RRSPORT.CO.UK |
||
Forum Gallery Shop Sponsors |
Home · FAQ · New Posts · My Posts · PMs · Search · Members · Members Map · Calendar · Profile · Donate · Register · Log In |
Home > General > F**king typical! |
|
|
Bladeboy Member Since: 17 Sep 2013 Location: Benson Posts: 522 |
Wow- third user name; can't you take a hint? |
||
Fri Jul 22 2016 2:02pm |
|
Lost for Words Member Since: 15 Jan 2015 Location: Warminster, Wiltshire Posts: 1477 |
Edit: Gone. Visiting from DISCO3.CO.UK
|
||
Fri Jul 22 2016 2:06pm |
|
Bladeboy Member Since: 17 Sep 2013 Location: Benson Posts: 522 |
Back to the Corsa SRI forum he goes.... |
||
Fri Jul 22 2016 2:27pm |
|
RRSTDV8 Member Since: 12 Aug 2011 Location: Northamptonshire Posts: 8983 |
I use my EPB all the time. Maybe that's why it's lasted 130k miles. Many seem to go wrong much earlier when used infrequently. I actually don't mind it failing, it was the timing of the failing that was annoying! 2012 SDV6 - it's missing a couple of cylinders
|
||
Fri Jul 22 2016 4:34pm |
|
Johnski Member Since: 02 Sep 2015 Location: North Wales & North Yorkshire Posts: 1407 |
"It isn't necessary to apply a handbrake if it's an automatic if you use Park", this I'm sorry to say was at MOT test where my hand brake failed, but car was passed as the MOT inspector says its not needed on an Automatic, so if only thing failed on, and car is in good road worthy condition. I'm sure this isn't legal and if found out by an inspector doing tests on MOT stations he would be for the high jump.
|
||
Fri Jul 22 2016 7:59pm |
|
muddywheels Milk Float Man Member Since: 30 Jun 2010 Location: East Riding of Yorkshire Posts: 5637 |
My brother had a 2.7 that applied epb everytime switched off - he didn't do a lot of miles and it seized constantly
|
||
Fri Jul 22 2016 8:08pm |
|
Johnski Member Since: 02 Sep 2015 Location: North Wales & North Yorkshire Posts: 1407 |
I've never had a problem with the EPB either.
|
||
Fri Jul 22 2016 8:23pm |
|
Ady 555 Site Moderator Member Since: 12 Dec 2010 Location: Good old yorkshire Posts: 8738 |
I think you have done the right thing taking it off the road RRSTDV8. The law states that a vehicle must be roadworthy whilst using it on a public road. Yours clearly isn't with a faulty handbrake. If any part is covered by an MOT on a vehicle, then it must be in good working order at all times. Since when have handbrakes been exempt on an automatic vehicle I think someone is telling porkies there. |
||
Fri Jul 22 2016 9:41pm |
|
Camelrock Member Since: 31 Aug 2013 Location: North Yorkshire Posts: 1003 |
I think if you don't want the handbrake to come on try pressing the switch in the release position then turn the engine off whilst still holding it down only releasing after turning ignition off. That's how you stop manual D3 handbrakes from engaging when you remove the key. Sure I did a 13 plate Freelander like that the other day as well.. 2008 G4 RRSport TDV8 current
|
||
Fri Jul 22 2016 10:05pm |
|
Camelrock Member Since: 31 Aug 2013 Location: North Yorkshire Posts: 1003 |
I'd like to know how the above mot tester did a decelerometer parking brake test, slammed it into park at 20 mph 2008 G4 RRSport TDV8 current
|
||
Fri Jul 22 2016 10:08pm |
|
GodivaNige Member Since: 14 May 2016 Location: Warwickshire Posts: 420 |
An existing MOT expiry date can be preserved by testing for the following year, up to 28 days prior to this date, effectively giving the owner some flexibility as to when a vehicle can be retested. So an owner can have a test done at just passed 11 months into a test year and can then place a further 13 months on to the vehicle. But only if it passes. Should the vehicle fail the test taken at 11 months and one day (the earliest a concurrent test can be taken to preserve the existing expiry date), this deems the vehicle unsafe for the road and provided it hasn't been marked as dangerous unroadworthy, it can still be driven on the road, but only to and from a repair garage and/or a MOT test station for which a booking has had to be made to be able to prove the owners intention for the journey. It's a grey area but one that would still be flagged to a police officer if seen by ANPR, who could by rights stop you and make awkward enquiries as to why you're driving with an unroadworthy vehicle and are you on the way to get it retested or repaired? A vehicle can be tested at any time to give it a new 12 months ticket, regardless of how much MOT it currently has left, but if it fails, the existing MOT is definitely null and void, again, because in the eyes of the law the condition of the vehicle has officially changed from roadworthy to unroadworthy. I hope the OP gets the issue sorted with minimum fuss and expense |
||
Sat Jul 23 2016 5:32am |
|
Lost for Words Member Since: 15 Jan 2015 Location: Warminster, Wiltshire Posts: 1477 |
It is still not what the law says.
Not neccessarily - e.g. a damaged headlamp could fail an MOT but, under the Road Vehicle Lighting Regulations, if arrangements are in place to deal with it, it is not illegal to drive until it is actually dark (or bad weather) (and not just to get it repaired).
The police's systems do not make the law, they can only apply it. Of course they could stop you, but your vehicle would actually have to be unroadworthy, not just have failed an MOT. If the issue were fixed, but no new MOT taken the car would still be roadworthy and you would be free to drive it anywhere under the old MOT. For instance, RRSTDV8 might fix his EPB, and would not need a new MOT for it to be legal up to the expirly date of the old one. That is my point, and that is the very good reason for the law being as I believe it is.
This is not correct either, because an MOT does not certify that the vehicle is roadworthy for its duration; it is only a formality that checks the vehicle at the point it is tested alone. It is always the driver's responsibility to ensure the vehicle is roadworthy regardless of any MOT status and hence there is no need for the MOT to be voided. The requirement to have a valid MOT certificate is one law; the requirement to have a roadworthy vehicle is a different one. Failure of an MOT will often expose the vehicle as unroadworthy and thus make it illegal to drive, BUT, it does not do so by voiding the old MOT. If caught you would not be charged with failure to hold a valid MOT certificate but with an offence under the construction and use regulations or with driving a dangerous vehicle. FWIW, in my opinion, RRSTDV8's vehicle does now fall foul of Section 41A of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (just not 47 (1) ). Visiting from DISCO3.CO.UK 2006 Discovery 3 TDV6 Auto HSE Zambezi Silver |
||
Sat Jul 23 2016 9:21am |
|
RRSTDV8 Member Since: 12 Aug 2011 Location: Northamptonshire Posts: 8983 |
Picked up a hire car from Enterprise. Booked a "Skoda Octavia or equivalent". Ended up with a Ford Kuga. Not too unhappy with that as it's easier to get in and out of than the lower Skoda.
|
||
Mon Jul 25 2016 8:16am |
|
Disco_Mikey Member Since: 08 Apr 2012 Location: Dundee, Scotland Posts: 4396 |
Not great, considering an 11 year old TDV6 Disco 3 can achieve this
|
||||
Mon Jul 25 2016 12:17pm |
|
|
All times are GMT |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2005-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis