Jump to content

You can now change your notification sounds by going to this link https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/index.php?/&app=soundboard&module=soundboard&controller=managesounds

 

You can find a library of free notification sounds in several places on the Internet. Here's one which has a very large selection https://notificationsounds.com/notification-sounds

 

 

BankFodder BankFodder

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • @unclebulgaria67 your point is particularly valid especially in regards to loss in the event of a claim. Irrespective of 2x SP30’s or not the vehicle is insured for its full market value. The insurers rating changes based on risk against those endorsements, where said risk calculation isn’t made available.    Also I question the validation of 22% in premium. Is that based on today’s risk profiling, or is that applied retrospectively to day 1 and can that be evidenced.    One thing that is very clear, is that to bring about any degree of misrepresentation the insurer has to have evidence that questions were asked in regards to the endorsements.   This was an auto renewal and when I’ve checked the Brokers electronic Copy on “My Policy’ at renewal, there is no section included relative to accidents in the last 5 yrs or Motoring convictions. Everything else relative to me and the named driver is listed. 
    • Here is what exposes Johnson & Co Commission document, makes for sober reading   Wonder if Snake Oil Singham has read and digested it?   https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/brexit_files/info_site/com_2020_324_2_communication_from_commission_to_inst_en_0.pdf
    • Must be a positive if the Insurers are now using the legislation as it was intended. It is just that I have not heard of it being used for Car Insurance, as the 22% comes from the Insurers rating calculations, which is not available information to the Policyholder. With Home Insurance, if you Insured a Building for £100k, when it should have been Insured for £122k, it is easier to grasp.   The Insurers would have issued the policy documents clearly showing that no motoring offences had been included within the premium calculation and the OP has had 5 months to correct the record with Insurers before the accident.   Perhaps probe the Insurers on the 22%. Can they provide evidence from their Underwriting rating guidance that this is the extra premium for 2 SP30's.
    • Moorcroft are just a first DCA that Natwest use, after Natwest have stopped chasing it.   The debt is still owned by Natwest and is currently sat with Moorcroft, but in a pile with many thousands of others.   If your new postal address is showing on your credit file, Moorcroft would have sent letters if they thought this was a priority debt to chase.     
    • We signed up to a credit reference agency.  Got an email this morning saying a search had been carried out in my husband’s name.  It’s by Moorcroft who are doing it on behalf of NatWest. Do we worry?  It’s been over 6 years since last payment and we wrote to NatWest in January advising of our new address.  They and Moorcroft both emailed an old email address which we have access to but never use asking us to confirm our address.  We didn’t respond to it.
  • Our picks

    • Currys Refuse Refund F/Freezer 5day old. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422656-currys-refuse-refund-ffreezer-5day-old/
      • 5 replies
    • Hi,  
      I was in Sainsbury’s today and did scan and shop.
      I arrived in after a busy day at work and immediately got distracted by the clothes.
       
      I put a few things in my trolley and then did a shop.
      I paid and was about to get into my car when the security guard stopped me and asked me to come back in.
       
      I did and they took me upstairs.
      I was mortified and said I forgot to scan the clothes and a conditioner, 5 items.
      I know its unacceptable but I was distracted and Initially hadn’t really planned to use scan and shop.
       
      No excuse.
      I offered to pay for the goods but the manager said it was too late.
      He looked at the CCTV and because I didn’t try to scan the items he was phoning the police.
       
      The cost of the items was about £40.
      I was crying at this point and told them I was a nurse, just coming from work and I could get struck off.
       
      They rang the police anyway and they came and issued me with a community resolution notice, which goes off my record in a year.
      I feel terrible. I have to declare this to my employer and NMC.
       
      They kept me in a room on my own with 4 staff and have banned me from all stores.
      The police said if I didn’t do the community order I would go to court and they would refer me to the PPS.
       
      I’m so stressed,
      can u appeal this or should I just accept it?
       
      Thanks for reading 
      • 7 replies
    • The courier industry – some basic points for customers. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/421913-the-courier-industry-%E2%80%93-some-basic-points-for-customers/
      • 1 reply
    • The controversial sub-prime lender says the City watchdog is investigating its practices.
      View the full article
      • 0 replies
MrMT

Faded number plate - MOT Failure

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4039 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I took my car in for the MOT knowing it would fail at least on the missing rear exhaust silencer that dropped off due to corrosion a few months back. I consider the sub £50 charge a very reasonable inspection cost so I can gauge whether it's worth repairing the old gal (93).

