One for the MoT testers...

[FEP]

magic trees rfr 1e
http://www.motuk.co.uk/manual_830.htm
magic trees, when hanging are encoraching on your view out of the swept area by more than 40mm!
should really give the presenter opportunity to remove it before failing. but meh.
if the car hasnt failed on anything else i do just move the magic tree but if im already failing it i just add it on!

Interesting Murran. Unless I'm mistaken, in law, the content of the MOT test is derived from the Construction and Use Regulations, which are pretty vague about 'view' requirements:

VISION
View to the front
30.””
(1) Every motor vehicle shall be so designed and constructed that the driver thereof while controlling
the vehicle can at all times have a full view of the road and traffic ahead of the motor vehicle.
(2) Instead of complying with the requirement of paragraph (1) a vehicle may comply with
Community Directive 77/649, 81/643[, 88/366, 90/630]72 or, in the case of an agricultural motor
vehicle, 79/1073.
(3) All glass or other transparent material fitted to a motor vehicle shall be maintained in such
condition that it does not obscure the vision of the driver while the vehicle is being driven on a
road.


Similarly, under 'Driver's control':

104. Driver's control
No person shall drive or cause or permit any other person to drive, a motor vehicle on a road if he
is in such a position that he cannot have proper control of the vehicle or have a full view of the
road and traffic ahead.

but this is not actually regulating something hanging from the rear view mirror.

I wonder where VOSA got their 40mm stipulation from - do you think they just made it up?

Also, the MOT is mandated in law to test the 'glass and field of vision' but only as stipulated in regulation 30. A magic tree is NOT part of the windscreen / glass and arguably, the phrase 'windscreen sticker or other obstruction' necessarily refers to another obstruction ACTUALLY ON THE GLASS.

Interesting to note that the manual does nonetheless include sun visors, but also that despite such an exhaustive list of considerations, items hanging from the mirror are not mentioned.

I reckon that you might be fooked if you fail a lawyer for his magic tree!

[konfuzion]

If I failed an MOT for a magic tree.. I think the 24" breaker bar in the back would be coming out with severe rage.

Thankfully, the fella I've been using for years isn't an anal jobsworth



Regards,

Ian

[murran]

no respectable lawyer would own a magic tree! theyd have one of those little fan shaped air freshners that clip on to one of the heater vents......

[bss325i]

magic trees rfr 1e
http://www.motuk.co.uk/manual_830.htm
magic trees, when hanging are encoraching on your view out of the swept area by more than 40mm!
should really give the presenter opportunity to remove it before failing. but meh.
if the car hasnt failed on anything else i do just move the magic tree but if im already failing it i just add it on!

Interesting Murran. Unless I'm mistaken, in law, the content of the MOT test is derived from the Construction and Use Regulations, which are pretty vague about 'view' requirements:

VISION
View to the front
30.””
(1) Every motor vehicle shall be so designed and constructed that the driver thereof while controlling
the vehicle can at all times have a full view of the road and traffic ahead of the motor vehicle.
(2) Instead of complying with the requirement of paragraph (1) a vehicle may comply with
Community Directive 77/649, 81/643[, 88/366, 90/630]72 or, in the case of an agricultural motor
vehicle, 79/1073.
(3) All glass or other transparent material fitted to a motor vehicle shall be maintained in such
condition that it does not obscure the vision of the driver while the vehicle is being driven on a
road.


Similarly, under 'Driver's control':

104. Driver's control
No person shall drive or cause or permit any other person to drive, a motor vehicle on a road if he
is in such a position that he cannot have proper control of the vehicle or have a full view of the
road and traffic ahead.

but this is not actually regulating something hanging from the rear view mirror.

I wonder where VOSA got their 40mm stipulation from - do you think they just made it up?

Also, the MOT is mandated in law to test the 'glass and field of vision' but only as stipulated in regulation 30. A magic tree is NOT part of the windscreen / glass and arguably, the phrase 'windscreen sticker or other obstruction' necessarily refers to another obstruction ACTUALLY ON THE GLASS.

