MOT Advisory already ?

[DavyTee]

63 plate Fiesta Ecoboost 1l Titanium 17k miles and the MOT states the following 

Trailing arm has slight play in a pin/bush nearside and offside rear 

Shock absorber has slight misting of oil offside rear 

Advisories on a 17k car really already ?

Is this normal ?

And are these advisories a major problem ?

Only picked the car up yesterday and a bit peeved. Stupidly I didn't check the MOT certificate before buying as never thought it would have problems 

Any advise on advisories welcome thanks 

 

[Mavroz]

5 yr old, low mileage but I guess it totally depends on how the previous owner(s) have driven the car.

I guess issues like those could occur with hitting potholes and speedbumps hard.

They are advisories and cannot be at a stage for an mot fail. You may get another year you may get longer. By that I mean depending on further degradation it may fail the next mot with these issue, it may not.

[isetta]

MOT testers seem to use different standards for advisories. some don't seem to mention stuff if it's not bad enough to fail. some chuck all sorts of stuff on there. you can view all the failure and advisories for about the last 10 years on any car from the reg no on dvla website. i would imagine some people are using previous advisories shown on the dvla website as a way of trying to lever the price down. some listed are just stupid eg. 'number plate deteriorating but not likely to be misread'  . it's not exactly a deteriorating hidden safety related item where it would be wise to warn people of like brake pads getting low which seems reasonable to warn people of. 

hard to tell on yours as we don't know how pinickety that tester was and those items may have been so minor (the amount of misting and amount of play) that some may not have mentioned it at all

[iantt]

i use advisories if i think its close to a fail. agree some testers put alsorts down, and the same crop up year after year. obviously not required . 

[MJNewton]

Yeah I wouldn't worry - just treat them for what they are intended - advisory points being made. By definition they would rarely be indicative of a major problem. Your particular 'issues' could well have been present when it left the factory (and not actually something to be concerned about).

As the others have said there are big inconsistencies in the way in which advisories are used, and the DVSA have long acknowledged this and are aiming to normalise them.

[DavyTee]

Thank you for your replies they have reassured me a little 😉 

Took the car for a workout around the Northumberland country roads today and never had so much fun. Love the fiesta, so far 😆

 

[iantt]

32 minutes ago, MJNewton said:

Yeah I wouldn't worry - just treat them for what they are intended - advisory points being made. By definition they would rarely be indicative of a major problem. Your particular 'issues' could well have been present when it left the factory (and not actually something to be concerned about).

As the others have said there are big inconsistencies in the way in which advisories are used, and the DVSA have long acknowledged this and are aiming to normalise them.

you found those links quicker than i did. i keep refering to those when i get new testers pointing out when to advise and when not to. 

[stef123]

out of interest, what type of garage was the car mot'd at? was it a dealer, an independent, a fast fit centre etc.

[DavyTee]

It was a major Ford dealer. Nothing mentioned on the previous MOT 

The car is one owner from new. He only did 2k miles between MOT's 2016-2017. Full dealership service  history. Immacualte car but that advisory threw me a little as I've never had much luck with cars 🤔

[MJNewton]

16 minutes ago, iantt said:

you found those links quicker than i did. i keep refering to those when i get new testers pointing out when to advise and when not to. 

To be fair I've referred to them a few times in the past (well the first one anyway; I accidentally found the second when searching again for the first!).

[Tiexen]

If you haven't already don't forget to check your pipes - see:

1.0l Ecoboost engine rust thread

[DavyTee]

11 minutes ago, Tiexen said:

If you haven't already don't forget to check your pipes - see:

1.0l Ecoboost engine rust thread

Yes I was reading through those before I picked the car up. I can only see one pipe unlike the ones in the photos were two can be seen. I have a couple of pin head size rust spots so will deal with them tomorrow and put some VHT paint on. I'll take a photo tomorrow as well as mine looks totally different to the ones on the thread 

[Eric Bloodaxe]

Bit late in spotting the topic, but have had loads of these over the years on cars with low annual mileage (the missus only does about 2k a year!).

Have generally found that a reputable garage/dealership will flag up an item that could reasonably be expected to need attention within the next normal service interval of, say, 10k miles as they obviously can't predict if the low mileage will be maintained. On my wife's old Ka, for instance, the front suspension bushes were advised 3 times before they were eventually replaced.

 

 

 

 

 

[Jethro_Tull]

Why do you think low mileage is a good thing?  Unless the car is thoroughly dried and parked in a climate controlled environment, low mileage is injurious to it.  Rubber components stiffen and degrade if not worked (failing bushes, failing shock pushrod wiper), exhuasts rot from inside out because the condensation never dries out, discs corrode, yadda yadda. 

It needs using a bit more (which hopefully you will now its yours) or storing properly if not.  It should also be serviced on the arduous duty cycle schedule up to this point with such low mileage.

None of them are a problem, and may never worsen during the life of the car.  It's half a decade old now, and the average car on the roads is 7 years old, so there's no reason to think it will remain forever faultless simply because its not used much.  Indeed, this is a good example why cars should be properly inspected prior to purchase - you wouldn't buy a house without a survey...  You want a mint car, but a new one - used cars cost less for this very reason.

