[Closed] MOT: "Front Pads are 70%" worn

2 years ago my MOT had an advisory note saying the brakes were working at 70%
1 Year ago there was no advisory.

They seem to advise on tyres at 4-5mm now as well! They only come with 8mm of tread to start with.

we had an avisory for our exhaust which then went on to pass another 3 MOTs.

I would say that front pads should be cheaper than that to replace. I just had front pads and discs, rear pads done on a Mondeo for £170 inc. labour. Go elsewhere, it's only an advisory, not a fail.

I dont get this at all.

A garage advises you that your brake pads are 70% worn and even gives you a cost for replacing them. What exactly have they done wrong?

As a garage and testing station they have a responsibility to advise you of things they find wrong or requiring replacement in the near'ish future. Considering they are 70% worn is isnt beyond the realms of reason to asume they wear out in the next 12mths before the next MOT is due. As you have pointed out you arent a paticularly high mileage user but the same applies.

Imagine your post in 9mths time if you found they were 99% worn and squeeling and you posted up that your MOT test centre hadnt pointed out that they 'may' have needed replacing.

Why is it that some people begrudge people a living these days. For every person like you there is someone that replies with thank you i will let you know when i want it done.

2 years ago my MOT had an advisory note saying the brakes were working at 70%
1 Year ago there was no advisory.

Class!

Whats annoying is I know the front pads are fine as I checked all the brakes a couple of weeks ago, the rears were shot so I replaced them myself, the fronts must have 10mm of pad material left

I had that recently. Advised that they are 80% worn and did I want them replacing. I pointed out they advised they were 75% worn last year so I'd come back in 4 years time.

[i]Whats annoying is I know the front pads are fine as I checked all the brakes a couple of weeks ago, the rears were shot so I replaced them myself, the fronts must have 10mm of pad material left [/i]

Why is it annoying? They advised you that in their opinion they were 70% worn and you were happy/knowledgable enough to not have the work done. I suppose the annoyance was when they got you in a head lock and wouldnt let you take the car away without paying for this extortionate job. They did do that, didnt they?

I had an advisory on brakes last year and nowt this year.

Actually I did have a fail for headlights and tyre. The realigned the headlights but they don't seem right now (hadn't noticed a problem before) the left illumintes farther ahead than right.
Whats the official ruling on tyres, they replaced a rear that had a puncture on the shoulder but I hadn't noticed it losing air, but the front that does have a slow puncture they left alone.

Why is it annoying? They advised you that in their opinion they were 70% worn and you were happy/knowledgable enough to not have the work done.

Because if the OP -wasn't- that knowledgeable, he'd have gone "oh, better do them then" and spent £130 unnecessarily perhaps?

I went to the dentist and they told me I might need a filling next time

I dont get this at all.

+1

The Southern Yeti - Member
2 years ago my MOT had an advisory note saying the brakes were working at 70%
1 Year ago there was no advisory.

I take it you went to the same test centre and it was the same test manager?

From my experience with things like bushes some of the MOT test rules are not exactly straight-forward yes/no answers.

Advisory = We need to relieve your wallet of some more cash as we dont make much profit on an MOT

Ie, better to go "they're 70% worn, they're likely to need changing in the next twelve months" rather than try to make a quick sale.

I had a bloke give me an advisory on brake pads on the Prius. I waited a good 9 months before getting aroudn to checking them - they were 50% worn.

molgrips - Member
I had a bloke give me an advisory on brake pads on the Prius. I waited a good 9 months before getting aroudn to checking them - they were 50% worn.

Ha, ha! Bonk!

Sorry, that was me laughing my head off 🙂

Cougar. So they are at fault for giving information? A lot of the general public would rather know this and change them early than wear them to 95% of their wear. Have you never replaced gear cables/brake pads on your bike a little earlier than neccessary?

i guess 70% worn pads will last for years on a car doing 5k miles a year, but significantly less on 60k miles /year. I guess they have to cater for everything.

Whats the difference between this

[i]Then they chip in with an advisory on the front pads as they are "70% worn"

Are they?

