My L322 passed its MOT today with an advisory that the N/S and O/S brake pipes are covered in grease.

That wasn't mentioned on last years MOT and I haven't covered them increase in the meantime, so that means either the last tester was a bit slack or todays tester was a bit keen. Either way that's not too clever. Current: FF Westminster money pit

Gone:
RRS 4.2 SC
RRS 3.6 TDV8
FL2 TD4

Brad,
Coincidence, mine passed the MOT on Tuesday... the tester made special mention to the brake pipes being coated in Dinitrol, which the same man never made any similar comment last year, but he did say we see a lot of these failing on rusty brake pipes, but these are OK. ?.
Mike. G reg 2.5VM Vogue Portofino red 1991- 1999
V reg 2.5td P38 Rioja red 1999- 2006
53 reg td6 Vogue Oslo blue 2006- 2015
11 reg 4.4 TdV8 Vogue SE. Baltic blue 2015- date.
https://www.fullfatrr.com/forum/topic56162...tty+affair

Thanks Mike - i am waiting for a call from the garage to see what they think. They use an independent MOT garage as they don't do MOT's themselves.

Surely it's a preventative measure so what's the problem in any case ? Current: FF Westminster money pit

Gone:
RRS 4.2 SC
RRS 3.6 TDV8
FL2 TD4

Nothing wrong with having brake pipes covered in grease provided the pipes were in good condition when the grease was applied.
If you really want to get an mot tester going try greasing and then taping up the exposed sections of brake pipes in the wheel arch areas with self amalgamating tape. Again provided the brake pipes are in good condition before it is applied they will never corrode.
Just an extension of what manufactures do with plastic coating of pipes.
Good for an advisory or two though which can be safely ignored.

Thanks chaps. This confirms what the garage are saying too.

They just called and told me to ignore the advisory. Given they would be doing any work on the car I am happy to take their advice. Current: FF Westminster money pit

Gone:
RRS 4.2 SC
RRS 3.6 TDV8
FL2 TD4

All a bit pointless really . You should have see the state-of-the old brake pipes I took off my L322 Td6 Vogue.
Most of the corrosion is out of sight, hidden behind the plastic covers.
Criminal really that they don’t use Cunifer from new.
Mike. G reg 2.5VM Vogue Portofino red 1991- 1999
V reg 2.5td P38 Rioja red 1999- 2006
53 reg td6 Vogue Oslo blue 2006- 2015
11 reg 4.4 TdV8 Vogue SE. Baltic blue 2015- date.
https://www.fullfatrr.com/forum/topic56162...tty+affair

How unreasonable of you Mike, bearing in mind these cars are designed for the rough stuff  Current: FF Westminster money pit

Gone:
RRS 4.2 SC
RRS 3.6 TDV8
FL2 TD4

The advisory is due to the tester being unable to confirm the condition of the pipes under the grease. 4.2 SC - sold , now bought back
4.4 AdBlu Tractor - Stolen

As above. MOT tester has to cover his arse, should a brake pipe fail, in a place that cannot be accurately assessed or seen...

My regular tester retired so I had to use a local garage. It was in getting tested and a mechanic came into reception and spoke with the receptionist. He said that he (the mot tester chap) wants to fail (another car)the car on bushes, but we only fitted them in Feb so we’ve encouraged him not to fail it. I won’t be going there again.

Steve.

MOT testers can only inspect what they see and are not allowed to remove coatings etc, as mentioned above, they will sometimes put an advisory on something looking suspect to cover themselves which is fair as there a lot of dodgy ‘ fixes’ done to get a car through an MOT by owners and garages.

If you don’t want an advisory you could either remove the grease prior to the MOT and cover again post MOT which would be a good thing in reapplying regularly. Or give the MOT inspector permission to remove but note, they can refuse to do this.

My main point is there is no consistency in testing standards and that has cleary been confirmed by others experiences. I havent greased them since last years MOT which made no reference.

The tester couldnt see the brake pipes as they are covered and therefore he did not know if the grease is an attempt to hide corrosion or is just preventative. By putting an advisory on the certificate it appears there is a potential issue where there isn't one. Current: FF Westminster money pit

Gone:
RRS 4.2 SC
RRS 3.6 TDV8
FL2 TD4

When humans are involved you will always get different outcomes, even with the same human!

I would take some comfort in your latest tester having his eyes open and commenting on the grease although that is no guarantee that he didn’t miss something more serious. That’s why get your car serviced and inspected at least yearly is a good idea, also not always using the same tech can also be a good idea... saying you use your tech because he ‘knows’ the car could be a bad thing in that he may become complacent through familiarity