NCT The Sillyness needs to end

Raggaroo

Driving without an up to date NCT will probably invalidate you insurance if you happen to be in a crash, insurance companies will look for any loophole to invalidate a claim.

Mr Benevolent

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Maybe that is why there are so many pricks driving around with their fog lights on?

Yup, my brother's headlights burned out months ago and he's been driving on his fogs since. Offered to change the bulbs for him, but oh no, he'll 'do it next week!'. And his engine would have exploded if I hadn't suggested he check his oil every few weeks...

Runaway34

I had mine last Thursday in Northpoint and the car failed because the cover off my passenger wing mirror is broken. The mirror works perfectly and the electrics are not affected so I'm stumped as to why it failed. When I questioned this I was told there's a sharp edge exposed which there is not!! So not I've to but a new wing mirror which will cost €75 plus vat and then pay for the labour!!! Absolutely ridiculous

davet82

anncoates wrote: »

If you had to say that to either of their faces. you;d wet your pants.

Now, run along. The grown-ups are talking.

yeah that's real grown up talk... :pac:

think somebody is having a cranky Monday morning :cool:

Yawns

Raggaroo wrote: »

Driving without an up to date NCT will probably invalidate you insurance if you happen to be in a crash, insurance companies will look for any loophole to invalidate a claim.

It won't invalidate your insurance. They may try to refuse to pay on your own car if you caused the damage. They must pay out to 3rd parties however.

Otherwise insurance would be invalidated if you were breaking the speed limit.

Cee-Jay-Cee

inforfun wrote: »

NCT centres here have no (financial) interest to fail your car other than maybe for a paid retest.

Wasn't that claim exposed as rubbish years ago when an undercover investigation discovered that their head honchos required a fail rate above xx% meaning that testers had to fail a certain amount of cars to keep the figures up. The only reason they would demand a certain fail rate is for money reasons.

Wibbs

Grimreaper666 wrote: »

If you think it's bad now just wait till the new wave of emission tightening measures come into play!! The next generation of cars on the way will have duel catalytic converters to add to the crap we already have to put up with! I am just soooo sick of all the rules and regulations here and the ones being imposed on us from the EU. The bottom line is all about control and taxes, comply sheeple and pay ye're taxes or we'll fine ye!!

and it keeps the motor industry going too. You can see that with other nations and their testing. Take Japan. If you think our NCT is bad, jeeebus theirs is only mad Ted. One reason why Jap imports were usually in such good condition and was tempting for dodgy gits here(ie most of them) to "clock" the mileage. Plus in Japan, the older the car, the more you incrementally pay for the test, so it makes economic sense to keep updating your car which keeps Toyota San happy.

IMH the emission stuff is a lot of ballsology, or mostly ballsology anyway. It makes eff all difference to the environment when ranged against all the other sources of pollution. Plus manufacturing a car is pretty damn heavy on the environment. IMHO it makes more "green" sense to keep an old car going for half a million miles than to buy a new car every three years.

Noreen1

Larbre34 wrote: »

All the little loopholes are closing fast. Wont matter about the Guards pulling you in for no NCT, it'll be a case of if you don't have any of tax, insurance, or NCT you wont be able to apply for any other, ie no tax-no insurance-no NCT-no insurance-no tax.

'Off the road' declarations are gone as well, if you own the car, even if you're using it as a chicken coop, itll need tax on it boss.

My major car based gripe is that my 8 year old Diesel with modern particulate filters which makes it clean and efficient even to todays standards would cost me €390 to tax if it were on a >2008 plate, but because I cant afford to change it for a newer car, costs me €673. Utter bullsh*t.

Already there.

No NCT means your insurance company will not renew your insurance. And no insurance means you can't renew your tax.

Grimreaper666

Wibbs wrote: »

and it keeps the motor industry going too. You can see that with other nations and their testing. Take Japan. If you think our NCT is bad, jeeebus theirs is only mad Ted. One reason why Jap imports were usually in such good condition and was tempting for dodgy gits here(ie most of them) to "clock" the mileage. Plus in Japan, the older the car, the more you incrementally pay for the test, so it makes economic sense to keep updating your car which keeps Toyota San happy.

IMH the emission stuff is a lot of ballsology, or mostly ballsology anyway. It makes eff all difference to the environment when ranged against all the other sources of pollution. Plus manufacturing a car is pretty damn heavy on the environment. IMHO it makes more "green" sense to keep an old car going for half a million miles than to buy a new car every three years.

For the most part it's all about generating revenue, bottom line. Doesn't matter what spin they put on it.

Bits_n_Bobs

Wibbs wrote: »

IMH the emission stuff is a lot of ballsology, or mostly ballsology anyway. It makes eff all difference to the environment when ranged against all the other sources of pollution. Plus manufacturing a car is pretty damn heavy on the environment. IMHO it makes more "green" sense to keep an old car going for half a million miles than to buy a new car every three years.

Absolutely agree. Plus the emission have a huge focus on 'greenhouse' gases and none of the other muck that flies through exhausts. I have no issue with most of the NCT but the emissions thing should be dropped - it's much more environmentally friendly to keep an old car running than to manufacture a new one.