Interesting to note that the manual does nonetheless include sun visors, but also that despite such an exhaustive list of considerations, items hanging from the mirror are not mentioned.

I reckon that you might be fooked if you fail a lawyer for his magic tree!

It is a fail 100%.

[FEP]

It is a fail 100%.

Why's that?

[fuzzy]

why not just unhook the magic tree and replace it after the fooking mot test? problem solved.

[johnna]

Or simply just have a car that does not stink, then no need to mask it with pine essence...

[murran]

Or simply just have a car that does not stink, then no need to mask it with pine essence...

lol!

[johnna]

Or simply just have a car that does not stink, then no need to mask it with pine essence...

lol!

For sale, e30, one careful owner... Mr Stinky the Farmer...

[DanThe]

Never driven with slurry covered wellingtons, I always placed them on the back seat

[bss325i]

It is a fail 100%.

Why's that?

It comes under the section "Drivers view of the road".

I will print off the exact text which explains why.

I just remove them and place them on the passenger seat.

[FEP]

It comes under the section "Drivers view of the road".

I will print off the exact text which explains why.

I just remove them and place them on the passenger seat.

Get with the program Bss325i - Murran's already posted the link to the relevant section above, and I've explained why it's far from certain that a magic tree can be a failure.

I'd love you to tell me why I'm wrong, because I'd love to be able to tell all those magic tree hanging, sat nav suckering, potential motorcyclist killers EXACTLY why they're breaking the law. Problem is, I don't think it's possible if you actually read the Construction and Use Regulations on which the MOT is based.

[town325i]

It comes under the section "Drivers view of the road".

I will print off the exact text which explains why.

I just remove them and place them on the passenger seat.

Get with the program Bss325i - Murran's already posted the link to the relevant section above, and I've explained why it's far from certain that a magic tree can be a failure.

I'd love you to tell me why I'm wrong, because I'd love to be able to tell all those magic tree hanging, sat nav suckering, potential motorcyclist killers EXACTLY why they're breaking the law. Problem is, I don't think it's possible if you actually read the Construction and Use Regulations on which the MOT is based.

dont you no motor cyclists have sat navs too now? and not much of a screen to stick it to

[daimlerman]

Huuuum,lowest of the low to fail for a 'magic tree',would an 'advisory' not be in order here? Anyways,I shall be hunting out a pair of wing repeaters just as soon as the zone classifieds start up.

[FEP]

dont you no motor cyclists have sat navs too now? and not much of a screen to stick it to

Yes but they probably don't often pull out in front of cars hidden behind the sat nav.

Do they also have magic trees?

[murran]

I'd love you to tell me why I'm wrong, because I'd love to be able to tell all those magic tree hanging, sat nav suckering, potential motorcyclist killers EXACTLY why they're breaking the law. Problem is, I don't think it's possible if you actually read the Construction and Use Regulations on which the MOT is based.

the construction and use regs have little to do with the mot.......
for instance you could mount a javelin with a razor sharp tip on the bonnet extending 3 foot forward into the air........ a tester would have to pass it!
tho its a sharp edge thats a danger to padestrians, its not caused by damage or corrosion is it!?
in many ways the mot leaves alot to be desired.

[bss325i]

I'd love you to tell me why I'm wrong, because I'd love to be able to tell all those magic tree hanging, sat nav suckering, potential motorcyclist killers EXACTLY why they're breaking the law. Problem is, I don't think it's possible if you actually read the Construction and Use Regulations on which the MOT is based.

the construction and use regs have little to do with the mot.......
for instance you could mount a javelin with a razor sharp tip on the bonnet extending 3 foot forward into the air........ a tester would have to pass it!
tho its a sharp edge thats a danger to padestrians, its not caused by damage or corrosion is it!?
in many ways the mot leaves alot to be desired.

I didn't post that!

