Annual NCT plan for cars > 6 years old Abandoned

Merch

CiniO wrote: »

Did you ever drive in the winter on gritted wet road?
Without windscreen washers after 5 minutes you won't be able to see anything.

I don't know about them. However front windscreen should be laminated - maybe that what e-marks are for.

Might come in handy.
I know it's possible to drive without it, but I would prefer that anyone on the road had one.

What exactly do you mean by that?
Without electrical system modern car won't work.

As far as I know it's not checked.

They are not needed unless there is a fog.
In the dense fog they can be a life saver and everyone should have them and use them.

How are you going to see what's behind you when reversing in pitch black?
How someone else is going to see that you are reversin?

All those things are needed for normal motoring.

The contradiction to me is that some cars dont have rear fog lights, yet a non functional rear fog on a car that has it is a fail, its about the least essential thing on the car (and it seems one of the least understood how and when to use), given they already some cars dont have it and pass. In all honesty, I have rarely had to use my fog light. I can think of only a few circumstances where I had to use it.
Unless a driver is aware they are actually frequently in conditions that require the use of fog lights I consider them (almost) unnecessary.

Sandra Delicious Molding wrote: »

Every two years is plenty of an nct IMO regardless if age. Having it every year is nothing but a money making racket.

Also to the people saying it gets the bangers off the roads. It gets some of and improves the safety of some but they miss lots of stuff in the nct and when cars do fail people get quick fixes or even borrow parts/tyres to get through, I think quick fixes and borrowing etc could happen more now that people have to do it every year.

My last NCT was a two year one, but now it will be every year, Im in two minds as some people will not do anything with misaligned lights and having stuff like that on the road for two years is a bit much.

On the other hand, I dont put much mileage on my car and its hardly deteriorating significantly.

Seweryn wrote: »

Sure.
I could perfectly and irresponsibly survive on the road without brakes, can't see myself driving without wipers.

You're dead right it would be irresponsible, cmon, you cant say going on the road with no brakes is better than no screen wash, its essential to have clear windows, but I think being able to see and stop are both fairly important

Merch

Not a person wrote: »

http://www.nzta.govt.nz/vehicle/warrants-certifications/getting-wof/about.html

I'm not sure about the arguments for it myself, just pointing it out!

At a glance, it doesnt seem to be as comprehensive as the NCT, maybe they are more realistic about checks and wont pull a fast one on you to have to return it for a follow up inspection for some crappy alleged fail
I cant see anything about emissions?
Possibly the age profile of the cars on their roads is a lot older and there are also a lot of grey Jap imports there too??
If its just cursory check to ensure everything is in order than good, but here, i feel it would be scammed.
A year minimum, two max.

CiniO

Seweryn wrote: »

Sure, it is checked. My car failed on a slightly perished drive shaft support bearing rubber holder.

Item similar to the one on the photo.

We had one perished as well and bearing was bit worn on a transit.
Do you know what happened?
One day driveshaft landed on the road.


Indeed driveshafts (and axles) are checked. But you could have your gearbox f**ed and f.e. have only 1st 2nd and reverse gear working, and still pass.

CiniO

joujoujou wrote: »

Read the manual.

I was reading this manual many times.
I don't really get why you want me to read it again.

CiniO

Merch wrote: »

The contradiction to me is that some cars dont have rear fog lights, yet a non functional rear fog on a car that has it is a fail, its about the least essential thing on the car (and it seems one of the least understood how and when to use), given they already some cars dont have it and pass. In all honesty, I have rarely had to use my fog light. I can think of only a few circumstances where I had to use it.
Unless a driver is aware they are actually frequently in conditions that require the use of fog lights I consider them (almost) unnecessary.

All cars in Europe must have type approval which requires them to have rear fog light, and it's in operation since late 80s.

I must admit that in Ireland dense fog is quite rare thing, but still it happens.
Beside - cars registered in Ireland are allowed to drive all over EU without any limitations. Therefore they must be equipped with rear fog light.

visual

RSA arent happy that a car tested in another country can be driven here as it was a little prod in their side that they arent the B all of safety.

I noticed 10 year old cars take a little longer to go through as they check all the bushings that obviously aren't tested as rigorously on cars less than 8 years.

CiniO

visual wrote: »

RSA arent happy that a car tested in another country can be driven here as it was a little prod in their side that they arent the B all of safety.

I noticed 10 year ol

I still can't understand why they are forcing NCT for imported cars which have a valid test from other country.

In nearly all EU countries, when importing car from other state with valid test, then you only have to retest a car after test from country of origin expires.
I can't understand why Ireland is different, but someone linked some article here recently that this might change.

I remember this used to be the case in Poland (same as here - you had to do the test on import, even it had valid test from country of origin).
However someone made a complaint to EU commission, and eventually Poland lost the case in EU court of justice (they said it was against EU free market), and was forced to change regulations to accept testes from other member states.

visual

Europe is going to forse RSA here to accept road tests from europe to.

Ive no big difficulty with a yearly test
But it should be from day of test vaild for 1 year.
Not this crap that its done on cars registered date.
And vaild only to its next registered date.

visual

CiniO wrote: »

All cars in Europe must have type approval which requires them to have rear fog light, and it's in operation since late 80s.

