DoE testing - The Court has spoken

niloc1951

At a sitting of the Limerick District Court today (24/03/2011) following a successful defence submission on behalf of the owner of a 'motor caravan', that ‘motor caravans’ were not included in the list of vehicles to which the regulations below apply, Judge Tom O’Donnell ordered that the charge against the defendant be ‘struck out’.

The accusation which had been brought by Garda Brian P O’Dwyer and prosecuted by the D.P.P. against the defendant alleged that he:-

On the 27/06/2010 …….., being the owner of a vehicle to which the European Communities (Vehicle Testing) Regulations, 2004 applies, to whit Motor Vehicle registration number xxxxx …………..did fail to produce a certificate of roadworthiness………………….contrary to Article 20 and 22 of the European Communities (Vehicle Testing) Regulations, 2004.

killalanerr

hold you so !!

Des32

Thats very good. Bet his solicitor cost more than a Doe test.
Got mine tested last week.

zoltar_boi

Des,

Going for my test on Saturday - do you have any tips?

Should I fill the water tanks / grey waste.
Do they need to get at the spare!

Thanks

Irishgoatman

zoltar_boi wrote: »

Des,

Going for my test on Saturday - do you have any tips?

Should I fill the water tanks / grey waste.
Do they need to get at the spare!

Thanks

The test for mine, last year, was the same as for a car, seat belts, spare tyre ( but you don't by law have to have one),etc. but mine is only a small 2 berth so not sure about the weight situation.

SARZY

niloc1951 wrote: »

At a sitting of the Limerick District Court today (24/03/2011) following a successful defence submission on behalf of the owner of a 'motor caravan', that ‘motor caravans’ were not included in the list of vehicles to which the regulations below apply, Judge Tom O’Donnell ordered that the charge against the defendant be ‘struck out’.

The accusation which had been brought by Garda Brian P O’Dwyer and prosecuted by the D.P.P. against the defendant alleged that he:-

On the 27/06/2010 …….., being the owner of a vehicle to which the European Communities (Vehicle Testing) Regulations, 2004 applies, to whit Motor Vehicle registration number xxxxx …………..did fail to produce a certificate of roadworthiness………………….contrary to Article 20 and 22 of the European Communities (Vehicle Testing) Regulations, 2004.

Am I reading this correctly, did the judge find in favour of the defendant, and if so, does that mean that a certificate of roadworthiness is NOT a requirement. if so Cash Saved for diesel.

zoltar_boi

Thanks Irish,

Passed mine today. Planning on going to France & UK this summer, so while it may not be legal requirement here yet - at least I have the cert for travels in case they require it.

As said - it's not law yet, but the tester said a lot were being tested.

TIP - empty your van of water / gas / BBQ / WEIGHT basically, so it passes the unladen weight test.

dorts

For safety reasons alone get the test done,better safe than sorry:)

niloc1951

dorts wrote: »

For safety reasons alone get the test done,better safe than sorry:)

Until it's a legal requirement personally my choice is to spend my money on proper servicing, a VTN or NCT test is no substitute for a proper service.

Eg. The last NCT on my car failed to pick up a weeping slave cylinder on one of the rear wheels which my 'garage man' picked on up later the same week, both sides were then changed.

FWIW I believe in getting our cars and camper regularly serviced/maintained and if one of the cars is due close to an NCT I leave it until AFTER the NCT, touch wood haven't needed a re-test yet.

gofaster_s13

niloc1951 wrote: »

Until it's a legal requirement personally my choice is to spend my money on proper servicing, a VTN or NCT test is no substitute for a proper service.

Eg. The last NCT on my car failed to pick up a weeping slave cylinder on one of the rear wheels which my 'garage man' picked on up later the same week, both sides were then changed.

As a DOE tester I can tell you for sure that a DOE will pick up stuff that a regular garage will never pick up i.e. brake imbalance and brake performance to name 2, as for the weeping slave cylinder, the slave cylinder is inside the rear brake drum and as of yet x-ray glasses are not required equipment for DOE/NCT tests.