"Yes but we can replace them for £110 plus VAT"[/i]

And this

[i]they're 70% worn, they're likely to need changing in the next twelve months[/i]

I dont see any more pressure in the 1st example.

I have never had a mechanic come out of a garage with a stated depth for pads or discs. They are usually a guestimate percentage. One mans gues may be different to another.

I take it you guys ask for an actual measurement rather than relying on some guys visual guess/% which it doesnt take a genius to work out is open to mistakes.

Oh and without checking in my workshops, i trust all brakepads are the same depth to begin with so the mechanic can calculate actual wear and then have the info at hand to calculate expected wear rates (You filled in a 10page questionaire). Or maybe they just say what they think and you make your choice.

Davidrussell. I have seen workshops force customers to sign dissclaimers before releasing their motors because they know the customer will be running the vehicle with pads which will deffo run out early (Before the next test).

Claim culture has made it too easy to blame the garage.

I take it you went to the same test centre and it was the same test manager?

The bit of info I omitted was that the car had been sat on the drive doing nothing for 6 months prior to the 1st test, it was being driven regualrly before teh 2nd test.

The percentage I was given was a measure of braking efficiency/ wear as far as I can remember. Rusty discs and pitted pads aren't very efficinet it seems.

So they are at fault for giving information?

I don't recall anyone saying they were "at fault" at all, that's just an assumption that's been made here. But, yes, I'd say they're giving potentially misleading information.

They're correct to advise, and correct to offer to do the work, but an honest garage would have also advised that they didn't actually need doing for a while. Without that snippet of information, someone who is less mechanically minded wouldn't be able to make an informed decision as to whether "70% worn" meant that they'd be fine for several years yet or whether they were about to have sudden catastrophic brake failure.

TheLittlestHobo - some garages do rip people off you know. Honestly, they do.

Didn't Kwik-fit get caught up in a scam where loads of their staff were sacked after they were caught earning extra bonus by selling unnecessary 'safety critical' parts on the back of advisories or fails?

I dont see any more pressure in the 1st example.

"They're worn, we can replace them" implies that they need doing immediately. "Pressure" is perhaps the wrong word, but it's almost certainly misleading in order to make a sale.

[i]but an honest garage would have also advised that they didn't actually need doing for a while[/i] By saying 70% the customer is in a position to make an educated guess.

I could see your argument if we were talking (Asper my suggestion before) mm's as that wouldnt mean much to the customer. But if someone tells me something is 70% worn, it means it has at least quarter of its working life left.

Of course garages try it on. same in most occupations. So do lbs's. This doesnt sound like trying it on though. It sounds like someone with mechanical knowledge showing how big and grown up he is

By saying 70% the customer is in a position to make an educated guess.

That's assuming some form of mechanical competence on the part of the customer. To someone non-technical, would a garage saying "your brakes are 70% worn out" make them think there was an immediate problem that needed addressing? I'd say so.

Had one of my cars serviced last week. The garage told me that the pads will need replacing in around 3000 miles. Seemed fair (and is in line with what I expected) and I'll be taking it to them to do the work.

Rusty discs is a fail tho iirc. Proper rust mind, not the sheen you get from 2 days of non-use.

Oh Cougar you really are trying to make simple sentances work for you arent you.

Ok using your simple examples i could argue that by saying the brake pads may need changing within 12mths (Your HONEST garages example) they are pressurising the customer more than by saying 70%. Your example is a definate time frame whereas the customer can calculate that if the car has done 4yrs and 43,000mls on them he is going to easily get MORE than the 12mths out of them.

Or maybe the above is a load of rubbish and playing with words

I get my car MOT'd at the local Council's works' garage. They're very thorough, but they don't do repairs and aren't allowed to recommend garages to do repairs, so there's less of an incentive to come up with advisories.

Whats the official ruling on tyres, they replaced a rear that had a puncture on the shoulder but I hadn't noticed it losing air, but the front that does have a slow puncture they left alone.

They won't know you have a slow puncture on the front, they don't put the air in every few days. They will have seen the big nail stuck in the rear tyre, and IIRC shoulder punctures can't be repaired.

