NCT failure - laughable.

cianclarke

Well, needless to say I've failed my NCT.
First thing - cracked headlight, fair enough I guess. I'm pretty sure it didn't effect the alignment, but they didn't even test this once they saw the crack it was just a fail.

Second - steering linkage - inner tie rod end - worn on the nearside front left... Anybody have any idea what this is, how much will it cost to get fixed (98 Hyundai accent).

Third thing - here is where it starts to get amusing. The jokes about the indicators not being amber enough? Well, mine have a little condensation inside the lenses. Maybe they aren't amber enough because of this... :rolleyes: (They're perfectly amber, I checked...)

Fourth - bodywork, bumper damaged/broken. The bumper sticks out an inch extra on one side to the other (passenger side) because of probably a shabby repair by the previous owner. It's the sort of thing you'd have to look for to actually notice... Hardly putting anybody's life at risk.

Fifth - "bodywork - sharp edges". Know where the blanks are for front fog lights? Well, one of them is cracked, and there are (not particularly) sharp bits of plastic, which dont even stick out a whole pile. Clearly endangering some poor flies life...? No, not seeing this one. Ridiculous... I'm thinking I might just buy a set of front fogs, or maybe just file away the edges so that they're blunt as could be and hope for the best.

Sixth - here is my favourite... Service brake pedal, pad/rubber - worn. Now, am I right in assuming that they mean the rubber on the break pedal in the car is a bit worn? It's not something I've ever noticed even when cleaning the things, and the brakes function fine - my feet don't slip from the pedal, anything.

I'd laugh, only it means I have to fork out a load of dosh to get some trivial petty non-faults fixed for these tyrants at the NCT. Can anybody justify faults 3-6, and why my car is unsafe for road useage because of these?
Finally, the NCT centre was waterford - and it was my mother who brought the car down for me (registered owner), and apparently she was treated very poorly by a grumpy and ignorant eastern european worker.
(For the sake of racial balance, the other person working there was also distinctly foreign, and apparently extremely friendly).

What a load of crap, ehy...

ST*

Didn't you get a pre-test? it really does depend on who you get tbh

cianclarke

Nah, I figured there'd be plenty wrong so I just pay them the fifty to tell me what... Didn't quite work that way though, did it... I mean engine was fine (emmissions etc)... I just checked the worn brake pedal - it wasn't worn, just you could see the metal of the pedal in one slit... Ridiculous, nothing short of it.
Anyway, I'll just get fixed what needs to be fixed I figure... Still have to pay for a retest, I presume it'l have to go up on the ramp for something like this "steering linkage" bit - anybody know what this is?

maidhc

In fairness they were going to fail you anyway, so I suppose you cant complain about having a few other things pointed out to you.

To be the devils advocate:
3 - Condensation means water which means a leak. The reflective paint on the inside of the indicators do not like water and will lead to a reduction in the light emitted

4 - It might fly off at 120kph

5 - Cant visualise to be honest, but it sounds like something that should be fixed!

6 - In hard braking it might tear and your foot would slip off.

fletch

[
Sixth - here is my favourite... Service brake pedal, pad/rubber - worn. Now, am I right in assuming that they mean the rubber on the break pedal in the car is a bit worn? It's not something I've ever noticed even when cleaning the things, and the brakes function fine - my feet don't slip from the pedal, anything.

That seems crazy considering the accelerator pedal on Seicentos don't even come with rubber on them as standard!

Litcagral

cianclarke wrote:

I'd laugh, only it means I have to fork out a load of dosh to get some trivial petty non-faults fixed for these tyrants at the NCT.
QUOTE]



No one is forcing you to drive a car. If you are not happy complying with the regulations that pertain to the rest of us, why not give up driving altogether and buy a bicycle. The NCT are obliged to carry out these tests and generally do it in a fair and impartial manner. If you have a problem with the NCT you should lobby your public representatives and the Minister for Transport instead of abusing the NCT in a very immature manner for doing their job correctly. Did you seriously expect your car to pass with the faults listed above?

greglo23

fletch wrote:

That seems crazy considering the accelerator pedal on Seicentos don't even come with rubber on them as standard!

a lot of cars have no rubber on the accelerator but its not a problem . if your foot slips off the brake pedal its a different story.

kadman

Maybe there should be a sticky about the most outrageous NCT failure faults.

