Motoring Discussion > could have contributed? Buying / Selling
Thread Author: Bellboy Replies: 25
View Threaded 

New Wed 23 Feb 11 11:57 
 could have contributed? - Bellboy
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-west-wales-12241227

watch the link
then ask yourself this
if your car gets an advisory for slight misting of a shock absorber would you change it if you could forsee the future
im not looking for answersa to the crash im asking for a sensible discusion on what could be with
your
sons/daughters/wifes car or one you just put a fresh mot on and decide to sell
me?
i have a vested interest in your views
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 12:02 
 could have contributed? - Stuu
I treat advisories as impending doom and prefer to head them off before they become a failure. If its a mechanical component that could fail and cause an accident, id be inclined to get it done.
If it was something like a cracked number plate/light lense, id be inclined to be advised every year.
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 12:13 
 could have contributed? - RattleandSmoke
The machanic my dad use is quite casual, with worn shocks etc it is wait for the MOT but one year the car had an advisory on axle bushes but when he looked at them they were none existant and he thought he would be dangerious to use the car in that state despite a fresh MOT.

I've usualy seen to the advisories myslef as it is always things like a tyre which is at 2mm, a cracked plate or something else very easy and cheap to fix.

My dad ignored the advisory on a rusted break pipe once, at the next MOT they showed us the fluid actually leaking from the pipes! That was so bad they actually wrote something on the lines of "DANGERIOUS - DO NOT DRIVE" on the MOT failure sheet.

Now my dad knows that advisories are things you need to fix :).

It does depend what it is though I agree.

I remember seeing a shed with a 12 month MOT once he should me the MOT and noticed it had advisories on it but no advisory sheet to be seen. So I checked the MOT record on line and it had nearly a page full of them.

A cracked number plate costs £10 to fix, a cracked lens £20 from a scrap yard both jobs even I can do and have done so it is not worth leaving it in case of a fine.

I think it also depends how the car is driven, for potting around Manchester then a slightly failing shock would not worry me too much, if I was doing country road driving then I would say it was vital they were in good working order.
Last edited by: RattleandSmoke on Wed 23 Feb 11 at 12:16
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 12:22 
 could have contributed? - madf
Two types of advisory from the way I treat them:

Items worn which if worn/rust more are potential killers - fix asap. Eg suspension bushes, brakes, tyres.
Items worn which will be inconvenient if they go but not life threatening - Eg exhaust rust..
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 12:17 
 could have contributed? - DP
Knowing small Peugeots of that era, I suspect it was more a case of lifting off the throttle at the wrong time and being unprepared, but then I am not an accident investigator.
I probably wouldn't have bothered replacing a misting shock on a car of that age/value that I was planning to shift on, but I certainly would have let the buyer see the advisory notice so they were fully aware of it. I always staple the MOT certificate, and any accompanying advisory together anyway, and will always be honest about what I've put right since, and what I haven't.

Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 12:40 
 could have contributed? - Iffy
I've heard a few of these accident investigator reports at various court cases and inquests.

They often find something wrong with the car, even if it's fairly new.

A misting shock absorber is fairly typical - makes the engineer's report look thorough.

I don't doubt it's correct, but I wouldn't read too much into it.

This accident had everything do with driving like a twonk, and not much to do with a shock absorber.

Reply to this message | Report message
      1  
New Wed 23 Feb 11 14:02 
 could have contributed? - Zero
An advisory is just that - advice.
You make a judgement based on what is
The Lancer got two on the last MOT
Rear tyres - Will I change them? - Yes
Handbrake Travel - will I fix it? - No it's well within spec.


As said - The driver ran out of skill and sense
Reply to this message | Report message
      1  
New Wed 23 Feb 11 16:44 
 could have contributed? - bathtub tom
The report said 'a faulty shock absorber'. Do we know if just showed a bit of misting or if it was completely shot?

One of my cars is showing a bit of mist on a rear shocker. I know about it, they didn't even mention it at this weeks MOT. It's still doing its job and I've no intention of replacing it unless it develops into a full blown leak or stops working properly.

The car was a 106 Rallye, driven at excessive speed, by a young male, demonstrating it to a prospective purchaser.
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 18:51 
 could have contributed? - L'escargot
>> if your car gets an advisory for slight misting of a shock absorber would you
>> change it ............

This is what the MOT Testers Manual says about shock absorbers. www.motuk.co.uk/manual_270.htm

"Slight seepage causing a film of fluid on a shock absorber is not a reason for
rejection."

Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 19:21 
 could have contributed? - Bellboy
The prosecuting solicitor said and i quote
"Morris took the bend too quickly in a car he knew to be defective."
now this has to be partly why the trainee mechanic got 4 years
you see the dilema? you sell a car and unless all advisories are rectified with proof ie receipts etc and fitted by a 100% competant person with possibly certificates to proof it then anybody who causes a death crash accident could go to prison on the wisdom of vosa being fliuffy in their definitions of advisories
its not a good situation for anyone this middle ground of blame in my opinion

sad theres not many replies on this one but thanks to those that did put their heads up
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 19:27 
 could have contributed? - Iffy
...now this has to be partly why the trainee mechanic got 4 years...

Doesn't follow.

The prosecutor is just throwing in all the evidence he had.

You are picking something out of the case that was almost certainly of no importance.

He admitted careless driving, the prosecution would not accept that, pressed on with dangerous driving, of which the jury convicted him.

A weeping shock doesn't come into it.


Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 19:31 
 could have contributed? - Bellboy
i would like to believe it iffy
unfortunately i cant believe it wont be bandied round for years maybe to come if only by shocker sellers
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 19:33 
 could have contributed? - Zero
if it was defective, it would have failed the MOT.
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 19:34 
 could have contributed? - Iffy
... i cant believe it wont be bandied round for years maybe to come if only by shocker sellers...

Maybe - you know the motor trade, I don't.

But in that type of case, a weeping shocker is really neither here nor there.

If it went against the lad at all, it will be because it showed there was nothing wrong with his car, so the killing was entirely his fault.

Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 19:33 
 could have contributed? - R.P.
I agree with iffy. The case has been in and out of the Wales national news (BBC) for the last few months - I don't think the reporting in the weblinks does credit to the detail of the case. I believe that the 75mph around that particular bend (maximum safe speeds were quoted in the TV news) was the primary cause. The driver was driving like an arrogant clown...the weepy shock was a side-issue.
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 19:40 
 could have contributed? - R.P.
www.thisissouthwales.co.uk/news/danger-death-driver-jailed/article-3249362-detail/article.html


Slightly more in here - seems the Judge focused on the shock absorber issue.
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 19:49 
 could have contributed? - -
I hope there's been an engineers report on the integrity of the weeping shocker compared to a functional shocker of equivalent use for comparison.

If i receive an advisory i take it quite badly, kick meself for not noticing something, and get the offending thing fixed pronto.
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 19:54 
 could have contributed? - Zero
>> If i receive an advisory i take it quite badly, kick meself for not noticing
>> something, and get the offending thing fixed pronto.

I felt that way till I got an advisory on "Excessive hand brake travel"

I checked the manual for my car. It should be 5-7 clicks fully engaged.,

Mine is 6

He best not try to hit me with that next time.
Last edited by: Zero on Wed 23 Feb 11 at 19:55
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 20:02 
 could have contributed? - Bellboy
just within serviceable guidlines
i would pass and advise
guess what? went out for a fish supper alfresco tonight,parked on our favourite hill overlooking the sewage plant in the wifes car and the handbrake wouldnt hold us on the admittedly, steep hill,now i did these to perfection less than 6 months ago and on this model im a one click fan
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 20:08 
 could have contributed? - Zero
Pah, not touching my handbrake, Its perfect.

He can have a row next year if he wants one.
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 19:49 
 could have contributed? - Bellboy
i might go for a freedom of information on the relevance of the shocker
from vosa
im going to sleep on this one
thanks for the link
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 20:45 
 could have contributed? - Runfer D'Hills
What are these"clicks" you speak of on your handbrakes? A gentleman should apply his handbrake silently and with decorum. Only hooligans and learners "click" their handbrakes. Good Lord...
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 20:50 
 could have contributed? - Zero
The handbook in my car specifically states " Do not push in your button when applicating the parking brake"


(its Japanese dont you know)
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 20:51 
 could have contributed? - Runfer D'Hills
QED
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 21:01 
 could have contributed? - Iffy
The handbook in my car specifically states: "Do not push in your button when applying the parking brake."


(It's a Ford don't you know).
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Wed 23 Feb 11 21:02 
 could have contributed? - Runfer D'Hills
All very well for those who have time to read manuals. Anyway, good manners are often inconvenient...
Reply to this message | Report message
       
Latest Forum Posts