We use a local independent for servicing & MOT although they farm out the MOT's themselves elsewhere they take the vehicle after they've done the service/pre MOT checkover. Not had a vehicle fail yet doing it that way.

Just to give you guys an idea of 'honesty' i have the following little story.

Mechanic at a main dealer of 25yrs service. He is the highest standard of mechanic and qualified for everything. The 18yr old recptionist flutters her eyelashes about needing to tax her sisters car and needing an mot cert and he astonishingly writes one out. This came to light 24hrs later when the bill for the MOT goes through accounts and the service manager 100% cant remember seeing the car. Mechanic gets sacked. Receptionist keeps her job.

Guess where the mechanic ended up working 2 weeks later?

The Police's own garage!!!

The whole thing was covered up.

Find a garage you trust and have good dialogue with and appreciate them. Dont spend your life trying to catch people out for doing their job.

You can't beat the MOT advisory game - watching how things appear and disappear over the years without any action (EDIT: assuming, of course, that they don't need any action).

The MOT fail game is somewhat less entertaining (as it invariably involves hassle and/or money) - a tyre fitter fitted an asymmetric tyre 'inside out' to my Mondeo, but it was only spotted after passing through 2 previous MOTs without problem.

On the flip side, I was charged an eminently sensible price for a replacement brake light bulb at my last MOT with no fuss or hassle - and that was at a test centre doing a discount on the test fee.

molgrips - Member
Rusty discs is a fail tho iirc. Proper rust mind, not the sheen you get from 2 days of non-use

Dunno, hadn't driven it for 6 months and the brakes sounded awful. The garage had guessed this was the case and TBF made no attempt at any sort of hard sell.

Have been into other places to get something like tracking done, only to be told I need at least 2 new tyres....

'but I had them replaced last month?'

Now slightly agro garage owner [Humph]'only telling you waht I see [humph]
prick.

Three_Fish - Member
I get my car MOT'd at the local Council's works' garage. They're very thorough, but they don't do repairs and aren't allowed to recommend garages to do repairs, so there's less of an incentive to come up with advisories.

I do the same. The guys are strict but fair. There is no incentive for them to fail the car on something that is a quick easy fix/earner for them.

Brake pads are dead easy to change DIY.

Telling you your pads are 70% worn is useful info, it means regardless of how long they have been on the vehicle, more than half their life has gone and you sould keep an eye on them..... its also a way of tyring to get a quick sale !

At my Mondeo's MOT in October 09 they said the rear pads only had 3000 miles left on them, and they could change them for me. The same pads have now done another 20k more this last year. The test centre this year (a different one) said the rear disc are starting to corode which could be an MOT failure next year. To me that was much more valuable info as I will now look at the discs periodically, especially through the winter to make sure they are not corroding too much. Having said that you can normally feel it through the brake pedal or through shudder when applying the brakes/

VOSA would tell the tester to pass and advise in this case.

COVER YOUR A**E!

So you take it away with a legitimate pass and sell it 6 weeks later to the local boy racer who destroys the brakes in a week. He complains to VOSA that they passed a car with duff brakes. VOSA check and look at the advisory sheet. VOSA are happy and the tester still has a job.

Of course you did sell the car with the advisory sheet didn't you?

richmtb: Just a general comment and not directed at you btw.

Marko

Marko that is the point i was trying to make in my first post.

TheLittlestHobo:

Yes I was just trying to stand up for the poor MOT tester. I think there are only 3 people in the entire world who defend the poor maligned motor trade!
(runs and hides)

Marko

i could argue that by saying the brake pads may need changing within 12mths they are pressurising the customer more than by saying 70%.

You could. You'd be wrong, but you could do that.

I think perhaps you misunderstand me, either that or I just wasn't clear. By saying "they'll probably need changing in 12 months," I didn't mean that the customer should blindly change them in a few months, rather that the customer should get them rechecked in a few months. If you genuinely believe that "your brake pads are 70% worn, we can change them now" is better advice than "your brake pads are 70% worn, you'll be fine for now but you should really bring it back in a couple of months so we can test it again" when there's [i]a third of their life left in the pads [/i]then we'll have to just agree to differ I think.