My 1995 Tempra passed everything, but failed because the Irish county on the front number plate was faded. True.

My wifes car passed everything, but failed on a worn rubber gasket ( alleged ) inside the petrol cap. Yet it was not leaking petrol, and did not emit fumes from the tank.

kadman:)

Litcagral

kadman wrote:

Maybe there should be a sticky about the most outrageous NCT failure faults.

My 1995 Tempra passed everything, but failed because the Irish county on the front number plate was faded. True.
QUOTE]



There are no such thing as "outrageous" faults. They requirements are all clearly laid out in the NCT manual. Your registration plate obviously failed the requirement. Did you realistically expect the tester to ignore his statutory obligations?

http://www.ncts.ie/nctmanual.pdf

fletch

greglo23 wrote:

a lot of cars have no rubber on the accelerator but its not a problem . if your foot slips off the brake pedal its a different story.

lol yeh I suppose....never thought of that!

JohnCleary

cianclarke wrote:

Second - steering linkage - inner tie rod end - worn on the nearside front left... Anybody have any idea what this is, how much will it cost to get fixed (98 Hyundai accent).

Track rod end? If so, about 30 quid for it. Its a simple device to fix, just take off the wheel, unscrew the old track rod end, screw new one back on. The only thing is you'll need to get the tracking done again. I had my NCT the next day after I replaced mine and couldnt get it done anywhere so I messed about with it myself, and it passed!

Gatster

There are no such thing as "outrageous" faults. They requirements are all clearly laid out in the NCT manual. Your registration plate obviously failed the requirement. Did you realistically expect the tester to ignore his statutory obligations?

Do you work for the NCT people, everytime I've been it all seems very hit and miss? My mates wifes car passed (absolutely wrecked Uno with mismatched wheels [front offside is warped]) and the glass sunroof panel is held in with duct tape.

Litcagral

Gatster wrote:

Do you work for the NCT people, everytime I've been it all seems very hit and miss? My mates wifes car passed (absolutely wrecked Uno with mismatched wheels [front offside is warped]) and the glass sunroof panel is held in with duct tape.

No certainly not - my car failed last week.

cianclarke

Litcagral wrote:

cianclarke wrote:

I'd laugh, only it means I have to fork out a load of dosh to get some trivial petty non-faults fixed for these tyrants at the NCT.
QUOTE]



No one is forcing you to drive a car. If you are not happy complying with the regulations that pertain to the rest of us, why not give up driving altogether and buy a bicycle. The NCT are obliged to carry out these tests and generally do it in a fair and impartial manner. If you have a problem with the NCT you should lobby your public representatives and the Minister for Transport instead of abusing the NCT in a very immature manner for doing their job correctly. Did you seriously expect your car to pass with the faults listed above?

I'll reiterate - I wasn't actually expecting to pass. How is this manner immature? I'm asking other peoples opinion as to why that "worn rubber on a break pedal" and the likes are infact valid faults...? Where the tear is, there is no risk of the ruber on the brake pedal falling off, although yes - it is reasonable to fail it considering it says so in the manual.
I'm not questioning the integrity of the testers (the manners yes) - I'm questioning the ridiculous detail of the test.
And, I'm also enquiring as to how much it will cost me to fix these faults, which brings me to...

JohnCleary wrote:

Track rod end? If so, about 30 quid for it. Its a simple device to fix, just take off the wheel, unscrew the old track rod end, screw new one back on. The only thing is you'll need to get the tracking done again. I had my NCT the next day after I replaced mine and couldnt get it done anywhere so I messed about with it myself, and it passed!

Thanks John, doesn't sound so bad! I'll probably just get the tracking done professionally unless I can figure a way of accuratly doing it myself with the accent.

Thanks again for the replies.

