Failed NCT - Wiper Linkages

towel401

i still think they are the scum of the earth, and do various tests to catch people out and rake in more re-test fees and force people to buy unnecessary replacement parts. if it was just a few basic things i wouldnt mind but there is no need for the carry on they do now.

L1011

towel401 wrote: »

i still think they are the scum of the earth, and do various tests to catch people out and rake in more re-test fees and force people to buy unnecessary replacement parts. if it was just a few basic things i wouldnt mind but there is no need for the carry on they do now.

The test is defined by the state. SGS only carry out what they're told to.

ejmaztec

What's the situation with small vans, the car-derived variety? Do they slip through the net as regards NCTs?

towel401

MYOB wrote: »

The test is defined by the state. SGS only carry out what they're told to.

i'm sure at least some SGS guys sat around a big table with some fianna fail henchmen before defining the test.

and if they only decided to test the 2 required items the FF bigshots would get given out to by their 'european neighbours' for not following the 'spirit' of the mandatory car testing. they would be seen as slackers in europe and unfortunately this would actually bother them. Its just all about sucking up to Europe.

Tropheus

bbam wrote: »

The NCT is a con...
Leave €50 in the front of the car and it'll pass int inspections...

Urban legend.:rolleyes:

L1011

towel401 wrote: »

i'm sure at least some SGS guys sat around a big table with some fianna fail henchmen before defining the test.

and if they only decided to test the 2 required items the FF bigshots would get given out to by their 'european neighbours' for not following the 'spirit' of the mandatory car testing. they would be seen as slackers in europe and unfortunately this would actually bother them. Its just all about sucking up to Europe.

It was defined before the contract went to tender. SGS tendered for a contract to perform an already defined test.

Why do we have a problem in this country of people being obsessed with finding a conspiracy in things?

towel401

MYOB wrote: »

It was defined before the contract went to tender. SGS tendered for a contract to perform an already defined test.

Why do we have a problem in this country of people being obsessed with finding a conspiracy in things?

that doesn't matter. they could still have sat at the round table before any contract was signed. Making people buy replacement indicators because the old ones are faded seems like a reasonable strategy to 'increase the economic benefits' of the test, especially since theres a few factories around in ireland making such menial parts that nobody would replace on their own

L1011

...as I said, searching for a conspiracy.

The contract went to open tender. I have no idea how many groups applied for it, but *any* of them could have won. The test was defined by civil servants, not politicians.

Theres no conspiracy here. You're like an old dog worrying over a bone or something...

Faded indicators are dangerous as you can't tell precisely what they are - turn signals are required to be orange in Ireland and a faded housing means they're not orange. You're required to have orange turn signals on the MOT in the UK and I'd predict on every other car testing system, and new car standards system even in all of Europe.

towel401

MYOB wrote: »

...as I said, searching for a conspiracy.

The contract went to open tender. I have no idea how many groups applied for it, but *any* of them could have won. The test was defined by civil servants, not politicians.

Theres no conspiracy here. You're like an old dog worrying over a bone or something...

Faded indicators are dangerous as you can't tell precisely what they are - turn signals are required to be orange in Ireland and a faded housing means they're not orange. You're required to have orange turn signals on the MOT in the UK and I'd predict on every other car testing system, and new car standards system even in all of Europe.

civil servants who hang with the car-testing industry maybe. there is no way in hell they would just randomly sit down and define a test without any 'outside' assistance. calling me a freaking old dawg isn't going to do you any good and can you even remember the last time someone confused a pair of slightly faded orange flashing lights with a pair of headlights?

it just doesnt happen. just like both wipers flying off at the same time while overtaking doesnt happen. these are nothing more than hypothetical disaster scenarios thought up to peddle an agenda. the heater in my car makes a loud squeaking noise while the fan runs. maybe they should fail me for that too incase the squeaking distracts me. and scratches on the paintwork should be outlawed too in case a tailgater crashes into someone while wondering how the car infront of them got scratched.

Guy:Incognito

towel401 wrote: »

it just doesnt happen. just like both wipers flying off at the same time while overtaking doesnt happen. these are nothing more than hypothetical disaster scenarios thought up to peddle an agenda. the heater in my car makes a loud squeaking noise while the fan runs. maybe they should fail me for that too incase the squeaking distracts me. and scratches on the paintwork should be outlawed too in case a tailgater crashes into someone while wondering how the car infront of them got scratched.

Is the MOT and other European tests also a scam set up by corrupt politicians in bed with companys or just ours?

towel401

Stekelly wrote: »

Is the MOT and other European tests also scams set up by corrupt politicians in bed with companys or just ours?

the other european ones like the MOT are slightly less strict. not sure why, maybe because the nct is a *new* test and they want to overdo it better than anyone else. or else its just that ireland has a huge safety/claim culture thing going on. unlike soviet russia for example where until recently they just didn't care.