We are testing roughly 2-3 camper vans of all shapes and sizes a week and in general the owners are happy to get the vehicles tested for the peace of mind it give's them. We also regularly tested campers before the new reg's came in as the owners believed that in the case of an accident either here, in the UK or on the Continent a current road worthiness cert would stand to them. And in case you're wondering most of the Campers being tested are passing.

spaceHopper

gofaster_s13 wrote: »

As a DOE tester I can tell you for sure that a DOE will pick up stuff that a regular garage will never pick up i.e. brake imbalance and brake performance to name 2, as for the weeping slave cylinder, the slave cylinder is inside the rear brake drum and as of yet x-ray glasses are not required equipment for DOE/NCT tests.

We are testing roughly 2-3 camper vans of all shapes and sizes a week and in general the owners are happy to get the vehicles tested for the peace of mind it give's them. We also regularly tested campers before the new reg's came in as the owners believed that in the case of an accident either here, in the UK or on the Continent a current road worthiness cert would stand to them. And in case you're wondering most of the Campers being tested are passing.

How about rust, friend of mine bought a mini bus that was used for school runs and had just passed the DOE, the floor was rotten with some rust on the chassid too. He had to fill a few parts of the floor and put a plait in under the drivers seat, lucky he's handy with welder.

I'm in the camp that my mechanic is very good but know how to charge I'd be better of spening 270 on a service and him saying it's good to go than a DOE.

gofaster_s13

spaceHopper wrote: »

How about rust, friend of mine bought a mini bus that was used for school runs and had just passed the DOE, the floor was rotten with some rust on the chassid too. He had to fill a few parts of the floor and put a plait in under the drivers seat, lucky he's handy with welder.

I'm in the camp that my mechanic is very good but know how to charge I'd be better of spening 270 on a service and him saying it's good to go than a DOE.

Rust shouldnt have passed but yes, there are bad testers around(there was one suspended locally recently for dodgey testing) but a proper DOE/NCT test will show up problems that mechanics just won't be able to check.

corkbuoy

Hi gofaster_s13

I'm getting mine tested next week. It is a left hand drive, are stick-on beam adjusters OK on the lights ?

gofaster_s13

corkbuoy wrote: »

Hi gofaster_s13

I'm getting mine tested next week. It is a left hand drive, are stick-on beam adjusters OK on the lights ?

The word from the RSA is that yes the stick on beam bender's are OK, what I normally tell our customers is not to stick on the beam benders themselves but to bring them along to the test centre and ask the tester(nicely:)) if he'd mind sticking them on for you while the lights are being checked on the beam setter as its easy to get them wrong:D

niloc1951

gofaster_s13 wrote: »

As a DOE tester I can tell you for sure that a DOE will pick up stuff that a regular garage will never pick up i.e. brake imbalance and brake performance to name 2, as for the weeping slave cylinder, the slave cylinder is inside the rear brake drum and as of yet x-ray glasses are not required equipment for DOE/NCT tests.

We are testing roughly 2-3 camper vans of all shapes and sizes a week and in general the owners are happy to get the vehicles tested for the peace of mind it give's them. We also regularly tested campers before the new reg's came in as the owners believed that in the case of an accident either here, in the UK or on the Continent a current road worthiness cert would stand to them. And in case you're wondering most of the Campers being tested are passing.

I have no problem with testing as such, I know it's a required net to keep crap off our roads.

My point is that testing should not be seen as a substitute for proper servicing, it is not set up to pick up 'hidden' stuff like internal problems with brakes, low lube levels and excessive wear in transmission trains, bearing grease condition etc. etc.

Poor brake efficiency and imbalance, worn dampers etc should be detected by a competent mechanic during the road test part of a regular service.

A vehicle might pass a test to-day and next month develop a potentially catastrophic fault for the want of a FULL service, conversely a properly serviced vehicle should have no need of a 'big brother' test in the first instance (in an ideal world) .

