Is your claim on the basis that it shouldn't have passed but did?
Yes, never thought in my wildest dreams that i would report an MOT test that passed me 
As MOT's are pretty basic they may have been right to, i really dont know. But i would like it checked and retested just the same with that side of things investigated if they shouldn't have passed it.
Edit
Equally i want to know if the 1st test (in part) failed for non-failure items
More to the point, that the dealer advised there were defects which needed fixing to pass an MOT then passed it (maybe correctly) but with those items listed as defective not having been seen to but still charged for. It may not be in the remit of MOT investigation but is pretty dodgy.
Despite my earlier joke, I do wonder whether two work orders on two similar vans got muddled up. There is no sign of any new pipework on Cocky's van, yet he's been charged for 40 feet of it.
...making me feel hungry now 
Very good 
If that was true then the guy who did the mot should have picked up on it as he did both of them. Besides they had the van in for 4 days which makes such a mix up very unlikely.
Plus I spoke to the mechanic who worked on it at the start who assured me that nothing had been missed etc and that my soft brake pedal was a result of all the work done on the brakes etc.
i just struggle to comprehend how a main dealer could bill you for work that hasn't been done.But your photos are very convincing 
Allegedly hasn’t been done 
Has been done....to the dealer's pool van.