**Sold Dangerous Car complete with dodgy MOT**Please read

[Sean_GT]

As sham says.. The car came into mot with a different set of alloys than what wheels it was sold on. Thats bang on!

Iv also seen the car about with some different wheels! And yes it has also been involved in a crash and that was a couple of hours after the mot!

Oh god not another one were you the owner Akki was selling it for

 

[Craig]

I do 20+ MOT’s a day

20 MOT's at around 45 minutes per MOT.

20 x 45 = 900mins
900/60 = 15 Hours

So based on the minimum amount of MOT's that you claim to do, you are saying you do a minimum of a 15 hour shift each day without any breaks? Or is it a 16 hour shift with an hour for lunch?

I'm aware there are 3 testers, but you said that that's how many you do. Can you confirm?

 

[gavinchappell]

The second MOT test shows no advisories because there was no second MOT test, the advisories remain the same as the ones from when it was MOT’d and that advisory note that was issued with the first failure test is the one that Akky or whoever sold the car should have provided to the buyer if he/she asked for it or if the seller was genuine enough to include it, which were pretty obvious anyways (windscreen).

But there's another test number for the same date which surely means there was a second test? And are you saying that after an MOT fail, the car isn't retested to make sure the repairs are actually satisfactory from a legal and roadworthiness viewpoint?

 

[Fishy89GT]

20 MOT's at around 45 minutes per MOT.

20 x 45 = 900mins
900/60 = 15 Hours

So based on the minimum amount of MOT's that you claim to do, you are saying you do a minimum of a 15 hour shift each day without any breaks? Or is it a 16 hour shift with an hour for lunch?

I'm aware there are 3 testers, but you said that that's how many you do. Can you confirm?

oops.. think someone is lying again.. this time about their hours lol

 

[Sean_GT]

oops.. think someone is lying again.. this time about their hours lol

Unless every car that went there was not going through a full test in which case he would be telling the truth

 

[Phil]

surely without a second mot test i couldnt possibly have shown a pass????? u cant just fix the things and not test it? surely not?

u test a car it fails, now without fixing all of the problems u issue a pass and assume that the owner will know that the first list of advisories still applies? thats a bit handy for you?!and akki is it not?

u say akki should have gave the failure with the car, akki just gives the pass?

so you arent directly at fault going by this story and its all akki's fault? maybe if akki still had something to loose on here say...his tradership/membership the story wouldnt blame him? you'd both stick to the... my mate owns it and i didnt know it was a mess.

imo, after all thats all i can give,

akki knew 100% what he was seling and sold it anyway, knowing that it wouldnt even have been tested after having this faults supposedly fixed. then the story of the crash into a what bollard? got made up to cover the fact that none of the defects had been sorted at the MOT centre.

Sham, just trying to help out a mate, probably doesnt realise fully what sort of mess the car is in and gives it some sort of MOT cert for akki, so he can move it on quicker.

nomatter mate your totally wrong in what has happened, i cant really see anyone bar your locals buying that story,

u should have went with "im sorry i made a mistake doing a favour for akki, i believed that akki would fix the car up to an acceptable condition before selling but he didnt, ive let the owner down and my test centre down....im sorry"

^^that i would have understood and forgiven to a degree.

Phil

 

[Beaker]

sorry mate but had we listened to the people making most noise when Akki was stopped from trading then he would still be peddling his rubbish on here. This is being handled and discussed in great detail and I think you will find with nearly 4200 on this site the majority have not actually spoken.

We will act based upon facts and not jump in with all guns blazing. I also dont really care for your choice of words "You work (moderate!) for us, not against us" sorry to burst your bubble I dont work for you... I dont see how giving someone an opportunity to speak is working against anyone - I think you my friend are VERY much in the minority.

We have proven we have members best interests at heart in the past and I am sure the vast majority will trust and respect our decision.

Fact of the matter is we cant please everyone all of the time.

My choice of words is totaly correct. You moderate for our protection.
I am not trying to argue with you, mearly pointing a few things out about what COULD be done. Internet forums are not the law so we DO NOT have to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that something iffy went on, if there is enough circumstansial evidence, that should be enough.

 

[Phil]

My choice of words is totaly correct. You moderate for our protection.
I am not trying to argue with you, mearly pointing a few things out about what COULD be done. Internet forums are not the law so we DO NOT have to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that something iffy went on, if there is enough circumstansial evidence, that should be enough.

nomatter beaker, you have to agree, as dylan pointed out, going on what the masses want wont always work. as in akkis case previously.

possibly if everyone hadnt screamed for akkis head 10pages ago, these two could go down together?! but now akki has nothing to loose on here, sham can just blame him. hindsight its fantastic. pretending we could do better than the moderation team...stupid.

Phil

 

[dan]

The second MOT test shows no advisories because there was no second MOT test, the advisories remain the same as the ones from when it was MOT’d and that advisory note that was issued with the first failure test is the one that Akky or whoever sold the car should have provided to the buyer if he/she asked for it or if the seller was genuine enough to include it, which were pretty obvious anyways (windscreen).

