MOT fail on outer sills - is that even possible?

NickUK

Dedicated Member
British Zeds
Joined
Oct 8, 2019
Points
44
Location
Cheshire
Model of Z
3
Hi! I hope you are all well and been able to get out during the sunny months.

I just had my Z3 MOT done and it has failed on one major defect as described here:

Integral body structure corroded to the extent that the rigidity of the assembly is significantly reduced Outer (sills both sides) [6.1.1 (c) (i)]

Looking under the car and various forum topics including this one: https://zroadster.org/articles/bmw-z3-sill-removal-and-protection.67, the outer sills are bolted on. My local mechanic; who didn't do the test but took it to a place that does, reckons the outer sills are seam welded on and therefore structural. He's said it's fine to contact the MOT test station he uses directly so before I make an idiot of myself arguing with them, am I correct in thinking it should not be a fail? Also, the tester has punched a hole through on the worst side so was that necessary if it is not indeed structural?

Thank you.
 

andyglym

Shiny Dust Caps Make Your Zed Go Faster.
Supporter
British Zeds
Joined
Feb 20, 2015
Points
231
Location
Moresby, West Cumbria, England
Model of Z
2.8 Roadster
Hi! I hope you are all well and been able to get out during the sunny months.

I just had my Z3 MOT done and it has failed on one major defect as described here:

Integral body structure corroded to the extent that the rigidity of the assembly is significantly reduced Outer (sills both sides) [6.1.1 (c) (i)]

Looking under the car and various forum topics including this one: https://zroadster.org/articles/bmw-z3-sill-removal-and-protection.67, the outer sills are bolted on. My local mechanic; who didn't do the test but took it to a place that does, reckons the outer sills are seam welded on and therefore structural. He's said it's fine to contact the MOT test station he uses directly so before I make an idiot of myself arguing with them, am I correct in thinking it should not be a fail? Also, the tester has punched a hole through on the worst side so was that necessary if it is not indeed structural?

Thank you.
I think @t-tony and @Stevo7682 will have a wry grin at this (not you), both are retired and current MOT Testers. The outer sills are bolt on affairs and deffo not structural in any way. That failure statement sounds nonsense.

Edit: many on here, including me, have unbolted them to clean behind. Seam welded on my arse :arghh:
 

t-tony

Zorg Expert (II)
Supporter
British Zeds
#ZedShed
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Points
226
Location
Torksey Lock,Lincoln, England
Model of Z
E89 Z4 23i Auto
They may have been welded on in the life of the car, but, that in itself does not make them structural items. Contact your local MOT Inspector and complain. Where did this happen please?

Tony.
 

NickUK

Dedicated Member
British Zeds
Joined
Oct 8, 2019
Points
44
Location
Cheshire
Model of Z
3
Oh deary, deary me. The only time sill covers might legitimately cause a fail, like any bodywork, is if a nasty sharp piece is sticking out and might hurt someone.
Well... funnily enough, the hole they have punched in the outer sill is quite sharp. It was just a rusted panel when I gave it to them.
 

NickUK

Dedicated Member
British Zeds
Joined
Oct 8, 2019
Points
44
Location
Cheshire
Model of Z
3
They may have been welded on in the life of the car, but, that in itself does not make them structural items. Contact your local MOT Inspector and complain. Where did this happen please?

Tony.
Hi Tony, it was in Ellesmere Port near Chester. I really appreciate you and others replying so quickly. Thank you. I will call the tester directly tomorrow and give them a chance to correct this before taking it further. If the latter has to happen, I may take action with the unnecessary damage caused as well because it has essentially left a hole I now have to sort out more urgently.
 

Peter1450

Zorg Legend
Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2018
Points
84
Location
Bristol
Model of Z
Z3 3.0
Coincidently I removed the passenger side outer sill this afternoon, the front edge just crumbled to not much but the "structural" inner body sill although rusty is just surface and will clean off with an abrasive 50mm disc very nicely before being treated with rust converter and then some paint.I think your MOT tester needs to give his head a wobble!
 

t-tony

Zorg Expert (II)
Supporter
British Zeds
#ZedShed
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Points
226
Location
Torksey Lock,Lincoln, England
Model of Z
E89 Z4 23i Auto
Hi Tony, it was in Ellesmere Port near Chester. I really appreciate you and others replying so quickly. Thank you. I will call the tester directly tomorrow and give them a chance to correct this before taking it further. If the latter has to happen, I may take action with the unnecessary damage caused as well because it has essentially left a hole I now have to sort out more urgently.
Even that would not be a reason to fail. It has be a projection (sticking out) to be a danger to others.