Even from a purely economic point of view - much more value to the Irish economy from mechanics being employed to fix older cars vs spending money importing cars. It's just dumb and a waste of money.

Wibbs

Noreen1 wrote: »

Already there.

No NCT means your insurance company will not renew your insurance.

My insurance company has never asked nor mentioned the NCT. They did try the no NCT not tax in the past but it fell on it's arse, mainly because of the NCT backlog, people could claim they weren't paying tax because they couldn't get an NCT.

Agricola

NCT is a joke. Whole host of new items are now on the test agenda that have little to no relevance to road safety. I got a fail last year because the outside door handle was slightly sticky and stayed up the odd time. Drop of WD40 - Pass

twinytwo

MidlandsM wrote: »

in fairness, for €55 you get a complete car check to ensure a car is safe to be on the public roads.

The only things that bug me about the nct is that the cost, i thing €55 is too expensive, it should be €35ish ......and that you can't nct a car at any time (only can from when its 3 months early from expiry) and the one year nct on cars over 10 years, a pain in the rocks that is.........

Actually it says on the form that passing the NCT does not guarantee road worthiness....

Yawns

Agricola wrote: »

NCT is a joke. Whole host of new items are now on the test agenda that have little to no relevance to road safety. I got a fail last year because the outside door handle was slightly sticky and stayed up the odd time. Drop of WD40 - Pass

So why didn't you do this before the NCT crowd pointed it out? This is why the NCT is annually for cars over 10 years. Too many people will not fix anything in the slightest with their car until the car fails the NCT. I'd be in favour of certain items being removed from the checklist such as the emissions for reasons given, but the fact remains that far too many people drive with known defects on their vehicles and the only reason they fix the car, service the car or bring it to a mechanic is because it failed the NCT.

Wibbs

Bits_n_Bobs wrote: »

I have no issue with most of the NCT but the emissions thing should be dropped - it's much more environmentally friendly to keep an old car running than to manufacture a new one.

+1, but you'd be surprised how many people buy into the notion of new car = better for penguins and butterflies. People who drive hybrids and are smug about it are even dafter when you consider the amount of environmental damage that comes from mining the rare earth elements for the battery, never mind the fossil fuels pissed away shipping all the various parts towards assembly. "Ordinary" cars like many people have gotten "fatter" too. Heavier, bigger with more bells and whistles which means more fuel and more pollution to build it. If you ever go to a classic car show, what does strike you is other than the American Yank Tanks, the cars we used to drive were on average much smaller than cars today. You could damn near drive an old Mini into the boot of a new Mini. I reckon you could remove the equivalent in excess stuff of an average weight bloke from most cars which would make things greener and cheaper to make.

That said TBH I'm glad so many do buy into newcaritis and lose a packet on devaluation so the rest of us can buy a better car for a lot less money.

Even from a purely economic point of view - much more value to the Irish economy from mechanics being employed to fix older cars vs spending money importing cars. It's just dumb and a waste of money.

I'd agree, though we can say that as a non manufacturer of cars, the Germans, French, Spanish, British and Italians may have a different take. BUt yep for us it's a little daft alright. Plus the sale of parts makes a goodly chunk of revenue for car makers. There was a time when an average car at 100,000km was fooked. More like a clown car with bits dropping off at reguar intervals. Nowadays your average car will easily do that and likely double that. I've seen a Toyota with 300,000 odd miles on it and other than maintenance items pretty much all was as it drove out of the factory. The only things changed were the clutch, a gearbox bearing and the rad had kacked itself. I've seen a couple of Honda's with 200.000 plus on them. Hell my own isn't far off that. Older Mercs and VW can eat up the miles too. A 90's Merc at 100,000 k is nicely run in.

Wibbs

Yawns wrote: »

So why didn't you do this before the NCT crowd pointed it out? This is why the NCT is annually for cars over 10 years. Too many people will not fix anything in the slightest with their car until the car fails the NCT. I'd be in favour of certain items being removed from the checklist such as the emissions for reasons given, but the fact remains that far too many people drive with known defects on their vehicles and the only reason they fix the car, service the car or bring it to a mechanic is because it failed the NCT.

Point is a slightly sticky door handle is hardly a safety issue. I'd reduce the test to brakes, lights, suspension and steering. End of. I'd get rid of the emissions guff or seriously reduce the levels for a pass.

Agricola

Yawns wrote: »

So why didn't you do this before the NCT crowd pointed it out? This is why the NCT is annually for cars over 10 years. Too many people will not fix anything in the slightest with their car until the car fails the NCT. I'd be in favour of certain items being removed from the checklist such as the emissions for reasons given, but the fact remains that far too many people drive with known defects on their vehicles and the only reason they fix the car, service the car or bring it to a mechanic is because it failed the NCT.

I drive a 20 year old car which is in far better condition than a lot of vehicles half its age, because I'm an enthusiast. I wouldnt need an NCT to tell me to keep my car maintained. So while it sailed through on emissions, suspension, steering, braking ability etc etc, my problem was that I didnt realize that a sticky outside door handle was such a calamitous safety issue!