[Mavroz]

If there were 2 similar vehicles for sale for the same price, let's say both 5 years old, one had 20000 on the clock and the other had 80000 on the clock, I would buy the one with 20k on instead of the one with 80k any day of the week.

If I was to buy a second hand car I would always steer toward the low mileage.

 

[jace1969]

My car is a 2011 and done very low miles,i did use to to take it to ford for a lot of things including MOT but they were hit and miss on the  advisories.

One year they say something then next time its ok,i had a slight dent on the inside of my rear alloy and next year nothing on the advisories.

When i had my car 2014 off ford they put it through a MOT as is was its first one and they failed it on rear moving part fouling brake pipe but the thing

was the car didn't move or come out the garage,this was before i even had the car,why fail it when they moved the pipe then passed it and same person fixed it.

I wouldn't be that worried and my car is the same,i only do around 3k from each MOT and not one problem in 4 years.

I'm getting less happy with my local ford garage so last MOT was another garage and looking for a good service place as well now.

2nd that Mavroz as long as serviced like mine was your spot on.

 

[isetta]

i agree with jethro tull to some degree. cars that are used little and parked outside (or parked in a garage when they are still wet) do suffer from rust more as they sit there damp without drying out. If I park my car in my driveway when wet and drive it the next day when the rain has stopped it will dry out underneath when driving it. If not driven it will sit there damp for days on end, particularly in a sheltered area where the wind will not waft around it and under it. My brother has an Audi TT which has spent long periods not being used, so the mileage is low but in some ways it has suffered more than if it had been used more  eg. brake discs awful, power steering hydraulic pipes rotting away, exhaust rust, very stiff gear change linkage. 

and I would rather buy one which has done say 60k mostly on motorways, than 30k pootling around town in low gears.  I accept you can't tell what use it has had so that is difficult to judge.    But there's a lot more factors to a car than just judging it on the mileage done.  In general I do think the public do sometimes place a disproportionate amount of importance on the mileage reading. I am not saying ignore it but it's not the only thing that matters.  

[DavyTee]

3 hours ago, Jethro_Tull said:

 

I'm having problems replying here keeps quoting Jethro 🤔

Yeah I get what you're saying and thanks for the input everyone. I'll see what the next mot throws up in September and go from there. 

[jace1969]

9 hours ago, DavyTee said:

I'm having problems replying here keeps quoting Jethro 🤔

Yeah I get what you're saying and thanks for the input everyone. I'll see what the next mot throws up in September and go from there. 

You should be fine and as you said see what pops up on the mot next time.

Every other day use of a car wont hurt it, if its there for days/weeks not being used then you could hit problems.

 

 

[Jethro_Tull]

15 hours ago, Mavroz said:

If there were 2 similar vehicles for sale for the same price, let's say both 5 years old, one had 20000 on the clock and the other had 80000 on the clock, I would buy the one with 20k on instead of the one with 80k any day of the week.

If I was to buy a second hand car I would always steer toward the low mileage.

 

Certainly on a car thats only a year or two old, I would agree.  However, once a car has aged somewhat, like the OPs has, it becomes a different proposition, as the MOT has so ably demonstrated.

I would steer towards average mileage, or a little below average milage.  People don't understand how significantly injurious low mileage can be to a car unless its stored and maintained appropriately.  Unless I know who's owned it and how its been treated in that regard, I steer clear of cars with a few years under their belt but significantly low mileage - quite often more trouble than they're worth.

 

[jace1969]

27 minutes ago, Jethro_Tull said:

Certainly on a car thats only a year or two old, I would agree.  However, once a car has aged somewhat, like the OPs has, it becomes a different proposition, as the MOT has so ably demonstrated.

I would steer towards average mileage, or a little below average milage.  People don't understand how significantly injurious low mileage can be to a car unless its stored and maintained appropriately.  Unless I know who's owned it and how its been treated in that regard, I steer clear of cars with a few years under their belt but significantly low mileage - quite often more trouble than they're worth.

 

How do you see cars waiting to be sold from new and stored outside as many places do,our local ford dealer has loads and most are there for a good month

or more as sure that aint doing them any good not even being started and rain/snow/ice etc on them.

Your 100% right on saying knowing the history on the car if low millage and the person who had it as if very low millage it still could be used every day.

When i sell mine i will have to scrap it lol..........as in 4 years of owning it i have done only just over 9k but used every day or other day,cant do a thing about it.

[DavyTee]

I might write to the previous owner and ask how he stored it and why he got rid of it 😀

Bought it from a main dealer so just got told the usual BS of them but have all the service records and it was maintained every year following the yearly guidelines

[Iaintruten]

Get the dealer to fix it under warrenty, I seem to be getting the most out my dealer warrenty just now, they will be counting down the days till mine expires[emoji23] .

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk

[jace1969]

9 hours ago, DavyTee said:

I might write to the previous owner and ask how he stored it and why he got rid of it 😀

Bought it from a main dealer so just got told the usual BS of them but have all the service records and it was maintained every year following the yearly guidelines

I do this on a lot of mt cars if i can as i did on this one,when i had it just over 3 years old and only 20k so looked at the service book and rang the Garage

where he had it serviced before and told me the full stuff and the chap was very fussy.

Laiintruten was right try the garage being a main dealer as i did get a lot out of mine in 12 months even a £250 reverse camera which only lasted 2 years after again.