Guy:Incognito

towel401 wrote: »

the other european ones like the MOT are slightly less strict. not sure why, maybe because the nct is a *new* test and they want to overdo it better than anyone else. or else its just that ireland has a huge safety/claim culture thing going on. unlike soviet russia for example where until recently they just didn't care.

What has strictness got to do with my question?

Is your whole rant and corruption allegations based around the fact that it is strict? If the leaving cert is more difficult than the A levels does that mean they are corrupt tests set up by corrupt businessmen around a tabel with government officials?

towel401

because testing [and forcing people to replace] small parts like wiper linkages appears to have more to do with 'economic benefits' than safety. there are lots of things like this on the list

the leaving cert is organised by the state itself and isnt outsourced to some other company that makes money from re-tests. or spare parts that will get you through the exam

it isn't so much a conspiracy as it is a scam, since you are likely to get away with driving without NCT for a good while. just helps to extract money from 'honest' people.

Guy:Incognito

towel401 wrote: »

because testing [and forcing people to replace] small parts like wiper linkages appears to have more to do with 'economic benefits' than safety. there are lots of things like this on the list

the leaving cert is organised by the state itself and isnt outsourced to some other company that makes money from re-tests. or spare parts that will get you through the exam

it isn't so much a conspiracy as it is a scam, since you are likely to get away with driving without NCT for a good while. just helps to extract money from 'honest' people.

I think your getting mixed up here, what NCT centre sells you spare parts (and fixes it?) . The MOT on the other hand is done at regular garages and can fix the problems there and then for you . Conflict of interets anyone.

Is the wiper linkage just a viaual recheck or a full retest? because if its a visual , then your whole arguement just disintegrated.

How is the ability to get away with driving the car without an nct part of the scam. Surely theres more money to be made by getting people in on time to fail them and get there retest fees? Plus why have they not made it a yearly test like the MOT to double revenue if thats all it's about?

Anan1

towel401 wrote: »

because testing [and forcing people to replace] small parts like wiper linkages appears to have more to do with 'economic benefits' than safety.

Sorry, but is this a joke? Surely you are not honestly trying to tell us that you can not see the safety implications of worn wiper linkages?

Guy:Incognito

Anan1 wrote: »

Sorry, but is this a joke? Surely you are not honestly trying to tell us that you can not see the safety implications of worn wiper linkages?

Course it isnt. Sure the nct centre will pass you for the €50 and then you can open your window and use a mop in heavy rainfall.

towel401

Anan1 wrote: »

Sorry, but is this a joke? Surely you are not honestly trying to tell us that you can not see the safety implications of worn wiper linkages?

nope. there aren't any, unless someone here wants to come up with another unlikely scenario where an innocent by passer gets killed by a wiper that fell off.

Guy:Incognito

towel401 wrote: »

nope. there aren't any, unless someone here wants to come up with another unlikely scenario where an innocent by passer gets killed by a wiper that fell off.

seriously? How about the innocent bystander (not to mention the people in the car) that gets killed by the driver who cant see out because of broken wipers during rain?


I see we skipped over my post about the MOT being more open to scamming btw. Plus can anyone confirm the wiper linkage is a full retest and not just a visual?

towel401

Stekelly wrote: »

seriously? How about the innocent bystander (not to mention the people in the car) that gets killed by the driver who cant see out because of broken wipers during rain?

when was the last time that happed? its still highly unlikely. less the fool decides to drive on with no wipers.

Guy:Incognito

towel401 wrote: »

when was the last time that happed? its still highly unlikely. less the fool decides to drive on with no wipers.

I dont know, how many people are going to admit they crashed because they didnt get their broken wipers fixed? Or maybe the NCT is making sure people arent driving around with faulty wipers.

there are plenty of fools btw. I was behing a 96 Sprinter van today with no rear lights working. All bar one of the lenses were smashed and most had no sign of a bulb in them, let alone broken ones. I'd say it's safe to assuem that van hadnt seen a recent Doe, or at the very least it's failed one, but the driver hasnt bothered even getting himself some brake lights.


Still no answer on the MOT comparison?

BostonB

The MOT has its own problems. Personally I find the NCT pretty random. Once someone I know had a car with 4 bald tyres tested only to fail only on a non working rear light bulb. Went around the corner flicked the blub, which came on, and then passed the retest. They (NCT) argued 2nd time about the tyres but they can't fail you on something they missed the first time.

That was when it started. I've had no hassle with it since then, I can remember. I don't think it adds much to safety tbh. You still see cars with bald tyres, no lights etc. Any stats on how many % accidents were caused by NCT failure items pre the NCT. I doubt it. They should have the results online, and also the mileage. It would cut down on clocking.