Sham

So basically your saying the car was sold without an MOT? even tho Matt has a MOT cert saying it passed with your name on it? and no advisory's? dosnt add up bud.

 

[Beaker]

pretending we could do better than the moderation team...stupid.

Phil

Im not saying I could do better. But what I am saying is that they should listen to the members on this. Members should have the power on this site, not just the moderators. The members dont get to choose the moderators but the moderators get to say who can do what on the site. This system does normally work (I have nothing against the general running of the site or any of the moderators) but I do think that they should listen to the members on this. It seems that as Sham has some nice bits every now and again, he is getting let off of being involved in some way (however small) in this incident

 

[dan]

c'mon guys lets just keep it on topic here

 

[Dave.]

I think, personally, you should wait until you see the actual outcome of this situation.

We don't know what the moderators of this site plan to do. You might notice that Sham's Store is missing from the Trader list, and that he is a "Suspended Trader".

While I don't agree with everything that happens on this website, thats part of living in a democratic society. Also, as far as I'm concerned, I pay money to this website to keep the servers funded. The 'staff' here have no ties to me personally, and I don't think they are here to be treated as 'staff'. It's as much their hobby/passtime (to run this place) as it is mine to access it.

Its a mutual understanding, without them we wouldn't have this, without us, they wouldn't have this site. (I'm in no way implying it isn't hard work, but you get my drift I hope)

Just my opinion...

Dave

 

[Phil]

Im not saying I could do better. But what I am saying is that they should listen to the members on this. Members should have the power on this site, not just the moderators. The members dont get to choose the moderators but the moderators get to say who can do what on the site. This system does normally work (I have nothing against the general running of the site or any of the moderators) but I do think that they should listen to the members on this. It seems that as Sham has some nice bits every now and again, he is getting let off of being involved in some way (however small) in this incident

sham getting let of because the "members(us) called for akki's head, akki has nothing to loose even though he was involved since he's already banned, so sham has his scapegoat because we were hasty in banning akki,

i'll put it this way, whats the average age on the members side of thing a against the average age in the moderators? its only normal that the more mature and patient people have the reins.

as you said, the members dont pick the mods (thankfully or 2months ago akki would have been admin supremo lol) the mods pick the future mods and that the only way a forum can keep a balance.

Phil

 

[Phil]

c'mon guys lets just keep it on topic here

apologies.

Phil

 

[sx_turbo]

i'm really not buying the sham and akki explanation.

i think it's amazing that the car miraculously had an accident on the way home from an mot test.

and this day in age i'm almost certain a car needs to be thoroughly retested cos of the computer system. i remember all the mot stations were up up in arms about this when the computers were first introduced as each test needed to take 45 mins and retests had to be done the same, and a lot of garages stopped doing the free retests because of this.

as phil said sham, if you had owned up to making a mistake and made a formal apology then i'm sure people would be willing to give you the benefit of the doubt.

(the fact i know first hand your a dodgy slippery f***er, play's no part in my mind that you are guilty as charged)

the more you lie the bigger hole you dig yourself.

 

[Dave.]

People are also forgetting, that failing to correct items which are noted on an advisory sheet (perhaps why it had a completely clean pass second time round) can and does invalidate vehicle insurance, aswell as leaving the driver of the vehicle open to prosecution.

Advisory notes mark items which are on the legal limit, rather than 'not great'

An Advisory Notice may be issued along with the MOT Test Certificate. This form will list the items that are at the minimum legal requirement, and therefore in need of attention. Failure to attend to these items may result in you, or anyone else driving your car, driving it illegally and open to prosecution. Also, should you be involved in an accident, it may invalidate your car insurance.

So the car was sold under false pretenses anyway, and although this doesn't incriminate Sham, it highlights Akki's wrong doing in my opinion.

Dave

I think this is still an important factor, and perhaps why it had a completely clean pass second time round.

 

[Gee]

It's great that the mods have opened the thread again so Sham can give an explanation, but no matter what Sham seems to say, people are still picking up discrepancies with the explanation given.

If the general members on the forum are picking these up and still questioning various things in the explanation given, I am sure the mods are also thinking the same thing.

Therefore, now an explanation has been given and there are still issues, then I think ultimately it should now be left in the hands of the mods to decide what action is taken from here.

I trust they will make the right choice...they aint stupid.

 

[Beaker]

i'll put it this way, whats the average age on the members side of thing a against the average age in the moderators? its only normal that the more mature and patient people have the reins.


Phil

Being nearer 40 than 30 I would say I fit in that category

 

[dan]

It's great that the mods have opened the thread again so Sham can give an explanation, but no matter what Sham seems to say, people are still picking up discrepancies with the explanation given.

If the general members on the forum are picking these up and still questioning various things in the explanation given, I am sure the mods are also thinking the same thing.

Therefore, now an explanation has been given and there are still issues, then I think ultimately it should now be left in the hands of the mods to decide what action is taken from here.

I trust they will make the right choice...they aint stupid.

well said mate

 

[sx_turbo]

x 2 gee