 

So, it came back as failed on the exhaust (fair enough), failed on corrosion to the sills (obvious once the tester had made holes with his tool) a split driveshaft boot and a faded rear number plate.

 

I was incredulous at the last and was sure the tester was being overzealous but he did have a slight point inasmuch, due to the large amount of t-cutting and washing and polishing I've done over the months, there was a large amount of oversmearing all around the car on black plastic trim, bumpers and rear number plate but it was still perfectly readable IMO. He justified his decision by saying due to the popularity of speed cameras and ANPR cameras, the test is more stringent and being faded means the camera cannot capture the registration. When in insuated I might set off a speed camera I had to bite me tongue and leave.

 

I got the holes professionally welded, a new exhaust fitted and replaced the driveshaft boot myself and decided to clean and polish the original number plate so the tester could see it wasn't faded but oversmeared.

 

I dropped the car off at noon for the retest worrying it could still fail on the emissions, only to return half an hour later to find they did me the favour of not retesting it because he could see instantly I hadn't changed the number plate.

 

Well, I wasn't happy at all and told them so, gave them my point of view and then threatened to complain to VOSA but the tester stood his ground and added "for the sake of a fiver, £8" at which point I had to bite my tongue and stomped off to get a number plate.

 

So I googled for MOT and faded plates but could not find anything concrete inasmuch as it being an up-to-date copy. I really want to know what method and testing principles are used to decide what is a pass and what is a fail for number plate fade.

 

Can anyone advise please? I would like to ask VOSA for clarification and would welcome a second opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The usual problem with plates is the de-lamination of the reflective backing from the plastic plate

 

This is what the manual says under reasons for rejection:

A registration plate;

a. missing

b. so insecure that it is likely to fall off

c. letter or figure missing or incomplete

d. Faded, dirty, deteriorated or obscured, (for example by a towbar so that it is likely to be misread or is not easily legible to a person standing approximately 20 metres to the front/rear of the vehicle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Knowing that passing something that could prove to be unlawful, and that the station could lose it's license if the ministry inspector considered they were not doing their job properly, they go by an instruction in the manual.

 

That instruction says "If in doubt, fail it".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the backing has delaminated to the point a few spots of the "yellow space" is encroached on at the very edges of the plate but the tester did not relate to such a fault. He made it clear he judged the plate "faded" (enough to make photography difficult) which I take to mean the perspex is not opaque and/or the black/yellow is greying out which neither is true IMHO.

 

I paced 20 strides and could easily read the plate, I paced 40 strides and still no problem, as I continued walking away, I could still read it so it doesn't fail the "not easily legible" and that wasn't what the tester was failing it for, he implied the camera's are less capable than the human eye - yet my cheap digicam photo'd it just fine. I just can't see where he's coming from.

 

As for "if in doubt", he didn't seem in doubt to me but I understand what you're saying.

 

The tester said they're more stringent about plates now but what is he relying on here? - if we can't know this info, the system's a license to print money, isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, the backing has delaminated to the point a few spots of the "yellow space" is encroached on at the very edges of the plate but the tester did not relate to such a fault. He made it clear he judged the plate "faded" (enough to make photography difficult) which I take to mean the perspex is not opaque and/or the black/yellow is greying out which neither is true IMHO.

 

I paced 20 strides and could easily read the plate, I paced 40 strides and still no problem, as I continued walking away, I could still read it so it doesn't fail the "not easily legible" and that wasn't what the tester was failing it for, he implied the camera's are less capable than the human eye - yet my cheap digicam photo'd it just fine. I just can't see where he's coming from.

 

As for "if in doubt", he didn't seem in doubt to me but I understand what you're saying.

 

The tester said they're more stringent about plates now but what is he relying on here? - if we can't know this info, the system's a license to print money, isn't it?

 

 

Not quite.

 

If you feel that the tester has acted unfairly you can appeal the matter to VOSA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MrMt, I undesrtand your frustration, but in the whole scheme of things considering you have had to have sills welded up, a rear box, and driveshaft gaiter, another five to ten pounds for a plate is possibly not worth the aggro of complaining to VOSA. You will probably find that VOSA have a waiting list of three or four weeks, so your car will remain off road for that time, and then if VOSA agree with the tester, you will have to buy the plate anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't you ring vosa? The numbers on your paperwork from the mot station.

Also why not upload the pic you took so we can see for ourselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...