Tony.
 

jonco

Zorg Guru (IV)
Supporter
British Zeds
The M44 Massive
Joined
Dec 6, 2011
Points
159
Location
Chester
Model of Z
'98 1.9 Auto
Even that would not be a reason to fail. It has be a projection (sticking out) to be a danger to others.

Tony.
Tony - Could you remove sill covers and put it in for retest? No projections?
 

t-tony

Zorg Expert (II)
Supporter
British Zeds
#ZedShed
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Points
226
Location
Torksey Lock,Lincoln, England
Model of Z
E89 Z4 23i Auto
Tony - Could you remove sill covers and put it in for retest? No projections?
Yes, if the tester was "switched on" you could.

Tony.
 

petecossie

Zorg Guru (IV)
British Zeds
M Power
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Points
158
Location
Teesside
Model of Z
Z3 M Coupe
I drove my coupe down to paint shop with the sill covers in the back of the car so that I could get Waxoyl applied to to inner sill cavities and the inside of the new outer covers. The inner sills are about 3 to 4mm thick and are the real structural chassis members, it was just surface rust on my car which was easily removed with an abrasive wheel. Thought the rust behind the jacking pads was a bit more crusty, still plenty of sound metal left after the surface was cleaned up though.
Don't think the MOT tester might be old enough to know what the the chassis rails are on a Z3. :whistle:

.
1631222982248.jpeg


The sills definitely are bolted on - show him this pic below of new sills - about 7 bolts/screws along each edge it I recall

1631223986375.jpeg
 

t-tony

Zorg Expert (II)
Supporter
British Zeds
#ZedShed
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Points
226
Location
Torksey Lock,Lincoln, England
Model of Z
E89 Z4 23i Auto
The thing is, they need to be referred to as "Sill Covers" which all they are. Time the tester involved in this instance went on a refresher course, or found himself a new job.

Tony.
 

t-tony

Zorg Expert (II)
Supporter
British Zeds
#ZedShed
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Points
226
Location
Torksey Lock,Lincoln, England
Model of Z
E89 Z4 23i Auto
Have a read of this about "Bodywork" in the MOT test. Particularly section 6.2.1. Copied from the official MOT Inspection Manual of 20th. May 2018, updated in August 26th. 2021. Free to download or read here.





6. Body, structure and attachments
Structure and attachments (including exhaust system and bumpers), and body and interior (including doors and catches, seats and floor) rules and inspection for car and passenger vehicle MOT tests.

Hide all sections
6.1. Structure and attachments,Hidethis section
In this section
6.1.1. General condition
This sub-section covers the condition of the general structure but does not include prescribed areas. These are checked under sections 1 (brakes), 2 (steering), 5 (axles, wheels, tyres and suspension) and 7 (other equipment).
You can find guidance on assessing corrosion in Appendix A of this manual.
DefectCategory
(a) A main load-bearing structural member:

(i) fractured or deformed such that structural rigidity is significantly reduced
(ii) fractured or deformed such that steering or braking is likely to be adversely affected


Major
Dangerous
(b) Strengthening plates or fastenings:

(i) insecure
(ii) so insecure that structural rigidity is seriously reduced


Major
Dangerous
(c) Vehicle structure corroded to the extent that:

(i) the rigidity of the assembly is significantly reduced
(ii) steering or braking is likely to be adversely affected


Major
Dangerous
(d) A main load-bearing structural member modified or inadequately repaired such that:

(i) the rigidity of the assembly is significantly reduced
(ii) steering or braking is likely to be adversely affected


Major
Dangerous
6.1.2. Exhaust system
You must check the exhaust system of all vehicles with an internal combustion engine, including hybrid vehicles. You need to assess the overall security of the exhaust system. One or more missing or defective exhaust mountings does not necessarily make the exhaust insecure.
For exhaust noise assessment, see Section 8.1.1.
For assessment of catalytic converters and diesel particulate filters, see Section 8.2.
DefectCategory
(a) Exhaust system has a major leak or is insecureMajor
(b) Exhaust fumes:

(i) entering cabin
(ii) causing a danger to health of persons on board


Major
Dangerous
6.1.3. Fuel system
You must check the fuel system on all vehicles with internal combustion engines and hydrogen fuel cells.
You might need to open the luggage compartment to carry out a full inspection of the fuel system.
If a fuel tank has a hole or the filler neck is split and fuel can leak from it, you must fail it for leaking even if the hole or split is above the fuel line.
If you cannot get access to the fuel filler cap, see item 4g in the Introduction.
To check for leaks on gas powered vehicles, use a leak detection product conforming to the standard BS EN 14291-2004. You must follow the manufacturer’s instructions when using leak detection products.
Only fail a vehicle for missing heat shields if there’s a risk of fire with other fuel system components.
DefectCategory
(a) Fuel tank, pipe or hose:

(i) insecure
(ii) insecure such that there is a risk of fire


Major
Dangerous
(b) Fuel system:

(i) leaking, or missing or ineffective filler cap
(ii) leaking excessively or a risk of fire


Major
Dangerous
(c) Fuel pipe or hose:

(i) chafing
(ii) damaged


Minor
Major
(d) Not in use
(e) Fire risk due to fuel tank shield or exhaust shield missing where fitted as original equipmentDangerous
(f) Any part of an LPG/CNG/LNG or hydrogen system defectiveDangerous
6.1.4. Bumpers
DefectCategory
(a) Bumper:

(i) insecure or with damage likely to cause injury when grazed or contacted
(ii) likely to become detached


Major
Dangerous
6.1.5. Spare wheel carrier (if fitted)
This inspection is only for externally-mounted spare wheel carriers.
DefectCategory
(a) A spare wheel carrier fractured or insecureMajor
(b) A spare wheel:

(i) insecure in carrier
(ii) likely to become detached


Major
Dangerous
6.1.6. Coupling mechanisms and towing equipment
You must inspect all types of coupling mechanisms and towbars fitted to the rear of a vehicle, including fifth-wheel couplings.
You must also inspect the vehicle structure within 30cm of any towbar mounting point and assess its strength and continuity.
Towbar mounting points are not prescribed areas and the vehicle structure should only be rejected if its strength or continuity is significantly reduced.
You do not need to inspect emergency towing eyes.
You must remove tow ball covers to inspect the tow ball.
If coupling mechanisms are behind access panels in the bumper, bodywork or removable panel, you must remove them to inspect the coupling mechanism unless tools are needed to do this.
When checking coupling mechanisms, you may also need to check inside the luggage compartment and lift loose fitting mats or carpet.
You must test retractable towbars in their ‘in-use’ position. However, if you need tools to do this, you do not need to do it.
If a tow ball or pin is not fitted at the time of test - because it’s detachable, it’s been unbolted or otherwise removed - but the attachment brackets are still in place, the brackets should still be assessed unless they have been deliberately rendered unfit for further use.
There might be movement (‘play’) in some detachable tow balls between the receiver socket and the tapered swan neck fitting, with up to 3mm movement measured at the ball end.
You must reject:
  • pins, jaws or hooks that have worn by more than 25% of their original thickness
  • pin locating holes that have been worn or elongated by more than 25% of their original diameter
  • tow balls that are obviously excessively worn
Many ‘bolt-on’ type tow balls have accessory devices between the tow ball and its mounting flange. You should only reject these if their fitment is clearly likely to adversely affect the roadworthiness of the vehicle and its trailer.
DefectCategory
(a) A towbar component damaged, defective, fractured or corrodedMajor
(b) A towbar component:

(i) excessively worn
(ii) so worn it is likely to fail


Major
Dangerous
(c) A towbar attachment:

(i) defective or insecure
(ii) likely to become detached


Major
Dangerous
(d) A towbar safety device damaged or not operating correctlyMajor
(e) A towbar coupling indicator not workingMajor
(f) Towbar:

(i) obstructing the registration plate or any lamp
(ii) obstructing the registration plate so that it is unreadable


Minor
Major
(g) Unsafe modification:

(i) to towbar secondary components
(ii) to towbar primary components


Major
Dangerous
(h) Coupling too weakMajor
(i) The strength or continuity of the load bearing structure within 30cm of any towbar mounting bracket:

(i) is significantly reduced
(ii) is so weakened that the towbar is likely to become detached



Major
Dangerous
6.1.7. Transmission
You must inspect all:
  • prop shafts
  • drive shafts
  • prop shaft and drive shaft couplings and bearings
  • drive chains or belts
Class 3 vehicles do not need to be inspected for this.
DefectCategory
(a) A transmission shaft:

(i) securing bolts loose or missing
(ii) likely to become detached


Major
Dangerous
(b) A transmission shaft bearing:

(i) excessively worn
(ii) likely to break up


Major
Dangerous
(c) A transmission:

(i) joint, belt or chain excessively worn
(ii) so worn it is likely to fail


Major
Dangerous
(d) A transmission shaft flexible coupling:

(i) excessively deteriorated
(ii) so deteriorated it is likely to fail


Major
Dangerous
(e) A transmission shaft bent or badly damagedMajor
(f) A transmission shaft bearing housing:

(i) fractured or insecure
(ii) likely to fail


Major
Dangerous
(g) A transmission shaft constant velocity joint boot:

(i) severely deteriorated
(ii) missing, split or insecure so that it no longer prevents the ingress of dirt