Your example is a definate time frame whereas the customer can calculate that if the car has done 4yrs and 43,000mls on them he is going to easily get MORE than the 12mths out of them.

I still think you're giving the 'average customer' too much credit. You're probably right for a percentage of drivers, but I reckon that's a small percentage. The sales pitch isn't aimed at them.

Anyway, by the by. Without being there it's difficult to say for sure whether it was bad advice to make a quick sale or whether it was a helpful advisory. I'm not saying they did anything wrong per sé, just that on the face of it it could be misleading.

Took my car in for a service approx 15 months ago and had new disks and pads fitted. Booked the car for a service and MOT at the same main dealership a couple of weeks ago. As it's over an hour away I left home to arrive at the garage to find the service manager saying "we've been trying to contact you all afternoon"

(I checked the mobile later and their first call was at 4.17 when I was already in the car on my way over)

The conversation went something like:

D "Your brakes have failed on the MOT?"
Me "That's a suprise!"
D "They're binding on at the front, and the pads need replacing"
Me "Really, those new disks and pads you fitted the last time you had the car about 14000 miles ago are now shot?"
D "We haven't been able to contact you to authorise any more work so we've left them as they were...brakes are a consumeable"
Me "Well I've been on the phone a couple of times, but the MOT is up tomorrow ?"
D "Well I suppose you can keep the loan car till Monday, and we'll get you a price (mechanic was a also stood there). Mech "...It will pobably need new calipers, but I can't confirm that 'tll we've had a proper inspection...maybe up to £800 or £900 for the job".
Me "forget it".

Basically they just couldn't be bothered with my predicament. It was approaching 5.30 and they wanted to get home. They'd left the job so late in the day they had nowhere to go but break some bad news.
I took it to a local garage the following day - a new set of pads later and a new MOT in hand. He said there was no evidence of any coppaslip on the back of the pads from when they'd been fitted, and they'd just bound in the caliper and worn away. The most irritating thing is that if they'd done the MOT first as ANY garage normally would they'd have spotted the problem and had time to work on it.

The garage in question was Lexus Stoke and the "service" (feel the irony) cost me approaching £500. I'd previously had good service from them but they will never see me again.

Oh, and I'm still waiting for my call from the dealer principal. I imagine he's been trying to contact me all day as well. 👿

Did mean, didnt mean, should coulda woulda. Blah blah blah. The point remains it is just a different interpretation.

The fact remains, as Marko pointed out, VOSA actually insist they let you know. How they do it is open

Let's face it, the roadworthiness of a car 6 months post MOT can't be justified by the MOT, which only really applies on the day of issue. Even 24 hours later a fault could have occured which would be a fail.

Hobo, whats wrong about the receptionist/mechanic story? The mechanic falsified an MOT, he lost job. Sounds about right. The receptionist can ask all she likes.

Took my Mondeo into a main stealer for a service, purely to get the corrosion warranty box ticked so I could then take it into a Ford bodyshop and get all the rusty sills repaired. I'd haggled them down a little to match a Ford fast fit centre, I got the expected call mid-afternoon - "your brake pads need replacing, 75% worn, that'll be £350 please". I bought the pads from a motorfactors, replaced the rears which were about half the thickness of the new ones, but the fronts were 75% unworn! Sold the car a year later (with nice repaired sills) and the pads a few months after that on ebay.

I've heard some stories of what goes on in dealers, had a friend who did a stint as a salesman at Fords, constant stories of charging customers XXX for a dog guard then popping down halfords and getting a cheapo universal one, same with roof bars, and how his colleagues would up sell all the optional extras to squeeze every penny out of OAPs, how cars would come in with intermittent faults or service and the bare minimum gets done to them.

