# Nail in tyre and passes MOT



## fatdazza (Dec 29, 2010)

Car was in for its MOT today, glad to say it passed but I was very surprised to get an advisory for "nail in nearside front tyre".

Tyre was repaired straight after the test, but I think the MOT is severely lacking if it only rates as an advisory.


----------



## Sicskate (Oct 3, 2012)

Mine failed on a nail in the centre in July?!?!


----------



## m4rkymark (Aug 17, 2014)

I'm surprised you got an advisory, manual says nothing about nails in tyres. The manual does speak about cuts in the tyre and the size of them, bulges in the tyre, cords showing etc. etc. but absolutely nothing about nails.


----------



## S63 (Jan 5, 2007)

I don't know the exact explanation, someone will for sure but I do know the requirements for a tyre to pass the MOT are not the same as a tyre to be legal in terms of the law.


----------



## possul (Nov 14, 2008)

Iirc there on the testers discretion.


----------



## w138pbo (Jul 10, 2013)

there is a already set button for nail in a tyre but dont say what tyre.

i always will advise nails in tyre or if they are in poor condition ect.

the mot is the bare minimum safety requirement for at the time of test.


----------



## nichol4s (Jun 16, 2012)

I had an advisory for a hanging air freshner


----------



## fatdazza (Dec 29, 2010)

I am just amazed that a test to ensure a vehicle meets road safety standards will sanction a car with a nail in the tyre 

"You must keep any vehicles driven on the road in a roadworthy condition. The MOT test checks that your vehicle meets road safety and environmental standards. " - (from gov.uk website)


----------



## fatdazza (Dec 29, 2010)

nichol4s said:


> I had an advisory for a hanging air freshner


lol - was it the fact it was hanging or was it the smell that could be distracting?


----------



## m4rkymark (Aug 17, 2014)

nichol4s said:


> I had an advisory for a hanging air freshner


That's because it would have been blocking part of your view out the windscreen.


----------



## MDC250 (Jan 4, 2014)

It's truly scary what gets through.

In my ignorance car passed and about a week later needed new pads as completely worn literally nothing left.

In my naivety I thought they physically looked the brakes over but apparently so long as it pulls up within tolerance it's through.


----------



## Rayaan (Jun 1, 2014)

Lol the missus car had:

Advisory - offside seatbelt not tested due to child seat fitted
Advisory - nearside front tyre wearing on outer edge
Advisory - slight play in steering column
Advisory - nearside front - suspension ball joint dust cover deteriorated but preventing ingress of dirt
Advisory - offside front - suspension ball joint dust cover deteriorated but preventing ingress of dirt
Advisory - nearside rear- suspension ball joint dust cover deteriorated but preventing ingress of dirt
Advisory - offside rear - suspension ball joint dust cover deteriorated but preventing ingress of dirt

list goes on............


----------



## possul (Nov 14, 2008)

^^^there covering there ****^^^


----------



## Sh1ner (May 19, 2012)

MDC250 said:


> It's truly scary what gets through.
> 
> In my ignorance car passed and about a week later needed new pads as completely worn literally nothing left.
> 
> In my naivety I thought they physically looked the brakes over but apparently so long as it pulls up within tolerance it's through.


I think you are perhaps expecting too much from an mot. It can never be infallible and as a tester I can only test what is there at the time. The condition of your vehicle is ultimately your responsibility. Even when you take it for test.
Brake pad limit for mot is 1mm but if you can show me how to accurately see or measure it on the vehicle.....
You check everything you can see but it is impossible to see clearly sometimes especially on a covered inner pad and where the outer may look fine because they wear less under normal circumstances with single piston calipers. If you cannot see it you cannot test it.
If it passes the brake test and you cannot see anything wrong then quite correctly it passes.
It perhaps should have had an advisory but there is no requirement to do so if it met the limit at the time.
The other thing with brakes is you don't know how often people use them if the pads were about on the limit but still ok you may be able to drive from one end of the country to the other and back again without using them and they would still pass an mot over 1000 miles later. So why should they have failed 1000 miles earlier.
When you see the same cars year after year you realise just how long something can last. Even when you thought it marginal the year before. 
You cannot fail things that should pass. The vehicle presenter always gets the benefit of any doubt, at the time of test. 
You should not touch a nail in a tyre so you do not know if it is just stuck in the surface or through the tyre.
An advisory was the correct thing to do. There was no need but it did show the tester noticed it.
If the tester pulls a nail out and the tyre goes down they are responsible. So you leave it alone.


----------



## nichol4s (Jun 16, 2012)

m4rkymark said:


> That's because it would have been blocking part of your view out the windscreen.


So does the mirror


----------

