Tests on Non Original Equipment components at MOT thwarted

EU wanted 'safety' tests on parts

An attempt to include checks specifically on non-OE components fitted to vehicles as part of the MOT has been blocked by aftermarket industry bodies and lobbying groups.

For full report click this link.

http://www.aftermarketonline.net/News/Industry-News/2014/30246-/Tests-on-non-OE-components-at-MOT-thwarted?utm_source=NewZapp&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nic

The explanation given was: “In case of non-OEM replacement parts or after-sales parts, that largely deviate from the original parts, their impact on the safe use of the vehicle has to be carefully assessed by the inspector. A downgrading of the level of safety of the vehicle shall not be acceptable.”

Who are these unelected people making decisions that can affect so many livelihoods.

I think that this is a typical case of desk based personnel who has never carried out an MOT in their life putting forward rulings without actually thinking them through. For example you can buy a suspension lowering kit from a main dealer and you can also purchase an equivalent kit from an aftermarket source. They both ‘largely deviate from the original parts’ but is it the quality of part that is in question or the fact that the vehicle has been modified? With some vehicles you can purchase the same vehicle with lowered sports suspension from new. How is an MOT tester going to know if a vehicle was lowered from new or afterwards? Unless every part that is replaced has a genuine stamp or reference somewhere visible on it you could never tell. An MOT tester will have to constantly be covering their backside and passing and advising on everything that looks like it has been replaced on a vehicle.

Very few motor manufacturers make all their own parts they rely on outside companies to produce parts for them. On many occasions these are the same companies that produce an equivalent part for the aftermarket.

What these unelected people do not realize is that an MOT test is no more than a basic safety check. MOT testing in our country is robust enough to highlight any safety issues a car may have at the time of test without adding to it. The longer the MOT test takes to conduct the more it will cost. Who will pay for this extra time required? You guessed it, the motorist.

This is a ridiculous ruling rightly thrown out, albeit the lobbyers used the ‘discriminatory’ card. Do these unelected people have links with the main dealerships by any chance or am I being paranoid and think that they are just out to get me?