Litcagral

cianclarke wrote:

I have to fork out a load of dosh to get some trivial petty non-faults fixed for these tyrants at the NCT. QUOTE]


After stating the above you now claim that you are not questioning "the integrity of the testers" ?

murphaph

The NCT is pretty straightforward, they don't even do you for minor oil seeps and so forth (automatic fail in some countries). They tell you what they're gonna test. I have a 96 Megane to go in now and although I'm confident it's a basically sound car but won't be surprised if it fails for a couple of minors. I'll just fix whatever's wrong and retest it. If you can't afford to get a car through the NCT you can't afford a car. Sorry, but it's as simple as that.

The 'small' things you were failed on will have no bearing on the retest cost cos the tie rod end re-inspection means the car has to go up on the lift-full retest cost just for that.

Kinetic^

One of the points on my NCT failure a few years back was that the indicators on the side of the car, near the door, the bulbs were white instead of yellow - what an absolute w**k*r :mad:

AMurphy

cianclarke wrote:

Litcagral wrote:

....... although yes - it is reasonable to fail it considering it says so in the manual.
I'm not questioning the integrity of the testers (the manners yes) - I'm questioning the ridiculous detail of the test.
....
Thanks again for the replies.

Based on some of the items I read here and elsewhere, some of these testers would fail you for having dust in the ashtray.

I wouldn't like to show up with some of things I have driven successfully for years.
eg, engine bay moved across about 2" after a side impact on the front. Incidentally, even with the chassis bent over, I was able to align it so I could break in a straight line, hands off the wheel, and it did not wear the tyres to one side or another....Aligned it with a pair of planks and a level.
Ignition wires no longer going to the key (as they melted) but routed to a light switch and a door bell (push button start, way ahead of my time).
Bath-tub silicon sealing a stone hole in the headlight, a whole lot of that plastic junk never replaced after replacing the gear stick and linkages and the ECU lying on the floor under the passengers feet, replaced it, but too difficult to get back up under the dash.

Anyway, I'd fix the tie rod bit, part of the steering rack, could be expensive to replace.
As for the rubbers, switch the brake and clutch or rotate them around, just to change the view.

"Not amber enough" a bit vague to say the least, is there a specificaton for the amber required, to which they can refer you.
Some lens get washed our, so are made that way. ie, I've noticed in EU cars with read fog lights sold here, (VW and Audi mainly), and as often as not the clown driving the car does not know they are on. However, the color of the brake and the fog tend to be different shades of red, even though the bulbs are of the same specification. ie 21W
And turn a hairdrier on them to dry them out in advance. Maybe a film of clear silicone caulking about the seam might help also.

Re the broken plastic bit falling off at 120km/h, sure, but there are a lot more incidents of bales of hay, rocks, liquid slurry, grass, grain, cement and wheels falling off vehicles and more lethal than a bit of a plastic bumper.

I tend to agree with you that some of the stuff they bring up is carp and nothing to do with roadworthiness.

Litcagral

Keyser Soze 69 wrote:

One of the points on my NCT failure a few years back was that the indicators on the side of the car, near the door, the bulbs were white instead of yellow - what an absolute w**k*r :mad:

I can't understand your apparent annoyance! It's an obvious failure item. Indicator lights are supposed to be orange (either orange bulb or orange lens) as front lights should be clear and rear lights red. Did you think that the regulations for you should be different from those applicable to everyone else? You seem to be implying that the tester was a "w**k*r" for doing his job. If so, why don't you give up motoring altogether.

Matt Simis

Litcagral wrote:

I can't understand your apparent annoyance! It's an obvious failure item. Indicator lights are supposed to be orange (either orange bulb or orange lens) as front lights should be clear and rear lights red. Did you think that the regulations for you should be different from those applicable to everyone else? You seem to be implying that the tester was a "w**k*r" for doing his job. If so, why don't you give up motoring altogether.

Im considering changing the Front indicators for a chrome coloured bulb that flashes amber (just looks chrome when off). Do you think that will be ok?


Matt

murphaph

Matt Simis wrote:

Im considering changing the Front indicators for a chrome coloured bulb that flashes amber (just looks chrome when off). Do you think that will be ok?