[murran]

I'd love you to tell me why I'm wrong, because I'd love to be able to tell all those magic tree hanging, sat nav suckering, potential motorcyclist killers EXACTLY why they're breaking the law. Problem is, I don't think it's possible if you actually read the Construction and Use Regulations on which the MOT is based.

the construction and use regs have little to do with the mot.......
for instance you could mount a javelin with a razor sharp tip on the bonnet extending 3 foot forward into the air........ a tester would have to pass it!
tho its a sharp edge thats a danger to padestrians, its not caused by damage or corrosion is it!?
in many ways the mot leaves alot to be desired.

I didn't post that!

corrected.

[FEP]

the construction and use regs have little to do with the mot.......
for instance you could mount a javelin with a razor sharp tip on the bonnet extending 3 foot forward into the air........ a tester would have to pass it!
tho its a sharp edge thats a danger to padestrians, its not caused by damage or corrosion is it!?
in many ways the mot leaves alot to be desired.

The Construction and Use Regulations have everything to do with the MOT - the guidance in the tester's manual is all based on elements of it and the Motor Vehicles (Tests) Regulations 1981 specifically list which elements of C & U are to be tested in an MOT.

A tester may have to pass the bonnet mounted javelin (good idea BTW for dealing with London pedestrians! ) but the Police - assuming they haven't all been replaced by cameras - would have no such limitations using (amongst other things) Regulation 53(1) and / or 100(1):

53.”” Mascots
(1) Subject to paragraph (2), no mascot, emblem or other ornamental object shall be carried by a
motor vehicle first used on or after 1st October 1937 in any position where it is likely to strike any
person with whom the vehicle may collide unless the mascot is not liable to cause injury to such
person by reason of any projection thereon.


100.”” Maintenance and use of vehicle so as not to be a danger, etc
(1) A motor vehicle, every trailer drawn thereby and all parts and accessories of such vehicle and
trailer shall at all times be in such condition, and the number of passengers carried by such vehicle
or trailer, the manner in which any passengers are carried in or on such vehicle or trailer, and the
weight, distribution, packing and adjustment of the load of such vehicle or trailer shall at all times
be such, that no danger is caused or is likely to be caused to any person in or on the vehicle or
trailer or on a road.
Provided that the provisions of this regulation with regard to the number of passengers
carried shall not apply to a vehicle to which the Public Service Vehicles (Carrying Capacity)
Regulations 1984 apply.
...
(3) No motor vehicle or trailer shall be used for any purpose for which it is so unsuitable as to
cause or be likely to cause danger or nuisance to any person in or on the vehicle or trailer or on a
road.

Agreed, the MOT has it's limitations. That's just my point - it SHOULD be possible to deal with magic trees and sat navs, but is it?

[Bewdley320T]

The fact is that if it really came down to it you could probably find a reason why any car on the road is illegal or should fail an MOT.

[JamOnIt]

What's the point of getting a "daytime" MOT unless you simply want to drive to a track day and back before sunset!

[oakey]

I have failed an mot partly due to a hangin tree before (on my old tech1)
Took it through the car wash outside the mot place (same unit) they gave me a free air freshener and then the car got a fail for it

[town325i]

dont you no motor cyclists have sat navs too now? and not much of a screen to stick it to

Yes but they probably don't often pull out in front of cars hidden behind the sat nav.

Do they also have magic trees?

well if you didnt ride your crotch rocket so fast people might not pull out on you

[FEP]

well if you didnt ride your crotch rocket so fast people might not pull out on you

So you're saying that no-one ever pulls out on a motorcycle ridden at or below the speed limit, because the bike was hidden from view by a sat nav unit?

[AxleF]

i have picked this one up a little late , but i am a mot tester and would like to add my insight , murran is correct that you can fail on objects hanging from a rear view mirror , with regards to FEP the regulations you are putting up on here have norelevance to the mot test , we have our own testers manual issued by vosa , which states items to be tested , how they are tested and reasons for failing , we cannot use any other documents i.e your book of regulations as these do not have relevence to the testers manual , we can only use the manual as a guide for testing . it is a case of if we are unsure about an item i.e " magic tree hanging from rear view mirror " , the only source of information we can use as to weather it will pass or fail is the mot testers guide no other liturature regarding vehicle safety , manufacture or repair can be consulted , i am not calling you a liar FEP just stating what we are allowed to use as a guide to passing or failing a car , hope this helps .

