Well it was like that last year mate! And you passed it then…

Barry Babister from MOT Juice throws some light on warning lights

Published:  28 June, 2018

How many warning lights does it take to create an MOT fail? Put simply, just one - but how many choices do we have?  
    
Looking through the revised testing manual it’s hard pick out these faults amongst so many changes. Let’s see if we can summarise them for you as a refresher on what fails, some new and some old. Below is a list of
major failures:

  •  ABS warning device MIL indicates a malfunction
  •  EBS warning device MIL indicates a malfunction
  •  Electronic parking brake MIL indicates a malfunction
  •  Brake pad or lining wear indicator illuminated
  •  EPS MIL indicating a system malfunction
  •  A towbar coupling indicator not working    
  •  An SRS MIL indicates a system malfunction
  •  ESC MIL indicates a system malfunction        
  •  Engine MIL inoperative or indicating a malfunction


Managing the process
These new fail items will create much more work for the workshop, but how to best manage this process?
At our garages, we have already refined our process for what will be an influx of fresh failures created by the additional fail items. Here are some thoughts on the repair process from our workshop team, but first a word of warning; ‘MIL lights will rarely be a simple cheap fix.’

Most of these warning lamps (MIL) will really only be the headline to the actual underlying fault. Yes we can sell a fault code read, which we offer as a read and report at £45, but without actually defining the true cause of the fault then a ‘fault code read and report’ does little more that the fail sheet.

A better solution is to upsell a proper diagnostic process that will allow the workshop to drill into the fault and present the customer with an estimate of repair options. Typically, we will charge one hour for this process, consisting of around 35 minutes of diagnostic process (which might include fault code read/record/clear, road test, and parts testing to gain an understanding of the route cause of the fail items) sufficient enough to give good guidance to front office for building a quotation.  

Often, we need to request further diagnostic time from the customer at this stage, as we need to work as far as possible to the route cause and the resolution of the fault and any associated underlying issues that are affecting the fault. It is better to take time to diagnose and quote correctly that to try and help a customer to a cheaper resolution that does not really address the fault.  
This is the stage that the job is pushed back at reception who are tasked with laying out the options to the customer, never forget; “its not your car!” So tell the customer what you have found and what it will cost to repair. The rest is their decision.
To download a factsheet on the new MOT fails click here.

Related Articles

  • OSRAM: New range of LED working and driving lights 

    OSRAM’s new range of LED working and driving lights are available in three categories; functional, multifunctional and slim, all of which offer a variety of performances, shapes and beam patterns with various illumination profiles including spot, wide and combo. All of the products in the range provide a cool white intense LED light of up to 6,000 Kelvin. The products are designed in a robust and compact design with a long lifetime of up to 5,000 hours. They are equipped with extremely robust polycarbonate lenses to endure heavy-duty applications and some also include multiple voltage protection. These LED lights are characterised by an extremely high optic efficiency, homogeneous light distribution and reduced glare and all come with a five year OSRAM guarantee.
    www.osram.co.uk/am

  • Draper Expert Diagnostic and Electronic Touch Screen Service Tablet 

    The Draper Expert automotive range now includes a new wireless Diagnostic Tablet. It covers 48 vehicle manufacturers, including American, Asian and European vehicles. The device offers complete OBDII diagnostic functions, and comes with 12 months of free updates. The tablet will quickly read and clear diagnostic trouble codes, making it suitable for MOT tasks as well as servicing requirements as well as advanced electronic maintenance and diagnostics. Technicians can record selectable multi-channel, real-time diagnostics information for subsequent analysis. It can also be customised to print detailed diagnostics reports for customers featuring a company name, logo and contact information. It is also a fully functioning Lenovo Android tablet, so technicians can take photos and record videos with sound. The tablet comes supplied with a carry case, ID Vehicle to VCI adaptors, USB power cable, 230V to USB plug and Wireless Bluetooth DBS connector.
    www.drapertools.com

  • MOT tester Annual Training & Annual Assessment: The next 12 months  

    In my last editorial in the March issue of Aftermarket, I discussed that the time was running out for MOT testers to complete their Annual Training and Annual Assessment. This needed to be completed by the deadline of 31 March this year (2019).
        
    The deadline has now passed and hopefully all MOT testers completed the training and Annual Assessment on time and are now ready for some down time to digest the topics that the DVSA have advised for the next 12 months.
        
    Many MOT testers left last year’s Annual Training and Annual Assessment until the last few weeks of March, or even the last few hours before the deadline. Those who didn’t complete will need to contact the DVSA, complete the Annual Assessment and also facing the DVSA Vehicle Inspector ‘observation test’ all of which could take considerable time away from MOT testing with the result being a reduced income.
        
    If it is necessary to request a demonstration MOT test,  call the DVSA on 0300 123 9000.

    Requirements
    This year (1 April 2019 to 31 March 2020), why not complete the Annual Training and Assessment early, even though you might have just completed the previous year’s requirement. It could all been done by Christmas – yes will we be fast approaching that time of year soon – reducing the stress of the ordeal.
        
    An MOT tester is required to complete a minimum of 16 hours training in a five year period. Each year an MOT tester must complete at least three hours of training associated with the DVSA prescribed syllabus as indicated below.
        
    The DVSA MOT tester Annual Training can be delivered in various forms. These include, but are not limited to, in-house, book form, electronic (e-learning) or face-to-face. There are a number of training providers in the industry that provide such services. MOT tester Annual Training must be recorded as follows:

  • Free MOT certificate copy service launched 

    MOT centres are less likely to need to provide replacement copies of lost MOT certificates for customers going forward, thanks to a new online service that has been launched. It is estimated that businesses made £6 million per year as a result of providing MOT certificate replacement copies

  • Where next for MOT testing? 

