Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
NCT annually for cars 10yrs+
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
10 years is reasonable enough. A lot of people with cars over 10 years don't care as long as it gets them from point a - b. Now a yearly check will at least make them check tyres, brakes etc. The basics of a car.
Anyone who looks after their car should have no problem passing the NCT, this will weed out the people who don't look after their cars.
30 Year+ cars don't require an NCT but most owners of a 30 year+ car look after them and only have them because they want to have an old antique car which they can work on and be proud of.
couple of things there:
1. The 10yr requirement was a money-earning sweetener to get more competitive tenders in, for the new 10yr NCT bid. The Spaniards won, the Swiss lost. €400million will do that to a person.
2. 10yr requirement in principle I don't have an issue with, but if I have to do it twice as often, then it should be half the price. If it's the exact same test, than either younger cars need to be charged more, or we need a different test - NCT-Lite, anyone ?
3. My cars are: 4, 17, 16, 20. All are well maintained. I'm not waiting 'til they're 30 before I start, and I know mine are good. To arbitrarily decide new 'car good, old car bad', is not unlike '4 legs good, 2 legs bad'...with apologies to George Orwell....Ode To The Motorist
“And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, generates funds to the exchequer. You don't want to acknowledge that as truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at the Green Party, you want me on that road, you need me on that road. We use words like freedom, enjoyment, sport and community. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent instilling those values in our families and loved ones. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the tax revenue and the very freedom to spend it that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a bus pass and get the ********* ********* off the road”
0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
metzengerstein wrote: »What the government and the RSA mean to say is that an older car is more likely to kill you that a new one. And unless they intend retrofitting ABS and airbags in the NCT centre, a yellow piece of paper twice as often as required now won't help
makes lots of sense seen how newer cars are made with less efficiancy as older cars ,look at the toyota recall ,and most new cars just keep having problems ..so a big **** *** to mr dempsey .ive 94 never broke down once never been in a collision where do they get these ridiculous stats
I'm presuming they are going to test Toyotas every Month seeing as they have brought in so many 21 year olds from Harvard, Yale and Oxford to so wondrously streamline their processes, save a huge, shítpile-high mountain of pennies and subsequently kill a great many People and recall a billion vehicles....
W@nkers.
P.S. Sorry, would love to stay and chat but can't stop - Am in a Toyota.0 -
A lot of people have made that argument, and it doesn't make sense to me.I'm against it because its just a money maker, like its been said make it a half price test and then we may believe its about honest reasons
In 2006, the company that runs the nct made a €6 million profit on €33 million turnover. That means that the NCT costs about as much as it costs. Halving the price of tests would force the scheme to run at a loss, so the taxpayer would have to pitch in to fund it. Asking drivers of new cars (or non drivers) to help fund the testing of your car hardly seems fair.
More importantly, the government doesn't make any money from the NCT. The only way it profits from this is move is when the NCT takes an economically irreparable car off the road a year earlier (fine by me!), and the driver replaces it with a new car. Edit: OR when the driver pays VAT on parts/servicing needed to pass the nct (definately fine by me
) 0 -
daveharnett wrote: »A lot of people have made that argument, and it doesn't make sense to me.
In 2006, the company that runs the nct made a €6 million profit on €33 million turnover. That means that the NCT costs about as much as it costs. Halving the price of tests would force the scheme to run at a loss, so the taxpayer would have to pitch in to fund it. Asking drivers of new cars (or non drivers) to help fund the testing of your car hardly seems fair.
More importantly, the government doesn't make any money from the NCT. The only way it profits from this is move is when the NCT takes an economically irreparable car off the road a year earlier (fine by me!), and the driver replaces it with a new car. Edit: OR when the driver pays VAT on parts/servicing needed to pass the nct (definately fine by me)
I think thats answered it, the aim behind the move is too increase the profit margin made by the NCT and to encourage people to scrap 10year old cars by making them more hassle than they're worth.
This will also have the benenfit to the auto retailers of creating a floor price in the second hand market as it will create an artificial high for 8 year old cars and younger.
All comes back to the unfair tax in an open economy that is VRT, where like the housing bubble the government profits from distorting the market.
FF bowing to the wishes of the auto retail outlets0 -
-
-
daveharnett wrote: »A lot of people have made that argument, and it doesn't make sense to me.
In 2006, the company that runs the nct made a €6 million profit on €33 million turnover. That means that the NCT costs about as much as it costs. Halving the price of tests would force the scheme to run at a loss, so the taxpayer would have to pitch in to fund it. Asking drivers of new cars (or non drivers) to help fund the testing of your car hardly seems fair.
More importantly, the government doesn't make any money from the NCT. The only way it profits from this is move is when the NCT takes an economically irreparable car off the road a year earlier (fine by me!), and the driver replaces it with a new car. Edit: OR when the driver pays VAT on parts/servicing needed to pass the nct (definately fine by me)
The Government makes massive money from the NCT tests. You pay Vat on every test. The Govt gets that.
There is no valid reason for cars over ten years that have taken and passed an NCT test, to have to retake it 12 months later. It is not justifiable.
Please someone say why a 10 yr old car needs to be tested every 12 months, but somehow it will magically save lives if a 9 yr old car isnt.
People who agree with testing a 10 year old car (that HAS passed) more often, are not thinking logically, and nor will they until their car is 10 years old.
Additionally scrapping cars creats more pollution than making newer "greener" ones.0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
Advertisement