I must admit that in Ireland dense fog is quite rare thing, but still it happens.
Beside - cars registered in Ireland are allowed to drive all over EU without any limitations. Therefore they must be equipped with rear fog light.

Then why does the rules of the road not require you to have rear fog lights and reverse lights.

And if fitted there is no requirement to use them

joujoujou

CiniO wrote: »

I was reading this manual many times.
I don't really get why you want me to read it again.

Read it again.

Also read this post:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=83245394&postcount=62

First part of it.

CiniO

joujoujou wrote: »

Read it again.

Also read this post:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=83245394&postcount=62

First part of it.

First Part of it is my quotation and then there's March's answer.
Can't see any relevance of it to what we were talking about

I just genuinely don't know what you were trying to say.

CiniO

visual wrote: »

Then why does the rules of the road not require you to have rear fog lights and reverse lights.

And if fitted there is no requirement to use them

I think Ireland is the only country in Europe which doesn't require all vehicles (first registered after fog light regulations came into place which was last 80s) to have them.

Ireland is also AFAIK the only country in Europe which didn't sign or ratify Vienna convention on road traffic from 1968 - a document which was signed and ratified by majority of countries in the world, and which makes road regulations similar in those countries, and also makes international traffic much easier.
That's one of the reasons why traffic regulations in Ireland are so different that on the Continent.

However in relation to rear fog lights - all vehicles made for European market must have them as those are the requirements.
That's why vast majority of cars in Ireland have factory fitted rear fog lights.
Generally only ones that don't have them are Japanese and American imports.
Now they instroduced obligatory testing of those lights with NCT, but probably as amount of vehicles without them on our roads is neglibible they didn't bother requiring all vehicles to have them at this stage.

Sam Russell

Merch wrote: »

Do you have a link? 6 months is ridiculously short
Should be annual, and then defects such as lights (misaligned/fogs) or others policed vigorously on a spot check basis, any car with these obvious failures will likely have others too, maybe tyres.

Whats the argument/basis for 6 monthly intervals???
If its that a major defect could happen in that time, well then 6 months wont cover that, a major defect could occur in an incident in any given day, if it was 6 months, then people would call for 3 months, if you are driving a vehicle on the road you have the responsibility to ensure it is roadworthy, if anything happens you ensure its sorted, otherwise suffer penalties.

Shortening the interval to ridiculous levels is a nanny state excuse to milk car testing, and suggests people cant do this themselves, which they should.

Just check your lights/tyres weekly/forthightly, any incidents check it, hit a pothole, check the car feels the same, does it drive the same? turn the affected side steering lock to lock and visually look at the wishbone/components, check bulbs, light alignment.
If someone cant do that then get/pay someone to look at it.

So, whats the argument for reduced intervals?????

http://www.vtnz.co.nz/FAQs

What is a Warrant of Fitness (WoF)?

Inspections are primarily a ‘road safety’ measure designed to ensure that vehicles are properly maintained and that they comply with certain requirements of the New Zealand law. The periodic WoF inspection consists of visual examination and performance tests, but does not involve any dismantling of the vehicle.
Vehicles with a gross laden weight of 3,500kg or under:
Must have a current Warrant of Fitness, unless they are being used for fare paying passengers in which case they then come under the Passenger Services Rule (PSV) and must have a current Certificate of Fitness. This shows the vehicle complied with certain safety requirements on the day of the inspection.
The WoF expiry date must be either:
A. 12 months from the date of inspection for a vehicle that:
i. was new at the time of its first registration in New Zealand, and
ii. has been registered in New Zealand less than 6 years, or
B. 6 months from the date of inspection for any other vehicle.
From 1/10/2002 the WoF expiry date must be either:
A. 12 months from the date of inspection for a vehicle that is less than 6 years from its date of manufacture, or
B. 6 months from the date of inspection for any other vehicle.
The period of the WoF, commences from the date that the vehicle passed the inspection. That is, if the vehicle passed a re-check, then the WoF period commences from the date of the re-check.
Vehicles with a gross laden weight of 3,501kg or more:
These vehicles need a:

• Certificate of Fitness issued every six months
• Certificate of loading
• Road User Licence
• Hubometer fitted to the vehicle

lomb

I think people know themselves if the washer doesnt work. The NCT themselves deny any responsibility for the mechanical integrity of a car, so the test fee doesnt buy that. It should buy something the average joe cant or wont or cant be trusted to check himself ie brakes, tyres, warning lights on dash and seatbelts working. Thats worth no more than 30 e and I would hope less and to be honest could be done as a drive through no appointment needed. Say a more comprehensive test every 4 or 5 years for the current 55e with booking.

Id agree with the above as the inconvenience/minor cost would be worth it for the safety improvements. Fat chance of any of the above as the greedy government /EU want new cars sold to keep German and French factories open.

Sam Russell

lomb wrote: »

Id agree with the above as the inconvenience/minor cost would be worth it for the safety improvements. Fat chance of any of the above as the greedy government /EU want new cars sold to keep German and French factories open.

Corrected that for you.

2 stroke

I'd like to see a system where the test fee was reduced but a fine imposed for silly fails, like showing up with cars that haven't a hope of passing, like bald tyres, dangerous brakes and lights. Fines would only apply to items that drivers should check regularly before driving.