    The UK Ministry of Transport Roadworthiness test (MOT test to you and I) has been in place since 1960 and has withstood some serious challenges in recent years – both from changes in European legislation that wanted to only allow dedicated test centres that were not directly connected to the repair of a vehicle to conduct the roadworthiness testing, but also from within the UK to try and change the frequency of the existing 3-1-1 test frequency.
        
    Thankfully, common sense triumphed in both cases and the UK MOT test soldiers serenely on.
        
    The original MOT test was a basic mechanical test and although many other elements have been added over the years, today it still predominately remains focused on the mechanical condition of the vehicle, plus exhaust emissions. However, ‘The Times They Are A-Changin', as Bob Dylan sang four years after the original MOT test was introduced.
        
    The future of the MOT test has drawn many diverging views and there are many who champion its continued format and frequency. At the other end of the spectrum there are those who see it as an unnecessary expense for the motorist, as well as being technically obsolete as automated systems and autonomous vehicles impose the mandatory testing  of their functionality. Effectively, in their view, the vehicle safety is self-tested every time it is driven. Somewhere in between are those who simply want to update the test to include an assessment of today’s electronic safety systems.
    However, the ‘self-test’ approach is being discussed at the UNECE level in Geneva, both as part of the autonomous vehicle requirements, but separately as how ‘periodic technical inspection’ (PTI) should be conducted. These discussions are not restricted to what the UK does, or even Europe, but includes all those countries who have signed the 1958 UNECE agreement to adopt what is agreed – which includes the UK who signed on 16  March 1963. This all comes under the snappy title of ‘Agreement Concerning the Adoption of Uniform Conditions of Approval and Reciprocal Recognition of Approval for Motor Vehicle Equipment and Parts, done at Geneva on 20 March 1958.‘

    There are now discussions to formalise the improvement needed to suit modern complex electronic systems and provide a solid health check for PTI. This may include how a system conducts functional plausibility, performance monitoring and self-healing abilities. This is a long way from today’s visual check of a vehicle! However, for the UK MOT there is also a timing issue to all of this. Although we know that automated systems are being introduced, there are many electronic systems which have been mandatorily fitted to vehicles for many years (e.g. ABS) and have yet to be included in the MOT test as an independent electronic check or functional test. This was the subject of a recent DVSA meeting which questioned what should be included in the future MOT test for systems that are already fitted to today’s vehicles, including how these electronically controlled systems should be tested, but also to consider the cost- benefit analysis to evaluate if there is a greater benefit than the costs involved to implement a specific test requirement. The simple proposal is to use a PTI scan tool connected via the OBD port and communicate with the vehicle and its safety related systems to detect if any faults have been detected. Is this going to provide a better test method and result than observing the malfunction indicator light (MIL) on the vehicle’s dashboard? The answer may be either a ‘yes’, but probably only if a deeper assessment of the system is made, bringing in the ‘cost-benefit’ question of the development of the PTI scan tool software, but also a ‘no’ if it can be shown that the vehicle is effective and accurate in identifying problems itself. However, this is also part of the problem. Where is the independence of the MOT if the vehicle manufacturers can create their own test methods? There is currently an ISO standard being developed that seeks to define what access to what data will be provided by the vehicle during a PTI test and from this, what test method will be possible. However, the data access is controlled through the use of a vehicle manufacturer’s electronic certificate and their intention is to provide the minimum data, probably related to the MIL activation, so this may restrict what test methods can be implemented unless legislation forces greater data access/functional control, which will also be subject to the cost/benefit analysis.

    Telematics
    Another angle is the ability to use the vehicle’s telematics system to remotely communicate with the vehicle and monitor its status and safety related functionality whenever it is being driven. If a fault is detected, then the vehicle manufacturer is able to assess the seriousness of the fault (effectively ‘advisory’, ‘failure’ or ‘dangerous’) and propose to the vehicle owner that a repair is necessary and direct them accordingly to a workshop of their choice, where the relevant spare parts would also be provided by the vehicle manufacturer. Unfortunately, this may signal one of the real issues here – the vehicle manufacturer is not only able to decide if a fault occurs and know when this happens, but then is also able to propose where it is repaired using their OEM parts. This is not a good scenario for either independent vehicle testing or for the competitive choice of where any MOT failures are repaired.
        
    So, although the communication to the vehicle might still be via the OBD connector, the testing of the electronic safety systems may still be controlled by the vehicle manufacturer and subsequently restrict what truly independent testing will still be possible. In the longer term, autonomous and connected vehicles will become much more capable of self-testing, but this still leaves how the choice of their repair being influenced by the vehicle manufacturer who becomes, judge, jury and executioner. If these vehicles are not tested in MOT centres, will the UK government return to enforcing vehicle safety via Traffic Police with the associated cost of police officers in patrol cars? I think not, so where will this leave independent roadworthiness testing and the test centres that conduct these tests?
        
    This may well come down to how the use of vehicles changes and the subsequent ‘mobility’ models of who is responsible for the vehicle, but this will also need a change in the law concerning who is responsible for the roadworthiness of a vehicle when it is being driven on the road. As I said at the beginning,  ‘The Times They Are A-Changin'.

    xenconsultancy.com

Most read content


Search

Sign Up

For the latest news and updates from Aftermarket Magazine.


Poll

Where should the next Automechanika show be held?



Facebook


©DFA Media 1999-2019