2 stroke

Brakes are not properly inspected in test centers. On both doe and nct, vehicles with less than the minimum friction material will regularly pass, yet vehicles which have just had their brakes done can fail. Brakes can fail within weeks of a sucessful test. A proper inspection by a mechanic will check the ammount of friction material remaining. A vehicle that fails on imbalance will often pass a few days later after a bit of driving, with no work necessary, I've seen this several times.

gofaster_s13

2 stroke wrote: »

Brakes are not properly inspected in test centers. On both doe and nct, vehicles with less than the minimum friction material will regularly pass, yet vehicles which have just had their brakes done can fail. Brakes can fail within weeks of a sucessful test. A proper inspection by a mechanic will check the ammount of friction material remaining. A vehicle that fails on imbalance will often pass a few days later after a bit of driving, with no work necessary, I've seen this several times.

As regards friction material on brakes, 1.5mm friction material is all that is required to pass, which in my own opinion is far too low. Vehicles that have just had brakes replaced commonly fail usually due to two things, incorrect adjustment in the case of drums and shoes or, insufficient "bedding in" of the brakes which applies to both drum and disc brake's and which as stated above can be cured with "a bit of driving"

Malta1

gofaster_s13 wrote: »

commonly fail usually due to two things, incorrect adjustment in the case of drums and shoes or, insufficient "bedding in" of the brakes which applies to both drum and disc brake's and which as stated above can be cured with "a bit of driving"

which Im sure is true but if you think about it, it makes no sense......the vehicle fails on a braking problem, ya take it out on public roads (where it shouldnt be if it fails), you drive it for a few days and you bring it back and have it tested again.....and it passes without any intervention :rolleyes:

2 stroke

gofaster_s13 wrote: »

As regards friction material on brakes, 1.5mm friction material is all that is required to pass, which in my own opinion is far too low. Vehicles that have just had brakes replaced commonly fail usually due to two things, incorrect adjustment in the case of drums and shoes or, insufficient "bedding in" of the brakes which applies to both drum and disc brake's and which as stated above can be cured with "a bit of driving"

So mechanics are reluctant to replace brakes on a vehicle which is due a test. The guy we use in work will often replace brakes after the test, so we are getting back a truck or van with untested brakes. It's total bolix.
If a vehicle is on a test lane and brakes are incorectly adjusted they should be adjusted there and then. Most brakes have automatic adjusters so if a competant mechanic worked on the vehicle, there shouldn't be adjustment issues. If brakes just need bedding in, there should be allowance in the test for this, if linings are obviously new.

spaceHopper

2 stroke wrote: »

If a vehicle is on a test lane and brakes are incorectly adjusted they should be adjusted there and then.

It's not the testers job to fix anything, he then becomes responsable for work and would be testing his own work...

If a mechanic works on the breaks of a car he is supposed to take it for a test drive an warn the customer that they need to be extra carefull for a the next 100k or so -thats normal. Any time I get the breaks done I take the car somewhere quite and do a few hard stops to bed them in and just to be sure, had a bad expeince once where the car had just been serviced and all pads replaced, the master break cylinde went on the next long drive, wasn't fun for about 20 seconds.

Aidan_M_M

2 stroke wrote: »

Most brakes have automatic adjusters so if a competant mechanic worked on the vehicle, there shouldn't be adjustment issues. .

most automatic adjusters aren't worth a sh1te.

eyebrows63

taxed my camper today , no mention of any test and i did,nt ask:D

DVD2009

got my tax renewel on thurs , no mention of test .

mervifwdc

Hi,

Has anyone had a heavy motorhome tested, i.e. one that is very definitly in the > 3500kg bracket?

If they are tested under regular HGV rules, they would need reflective stickers on the sides and back, which I'm not very keen to do......

Merv.

corkbuoy

mervifwdc wrote: »

Hi,

Has anyone had a heavy motorhome tested, i.e. one that is very definitly in the > 3500kg bracket?

If they are tested under regular HGV rules, they would need reflective stickers on the sides and back, which I'm not very keen to do......

Merv.

I recently had mine tested, its 3800kg. No mention of reflective stickers and it passed. Tested by Riverstick Motors near Cork.