[AxleF]

oh and sorry to be a bore on this one but also with the test is that the reason why it differs from garage to garage is that certain items in the testers guide have no black and white rules as to passing or failling so alot of it is down to the descretion of the tester , i.e rust within a prescribed area , corrosion to fuel or brake pipes etc , but when there are specified measurements it is black and white i.e brake performance , tyre wear , obstructions within swept areas of the windscreen , all in all speaking as a tester for many years the test means nothing to most people , a large percentage just see it as a thing you need to get your tax and not as a safety requirement , and the mot is really only valid for the 1/2 hour its being tested for anyway , or at least untill the local rat boys remove there mates 4 wheels fitted with new rubber for there death trap slicks , oh sorry i am really getting boring now .

[FEP]

with regards to FEP the regulations you are putting up on here have norelevance to the mot test , we have our own testers manual issued by vosa , which states items to be tested , how they are tested and reasons for failing , we cannot use any other documents i.e your book of regulations as these do not have relevence to the testers manual , we can only use the manual as a guide for testing .

So where do you imagine VOSA get their rules from?

[town325i]

well if you didnt ride your crotch rocket so fast people might not pull out on you

So you're saying that no-one ever pulls out on a motorcycle ridden at or below the speed limit, because the bike was hidden from view by a sat nav unit?

where the f*ck do people mount a sat nav to hid a bike normally when pulling out your looking to the left and right. and how often do you see a bike being ridden at or below the speed limit

[gudgeon]

yes, just like traffic wardens and their tickets!
the amount of dumb asses that bring their cars in for test with no water in the washer bottle, a front side light out, oil level below minimum (so i cant do an emissions test) and a magic tree hanging on the mirror.
im sure youd "just fail them" after a while too!

Sounds fair enough to me, it's a pretty simple retest.

[Gibson]

well if you didnt ride your crotch rocket so fast people might not pull out on you

So you're saying that no-one ever pulls out on a motorcycle ridden at or below the speed limit, because the bike was hidden from view by a sat nav unit?

where the f*ck do people mount a sat nav to hid a bike normally when pulling out your looking to the left and right. and how often do you see a bike being ridden at or below the speed limit

i have seen plenty of cars with them mounted to the right of the steering wheel. also not all bikers are physco's, there are some out there. but not by any means all of them, my dad rides a bike, hes nearly fifty, and the most sensible person you could ever meet. granted he has his moments but 95% of the time he is riding at or below the speed limit.

[town325i]

So you're saying that no-one ever pulls out on a motorcycle ridden at or below the speed limit, because the bike was hidden from view by a sat nav unit?

where the f*ck do people mount a sat nav to hid a bike normally when pulling out your looking to the left and right. and how often do you see a bike being ridden at or below the speed limit

i have seen plenty of cars with them mounted to the right of the steering wheel. also not all bikers are physco's, there are some out there. but not by any means all of them, my dad rides a bike, hes nearly fifty, and the most sensible person you could ever meet. granted he has his moments but 95% of the time he is riding at or below the speed limit.

alot of people have there sat navs right in front of the face where they are supposed to be looking at the road. im not a bike hater i just get annoyed when everything is someone else's fault and not there own

[Morat]

Sat Nav is a great aid to road safety in my humble opinion, but it shouldn't be mounted in your sight line!

[AxleF]

fep it makes no difference what the regulations your quoting from , as i said a mot tester can only use what is in the testers guide , it clearly has guidelines regarding obstructions within the drivers view , they book you are quoting from may contradict the testers guide but it is still not relevent to the test the only source of information we can use is the mot testers guide and thats it im affraid .

[daimlerman]

I only asked if I needed side repeaters!!

[Brianmoooore]

I only asked if I needed side repeaters!!

If you can see your front indicators when standing at the rear of the car, one metre sidewaysfrom the rear corner, then the answer is no. (I think that's what's legally required, IIRC).