Yep. It's no different than a clear lens that flashes amber. The light emitted must be amber, bot the lens.

TempestSabre

Shock_treatment wrote:

Didn't you get a pre-test? it really does depend on who you get tbh

Pre-tests are a complete waste of time and money.

Litcagral

TempestSabre wrote:

Pre-tests are a complete waste of time and money.

I agree with you TempestSabre that pre tests are a waste of money but I can't understand why people put their car through the NCT with basic faults like cracked lights and blown bulbs, bald tyres etc. when they know that these will mean automatic failure. Even someone with no mechanical knowledge should be able to check basic external items like these prior to the test.

TempestSabre

True. People are just lazy, its that simple.

johnplayerblue

The NCT and the Theroy test are a waste of time and money, period.
29 DEAD and its only the 24th of the 1st. Litcagral should catch on to himself and stop makeing a fool of himself, He sounds like a ****ing civil servant.

maidhc

johnplayerblue wrote:

The NCT and the Theroy test are a waste of time and money, period.
29 DEAD and its only the 24 of the first. Litcagral should catch on to himself and stop makeing a fool of himself, He sounds like a ****ing civil servant.

?

Your solution is?

johnplayerblue

Hit people where it really hurts with BIG BIG fines, Enforce the laws of the land, send people to jail and take there cars away. There was a case a month or so ago in sligo or there abouts where a drunk driver killed two people and was fined €1000. Now you tell me what kind of a signal that sends out to the thousands of drivers that are going to park there cars in the pub carpark tonight and every night of the week, are the guards blind or do these cars have invisable powers 80% of these drivers are drinking 45% of road deaths are put down to drink driving. The county name not been visable on a reg plate my arse, send these killers to jail for life and see what kind of a signal that sends out.............

Litcagral

johnplayerblue wrote:

The NCT and the Theroy test are a waste of time and money,QUOTE]

johnplayerblue wrote:

Enforce the laws of the land, QUOTE]


A bit of a contradiction johnplayerblue???? The NCT and the Theory Test are the "laws of the land" too. Perhaps you think that only the legislation that you agree with should be enforced????? An "a la carte" system of law enforcement.

johnplayerblue

A bit of a contradiction johnplayerblue???? The NCT and the Theory Test are the "laws of the land" too. Perhaps you think that only the legislation that you agree with should be enforced????? An "a la carte" system of law enforcement. [/QUOTE]

A different verison of the "a la carte" system that lets 400+ a year die on the roads might be better than whats in place at the moment.
Can it be proven that the millions that are spent on theory and nct tests every month are helping save lives? If i'm not mistaken the numbers have gone and are going up......

maidhc

johnplayerblue wrote:

A different verison of the "a la carte" system that lets 400+ a year die on the roads might be better than whats in place at the moment.
Can it be proven that the millions that are spent on theory and nct tests every month are helping save lives? If i'm not mistaken the numbers have gone and are going up......

How do you know they wouldnt be higher without the NCT and Theory test? The number of cars on the road has also gone up and up. I really dont think you can put down all these accidents to drink driving; you have fatigue, drugs, and perhaps the biggest killer: stupidity (which I think encompasses those who try to take bad bends at 70mph). You cannot legislate for these things, the best you can do is provide education, and the theory test is a (totally inadequte) step in this direction.

Seth Brundle

Litcagral wrote:

There are no such thing as "outrageous" faults. They requirements are all clearly laid out in the NCT manual. Your registration plate obviously failed the requirement. Did you realistically expect the tester to ignore his statutory obligations?

http://www.ncts.ie/nctmanual.pdf

I would disagree. See Unfair NCT failures

Litcagral wrote:

I can't understand your apparent annoyance! It's an obvious failure item. Indicator lights are supposed to be orange (either orange bulb or orange lens) as front lights should be clear and rear lights red. Did you think that the regulations for you should be different from those applicable to everyone else? You seem to be implying that the tester was a "w**k*r" for doing his job. If so, why don't you give up motoring altogether.

They are meant to be amber, not orange!
How amber is amber? Where do you draw the line between amber not not quite amber?