Irishgoatman

When I had my (small) camper tested I asked how they were going to test it as it wasn't a commercial vehicle, I was told they would test it in the same way as the NCT people would test a car.
There is no way they could apply HGV rules to a non-HGV vehicle.

mervifwdc

Thanks folks!

niloc1951

Under the Proposed Testing Arrangements ALL motor caravans, irrespective of DGVW are to be charged the LGV rate for testing, however those over 3,500 Kg DGVW will be tested in the HGV lane.

Irrespective of the DGVW, ALL motor caravans will be charged the rate for the LGV test, with the exception that those with three axles which will be charged an extra €17.72 + VAT for the additional work involved in checking the third axle :rolleyes:.

Motor caravans will not be required to be fitted with conspicuity markings.

NOTE:
The above are proposals submitted to The Minister and still await signing into law, currently there is no legislation requiring roadworthy testing of motor caravans.

Below is an extract from the RSA'a full recommendations

NEW TESTING ARRANGEMENTS
Motor caravans used for the carriage of passengers


Test Regime – Motor caravans to be tested at VTN
•
Motor caravans will continue to be tested in Vehicle Testing Network (VTN) test centres as these
centres have the most appropriate test facilities for testing vehicles with the physical
characteristics of motor caravans. Motor caravans with a DGVW exceeding 3,500kg must be
tested in a HGV test lane and motor caravans with a DGVW not exceeding 3,500kg must be
tested in an LGV test lane.

Test Frequency – 4:2:2:2:1 (as for NCT)
•
In line with the test frequencies currently applicable to vehicles tested at NCT, motor caravans
will be tested on the fourth anniversary of first registration and thereafter every two years.
Annual testing of motor caravans that are over ten years old will apply after June 2011. This is in
line with the impending introduction of annual testing of cars at NCT that are over ten years old
from June 2011.

Test Fee
•
The fee for testing of motor caravans is to be linked to the fee for testing a Light Goods Vehicle
(LGV) on the basis that the test for both categories of vehicles is similar. The fee structure also
takes into account the number of axles fitted to a vehicle which have a significant impact on the
length of the test. Accordingly,
Motor caravans with two axles, irrespective of their Design Gross Vehicle Weight
(DGVW) will be charged €70.86 plus VAT (VAT rate currently 21%). This is equivalent to
the LGV test fee.
Motor caravans with three or more axles, irrespective of their DGVW will be charged an
additional 25% because of additional checks on wheel bearings, tyres, suspension, and
brake components on the extra axle or axles bringing the fee to €88.58 plus VAT (VAT
rate currently 21%).

Motor caravans will not be required to be fitted with a speed limiter or conspicuity markings.

Wastewater & Sewage Treatment Systems
•
Wastewater & sewage treatment systems fitted to motor caravans will be checked for the
presence of leaks.

Brake Testing & Un-laden Weight Dockets
•
Brake performance testing on all motor caravans will be carried out on the basis of the weight
presented as per the current Light Goods Vehicle (LGV) brake performance test. It will not be
necessary to present an un-laden weight docket for the purpose of undergoing brake
performance testing.

Gas Installations
•
Gas installations fitted to motor caravans will not be checked as part of the test; however this
will be reviewed in the future to perhaps require a declaration of conformance for the vehicle’s
gas installation.

Buford T Justice

Nothing new there though niloc. It was the same guff they came out at the time when they concluded the consultation period.

niloc1951

Buford T Justice wrote: »

Nothing new there though niloc. It was the same guff they came out at the time when they concluded the consultation period.

I know, I was just reiterating for those recent entrants to the thread who seem not to have been involved when the thread was originally very active on the subject.

BTW, it not 'guff' the proposals are very fair and sensible for motor caravans (apart from the charge, which should be the same as the NCT in my opinion and the extra for 'tag' axles) and they are what will be the legal requirements when the Minister signs the proposals in the document into law.

superfly35

Hi guys,
I read the thread and understood that the law was not signed yet.
Do u know if the law will be in action straight away or in January 2012 or something?

I m just wondering as I don t use the camper often really, so I want to make I won't break the law.

Cheers