I also bought a car that came with a new MOT, took it back the following day with no damping action whatsoever in the rear shocks, airbag lights on (and a leaking gearbox gasket and slipping brand new clutch but thats not the MOT guys fault) Looked up the history on the MOT site, last three MOTs had an advisory list as long as your arm;

Windscreen has damage to an area less than a 10mm circle within zone 'A' (8.3.1a)
Brake hydraulic reservoir fluid close to minimum level (3.6.G.2b)
Front Brake disc(s) (3.5.1h)
Front Brake disc(s) slightly pitted (3.5.1h)
Front Brake pad(s) wearing thin (3.5.1f)
Air bag light on
All four shockers getting soft
And,
Nearside Front Brake pad(s) wearing thin (3.5.1f)
Offside Front Brake pad(s) wearing thin (3.5.1f)
Nearside Rear Shock absorber has a slightly reduced damping effect (2.7.5)
Offside Rear Shock absorber has a slightly reduced damping effect (2.7.5)
Offside at limit Windscreen has damage to an area less than a 10mm circle within zone 'A' (8.3.1a)
Brake hydraulic reservoir fluid close to minimum level (3.6.G.2b)
Airbag light staying on
Wiper blades showing age and have smear recommend replacing
N/s mirror damaged advise repair
Clutch release bearing noisy (and still noisy after replacement clutch)
Exhaust has part of the system slightly deteriorated (7.1.1a)

But somehow the latest MOT came with no advisories, despite still showing all the faults above, and coming with two visibly under-inflated tyres that were also underinflated on the test drive before it went for its MOT.

My van also came back from an MOT with a pass, despite me taking it in an asking them to replace dud bulbs for the rear number plate, x1 tail lamp, and x1 front marker lamp.

My Mondeo came back from a check on the suspension with a clean bill of health, no faults found, turned out the rear castor was seriously out causing uneven tyre wear and dodgy handling, sorted at another garage when I did some Googling on the symptoms and told them exactly what needed doing.

The only place I trust is the local 'Just MOTs' place, they failed my car once as it had a multi-colour headlight bulb in one side and a white in the other, how they noticed I don't know! Apparently both are OK, but must be the same fitted to both lights.

Spooky, is the irony of this guy who was sacked for dishonesty and then employed by the police not glaring

Yeh I saw that Hobo, but I got the impression you also thought it unfair that the receptionist kept her job whilst mechanic was sacked. My mistake.

Always thought the trick is to go somewhere that doesn't do repairs/parts, takes away the motivation to "find" something to fail. I work on the basis of trusting nobody, really, and it does seem to work.

The general perception is that a lot of garages have an integrity on par with that of estate agents & double glazing salesmen.

There's a lot of people around with tales of being hoodwinked, or simply ripped off.
Maybe they are all misunderstood or maybe they do have a particularly high number on chancers in their ranks
Certainly in the past there was massive amounts of fiddling going on in the motor industry, hence all the tight regulations to keep records of mileage etc.

The only thing I will post is:

Never go to Arnold Shark. Ever.

I once ripped them off 😆

i once put my ford orion in for mot, at a small independent garage,
it passed.
less than 100 miles later i noticed a grinding noise from the front when i used the brakes, got my dad to check it and it turns out the front pads were completely worn out!
(i had only passed my test a few months, and knew nothing about cars)
got it fixed by my dads m8, but i went back to garage that did the mot, informed them of the situ, and pointed out that if id known the pads were so worn they would have got the job of fixing them.
their reply was that id only asked for the mot, its not up to them to point out wear on components.
as a new driver, i think id rather have had the OPs experience, then at least i could make a guess as to what to do.
ps, garage went bust a couple of years later.

MOT is for roadworthiness at that point, it's not a service. Most garages would tell you, it costs them nothing after all and it's crap that they didn't- but you can't blame them that you didn't service the car right.

missingfrontallobe - Member

Let's face it, the roadworthiness of a car 6 months post MOT can't be justified by the MOT, which only really applies on the day of issue. Even 24 hours later a fault could have occured which would be a fail.

MFL - Spot on, an MOT only guarantees its roadworthyness at time of test

Martyn, the MOT tester is not allowed to remove any covers or do any dismantling etc so if he couldn't physically see the state of your pads he'd have no idea how worn they were. As long as it passed the rolling road test then job done (and I've seen pads with no material left on pass that test)!