Minor
Major



6.2.1. Body condition
This inspection is for all vehicles and includes:
  • all body panels
  • undertrays
  • spoilers
  • mirror housings
For inspecting bumpers, see Section 6.1.4.
A ‘body pillar’ applies only to the load carrying area of a goods vehicle.
An unsafe modification is one that is likely to cause injury.
DefectCategory
(a) A body panel or body component:

(i) damaged or corroded and likely to cause injury when grazed or contacted, or insecure
(ii) likely to become detached


Major
Dangerous
(b) A body pillar:

(i) insecure
(ii) so insecure that load stability or security likely to be seriously impaired


Major
Dangerous
(c) The passenger compartment in such a condition that:

(i) it permits the entry of exhaust fumes
(ii) exhaust fumes lead to a danger to health of persons on board


Major
Dangerous
(d) Body:

(i) has an unsafe modification
(ii) modification likely to adversely affect braking or steering


Major
Dangerous
(e) A bootlid, tailgate, dropside, loading door or access panel cannot be secured in the closed positionMajor
6.2.2. Cab and body mounting
You only need to inspect vehicles with a separate body and/or cab. Class 3 vehicles do not need to be inspected for cabs and cab mountings.
You should assess for corrosion within 30cm of the mountings of the body or cab and its chassis.
Cab/body mountings are not prescribed areas and you should only reject the body or cab if its overall security is significantly reduced.
:




Tony.
 

Woodsta888

Zorg Legend
British Zeds
Joined
Mar 18, 2012
Points
74
Location
Exmouth, Devon
Model of Z
2.0
Structural?

MOT money back - for incompetence.

If you pay going standard rate charge for an MOT- then you get someone 100% knows what's what. The amount of folk not in the know would just accept and be ripped off.

I'd show'em what others have said about cill covers, and demand an MOT pass and your money back for wasting your time.

Name and shame - get it round all the forums.

An advisory to argue, yes.

A fail? fk orff
 

NickUK

Dedicated Member
British Zeds
Joined
Oct 8, 2019
Points
44
Location
Cheshire
Model of Z
3
The issue I have with naming and shaming or getting any kind of refund yet is the person who I paid took the car elsewhere to have it tested. He's a little 'backstreet garage' who outsources MOTs. I initially discussed this problem with him when he got the car back but he was too busy to do the work we thought was needed.

I ended up going to a company who charge £78 an hour who also said the outer sills were welded on when I actually asked if they could be removed. Luckily, they let me down on Thursday morning which led to more research and back onto here.

That's three different businesses who thought the same thing although only one actually looked at the sills closely - the MOT tester. It's quite unbelievable really, hence I posted the exact text from my MOT fail on here. The only other issues were a driveshaft gaitor and some play in the front ball joins I think. In all my years of owning old(ish) cars, I have never had something like this happen.

I took my Ford Probe to ATS the other week because I just wanted a list of faults and not pay full price for it. That car really does need welding - a week's worth. I can't believe I'm saying this after having lack of trust in big brands but the young bloke at ATS actually seemed more knowledgable and genuinely interested in my car than any of the people above! The fail sheet was very reasonable & nothing they could fix really so clearly quite transparent. It was a worthwhile £25 spent to give me a guide on faults to sort.
 

mrscalex

Zorg Guru (IV)
Supporter
British Zeds
3rd Party Trader
Joined
Jun 10, 2016
Points
165
Location
Swindon & Swansea
@NickUK a bit of context for you as we're possibly starting to look like a lynch mob for the businesses involved here.

There's various pet subjects on here and MOT fails on sill covers are one of them. It's a fairly clued up bunch on here and we've also got a couple of current/ex MOT testers. So views are firm on this.

The technical advice you've been given is correct. But do your own thing with any follow-up action - no one is going to judge what you do or don't do there. It seems an obvious mistake to make to me. But then I'm always banging on about how ruthless the tester is at my garage. And for reasons that suit me I still go back there.
 

t-tony

Zorg Expert (II)
Supporter
British Zeds
#ZedShed
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Points
226
Location
Torksey Lock,Lincoln, England
Model of Z
E89 Z4 23i Auto
The idea works with the Probe only if you repair and take it back to ATS, and the same tester does the re test. Even then it is not impossible to find different faults, even some which may arise from the repairs.
Even IF the sill covers have been seam welded all the way round (doubtful) that does not mean that they are now structural items.
It merely means that “bodywork” has been welded on instead of being bolted on. Please contact your local vehicle Examiners Office. Do not do any repairs till they inspect it or they will not be interested in your problem.

Tony.

ps. The back street guy you originally took the car to is responsible for his out sourcing of any work on your car. Be it MOT, A/C regal or whatever.
 
Top