Seth Brundle

bbam wrote: »

This is not the only way...
Lots of small garages will "guarentee" an NCT, how ??. They are "friendly" with the lads in the centre...

Please don't quote safety... I truely beleive the % of cars made genuinely safer by the NCT is slim to none...

Also if you look at the deaths on the road... SPEED, Drink & Drugs kill people, not wiper mechanisms, faded indicators, county on number plate, rust, door closing mechanisms, cracked lenses, cracked glass, headlight alignment and all the other crap they use to rip us off..

Its a CON

I distinctly recall rusty cars barely held together being quite common. These are gone now thankfully. The NCT was brought in to help bring in basic levels which did not exist. It was not brought in to solve the drunk driving issue, etc. In fairness, IIRC cars were allegedly responsible for something like 2% of incidents but this figure could not easily be calculated in those days IMO.

ClioV6 wrote: »

Of course it's a con.

Why do we have to pay for something required by law anyway?

How is enforcing a basic standard a con?
As for questioning paying for something required by law, do you question paying for insurance, motor tax, your driving test and licence, etc.?

L1011

Lads, look at towel401's other posts on this forum - he's a troll. Best to ignore now.

Slidey

BostonB wrote: »

The MOT has its own problems. Personally I find the NCT pretty random. Once someone I know had a car with 4 bald tyres tested only to fail only on a non working rear light bulb. Went around the corner flicked the blub, which came on, and then passed the retest. They (NCT) argued 2nd time about the tyres but they can't fail you on something they missed the first time.
.

I work in a DOE test station and had a gut come back for a re test in a caddy van. He had failed previously on rear brake imbalance and the rear wheel bearings to be adjusted.
Torrential rain on the day he came in and his wipers weren't working.
Neither were his back brakes fixed or his wheel bearings adjusted so he left after paying his fee with a bigger list then what he came in with.

A has already been mentioned the washers and wipers are one of the first things that are checked as you drive in the door.
The reason linkages or spindles are failed is that, when driving at high speeds/high winds if these parts are worn the wiper can can go off the edge of the screen and jam on the pillar so no wipers..

For those moaning about the cost of the nct, the doe for a small van is 85.00 and the retest half of that.
The linkages should not incur a retest fee

Anan1

Worse, I think he's genuine.;)

maidhc

bbam wrote: »

Also if you look at the deaths on the road... SPEED, Drink & Drugs kill people, not wiper mechanisms, faded indicators, county on number plate, rust, door closing mechanisms, cracked lenses, cracked glass, headlight alignment and all the other crap they use to rip us off..

If my car had inefficient wipers, non functioning indicators, a rusty subframe and blinding headlamps I think it woul be quite dangerous.

I'm very much in favour of the NCT, especially as it forces the terminally careless to look after their cars.

towel401

MYOB wrote: »

Lads, look at towel401's other posts on this forum - he's a troll. Best to ignore now.

lol, just because I don't share your enthusiasm for extreme safety measures to prevent highly unlikely accidents doesn't mean i'm a troll. The NCT is part of a far greater 'safety culture' ingrained in irish society largely due to insurance and public liability.

If one person gets killed due to a broken wiper they will try to ensure that particular type of accident will never happen again as a knee-jerk reaction they will have to annoy the rest of us with more checks in the NCT and force the replacement of wipers that would otherwise have a good few more months of life left in them.

@OP who ever was pushing down hard on the wipers probably did a good bit more damage to them. A few years ago we had a old peugeot 305 that left the NCT in a somwaht worse condition than when it went in - just shows the NCT are out there to try and damage cars and force people to buy unnecessary replacements.

Guy:Incognito

towel401 wrote: »

lol, just because I don't share your enthusiasm for extreme safety measures to prevent highly unlikely accidents doesn't mean i'm a troll. The NCT is part of a far greater 'safety culture' ingrained in irish society largely due to insurance and public liability.

.

You also pick and choose the sections of posts you want to reply to in case the other parts dent your arguement.


Hasnt been an answer yet and I'm genuinely interested but is the wiper linage a visual recheck?

towel401 wrote: »

just shows the NCT are out there to try and damage cars and force people to buy unnecessary replacements.

How does that benifit them? (the nct?)

peasant

towel401 wrote: »

...just shows the NCT are out there to try and damage cars and force people to buy unnecessary replacements.

If the NCT manage to damage something on a car within their half hour test, then that component certainly wasn't roadworthy anymore ...simple as.

It's not like the NCT carry out their tests with a sledge hammer and an angle grinder, now is it?

BostonB

slideways wrote: »

I...so he left after paying his fee with a bigger list then what he came in with.....

Can you add new items for test on a restest. Thats been my experience.