Don't like the adverts?  Click here to remove them

Odd MOT argument today


Well-Known Member
May 28, 2013

Been a long time since I posted on the forum but thought I would share a really odd time at the MOT today.

I young fella is trying to fail my 93' cruiser as he can't see an indicator on the dash for when the headlight dipped beam is on.

Had my cruiser since 2010 and only remember a High Beam indicated on cluster. He had me convinced maybe a bulb has blown and I'm wrong.

Found my original owners manual and nowhere can I see a dipped beam bulb meant to light up, just high beam.

I'm hoping someone on the forum with a similar year cruiser can confirm this headlight indicator never existed or maybe im going senile.

Thanks, Dave.

My 1992 80 is same - only high beam blue bulb.
I don't remember any of my vehicles past or present (a120) having that made up shite.
Take it to VOSA, and tell the tester/station what you are doing he/they could lose his ticket !
Last edited:
There is no 'low beam' indicator on the 80's.

If he has failed it on that you need to get the 'fail' removed from your MOT history, unless you're not bothered about it being there of course.
Thanks for your replies guys. I thought I was losing my mind.

This means war. Unfortunately in NI the MOT centres are government run but first thing tomorrow I'll be lodging a formal complaint with the civil service clowns that run these tests and the MOT tester personally. I will also certainly will be getting it removed from my record as its the first 'fail' shs's had in 14 yrs.

Unbelievable. Thanks again. Dave.
Don't like the adverts?  Click here to remove them
By his thinking then, every vehicle that he has tested has passed with indicator for dipped beam or failed because they havent ? Those figures/mot's would be most interesting
Maybe he is a tree hugger that doesn't like 4×4's.
He was very young and full of his own importance. I stood for a good 20 minutes arguing that my truck does not have a dipped beam indicator just to have him recite what road rule says it must. I knew he was full of crap but i drove home half convinced I’m maybe wrong.

Anyhow by the time I’ve finished tomorrow with the department that controls these MOTs over here he will hopefully not be an inspector much longer. I would also hope they trace through all his inspections to see who else he screwed with.

I’ve never owned a modern car or have any desire to but thinking they must have that lights on indicator. Reckon they are trying to force old cars off the road making these MOTs an increasing pain in the ass.

Cheers, Dave.
The 90 series doesn't have a dipped beam "on" indicator either - only for the main/full beam.

It does have a lights-on indicator in the form of a buzzer iirc which would work with the parking lights upwards - buzzer goes off if you remove the key and open the door with lights still on (close the door buzzer stops).
Well done Dave, keep us informed.
I already know some of these testers are jobsworths fuelled by the 'power' they have over us.
Surely he was referring to "high beam warning light"? Be good to see what he has written on his report. He fills in a tick box report and cant see why there would be a box referring to dipped beam warning light.
I've yet to drive a vehicle that has a low beam warning light.....
Think the tester was on wacky backy.....
Yeah Frank, my full beam indicator is fine and MOT reports where I am are a bit different than the mainland as there are no real tick boxing its more a summary of minor/major faults and braking efficiency etc. I should have posted up the MOT failure as he had put the regulation it related to. I took the failure notification to the department over here that regulates these test centres along with copy of my original owners manual to prove they only have high beam.

I received an email from them this afternoon profusely apologising for the error caused by their tester and their excuse was apparently there is an MOT regulation "All lamps must be working correctly, including headlights, tail lights, indicators (inc. hazard lights), side lights, brake lights and rear fog lights. The latter must activate a tell-tale symbol on the dashboard to alert the driver when they’re switched on."

Seems this young clown didn't understand the meaning of Latter. I can only think they are struggling to find new MOT testers and are taking anyone. Even if he had made a mistake I don't think having no dipped beam indicator on a modern car would be a failure anyhow.

My fault, I should have kicked up a hell of a row and demanded to speak to his supervisor but he really had me convinced I was wrong and remembered my young fellas car has a dipped beam indicator so thought maybe id a blown bulb. Ah well, failure has been removed from the cruisers record and she carrys on for another year,

Cheers, Dave.
Great news Dave, and no fails on the log.
I wonder if they have taken any action with him or looked back on his mot records.
All immaterial now, you got the right decision.
In a similar vein, I had a fail (justified) and an advisory a few months ago. Since then it's been in the body shop which they mot'd again yesterday (I know the owner) He took it to a different station him which passed, but no advisories this time when nothing done to put right the previous one, so on my mot history it looks like it was rectified.
Make it up as you go along industry.
Just to finish off this thread, I did push the government department that regulates the MOTs over here to tell me what action they planned to take regarding this specific clown but they would only say how seriously they are taking the matter. I'm sure. Its very much a case of protecting their own and suspect nothing will come of it. I also requested they return the MOT failure report but I suspect it will be 'lost' in their bin. If I do ever get it back I'll post it up here for a laugh.