows that the ABS system is compromised by the momentary failure of an ABS wheel sensor - but the system still functions perfectly well when tested on loose surfaces and or wet surfaces and going through puddles.
Also if I turn off the engine/ignition and then start it again the light is fully extinguised and often for several weeks/many miles of use.

 

[LostKiwi]

Also if I turn off the engine/ignition and then start it again the light is fully extinguised and often for several weeks/many miles of use.

Which if the light were on at test time would be a fail and rightly so.
The fact you have this issue shows something is wrong with the car that needs attention, irrespective of how intermittent it is or that a "reboot" makes it run for many miles.

Idiosyncratic behaviour shouldn't be accepted as normal in any marque as the car was never designed that way nor built that way so anything like that which brings up a warning light should be cause for failure as it's still a malfunction that needs addressing.

 

[AWanderingLancastrian]

Which if the light were on at test time would be a fail and rightly so.
The fact you have this issue shows something is wrong with the car that needs attention, irrespective of how intermittent it is or that a "reboot" makes it run for many miles.

Idiosyncratic behaviour shouldn't be accepted as normal in any marque as the car was never designed that way nor built that way so anything like that which brings up a warning light should be cause for failure as it's still a malfunction that needs addressing.

Hi LK. If that is the case then can you please explain to me how it is that the EML is illuminated on Ms AWL's 2000 (X) reg Vauxhall Astra and that gets a clear pass year after year.

 

[LostKiwi]

EML isn't a fail (yet) as long as it passed an emissions test.
ABS is as it's a safety item (as is SRS and ESP).

 

[Taffy7hfa]

EML isn't a fail (yet) as long as it passed an emissions test.
ABS is as it's a safety item (as is SRS and ESP).

Interesting...there seems to be some variation in the way different inspectors interpret the rules regarding this, I had a conversation with an mot inspector fairly recently regarding eml's, his view was that he would always consider this a fail as it may indicate a problem with the emissions system, although he may have been talking specifically about diesel engines, I would never put a car through an mot with the eml on anyway so I guess I'll never know !

 

[Westheath]

Hi Westheath. If that is the case then there might be a good case for discrimination within the MoT testing bay based upon the very valid points of observation that you have highlighted.
The very fact that there is often proven abiguity with failures and moreso with advisories leaves the whole MoT process open to question.
.

There is due process if you think your vehicle should have passed an MOT
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/complain-about-an-mot

I've had a visit from them twice in 25 years,
both occasions were traders not getting their own way with the test result.

 

[AWanderingLancastrian]

EML isn't a fail (yet) as long as it passed an emissions test.
ABS is as it's a safety item (as is SRS and ESP).

Hi LK. My understanding of the EML is that it is illuminated when there is an issue with the ECU and as the ECU controls many things on a modern car including the fuel mixture and delivery of it then there is an issue with incorrect mixture which is not good for the planet.
When the EML light illuminated on my BMW 320i Touring illuminated the fuel was running rather rich and the tickover was irratic to say the least and especially when cold.

 

[LostKiwi]

The EML can light for many reasons and not all are emissions related or related to fuelling or even the engine. Gearbox limp mode can illuminate the EML. On my Smart gear selection failure likewise.
Hence what I said - if it passed the emissions test then the EML isn't a fail.
Technically you don't even need a gearbox to pass an MOT.

From May 20th an EML is a fail (hence why I said yet earlier).