Nash Bridges

Agricola wrote: »

I drive a 20 year old car which is in far better condition than a lot of vehicles half its age, because I'm an enthusiast. I wouldnt need an NCT to tell me to keep my car maintained. So while it sailed through on emissions, suspension, steering, braking ability etc etc, my problem was that I didnt realize that a sticky outside door handle was such a calamitous safety issue!

The sticky door handle used to be a problem with older Fords, particularly on the rear doors if not used regularly. With handle staying pulled out, the door wouldn't close properly or lock. Going around a corner or roundabout the door would swing open, passenger could fall out or door could hit a pedestrian, cyclist or another car.

That seems like a very real safety issue to me.

Yawns

Agricola wrote: »

I drive a 20 year old car which is in far better condition than a lot of vehicles half its age, because I'm an enthusiast. I wouldnt need an NCT to tell me to keep my car maintained. So while it sailed through on emissions, suspension, steering, braking ability etc etc, my problem was that I didnt realize that a sticky outside door handle was such a calamitous safety issue!

You have made my point tho. Your 20 year old car is in far better condition than a lot of vehicles half it's age. If the NCT wasn't about, your car would be in a far better condition than probably half the cars on the road.

Madam_X

People only give out about it and pick faults, because they have to pay for it. Go on a Sunday. It's quieter and the staff are more easygoing.

ilovesleep

CJC999 wrote: »

Wasn't that claim exposed as rubbish years ago when an undercover investigation discovered that their head honchos required a fail rate above xx% meaning that testers had to fail a certain amount of cars to keep the figures up. The only reason they would demand a certain fail rate is for money reasons.

I wouldn't doubt you on this. The driving test system is the same. It's money making racket.

UDP

ilovesleep wrote: »

I wouldn't doubt you on this. The driving test system is the same. It's money making racket.

but they are necessary evils. The driving test needs a serious revamp and tighter integration with driving schools where people are thought and tested on different driving conditions.

Eeeyore

Madam_X wrote: »

People only give out about it and pick faults, because they have to pay for it. Go on a Sunday. It's quieter and the staff are more easygoing.

My God seriously go on a Sunday the staff are more easygoing! This statement just emphasises that the test is not of standardisation and depending on who you get will determine your car passing or failing. So if I had of went yesterday the LED Dashboard Light would not be an issue so if it is really a safety issue this should fail all day everyday correct.

inforfun

CJC999 wrote: »

Wasn't that claim exposed as rubbish years ago when an undercover investigation discovered that their head honchos required a fail rate above xx% meaning that testers had to fail a certain amount of cars to keep the figures up. The only reason they would demand a certain fail rate is for money reasons.

That is why i added "other than for a paid retest".


Still quite the difference with a garage who sees an option to fix your car for a NCT failure. Of course you can do a diy job or have someone else repair it. But they advertise a "free nct test" if you have them service your car at the same time. So your car is being serviced anyway, you ll have them fix the failure as well.

Honestly, if i compare the 2 systems, Ireland/Holland, the Irish one is much better and less open for ripping people off.

pabloh999

Nash Bridges wrote: »

The sticky door handle used to be a problem with older Fords, particularly on the rear doors if not used regularly. With handle staying pulled out, the door wouldn't close properly or lock. Going around a corner or roundabout the door would swing open, passenger could fall out or door could hit a pedestrian, cyclist or another car.

That seems like a very real safety issue to me.

You're taking the piss?

Was people falling out of moving cars on roundabouts ever a problem on Irish roads?

Nash Bridges

pabloh999 wrote: »

You're taking the piss?

Was people falling out of moving cars on roundabouts ever a problem on Irish roads?

Take note of the "could". Previous poster couldn't understand why a sticky door handle was a safety issue and would fail the NCT. I explained.

This was a common fault on mid to late 90's Ford Mondeos. Makes perfect sense to me.

ozmo

A sun visor strip was about 1cm down over wiping arc of the unusually very long wiper blade on driver side - failed - tore a tiny half circle of it off in front of him so wiper blades just about cleared that one spot but is same length in rest of window - looks gank now with torn visor but he passed it.

Noreen1

Wibbs wrote: »

My insurance company has never asked nor mentioned the NCT. They did try the no NCT not tax in the past but it fell on it's arse, mainly because of the NCT backlog, people could claim they weren't paying tax because they couldn't get an NCT.

I insured my sons car last week. A copy of the NCT disc, or cert., was requested.
It had expired, and they wouldn't insure him until he provided a valid cert.

I also bought a new car last October. Switched over the insurance no problem, but when it came to renewal in December, they wanted a copy of the NCT disc or cert.
As it happened, I wasn't happy with the quote, so I changed my insurance Company - and, yet again, was asked to provide a copy of the NCT disc, or cert.

So, that's three different Companies that have requested proof of NCT from this family in the last six months or so.

Out of curiosity, who are you insured with?

Wibbs

Noreen1 wrote: »

Out of curiosity, who are you insured with?

IIRC Aviva, though through a broker.

donegal_road

Noreen1 wrote: »

I insured my sons car last week. A copy of the NCT disc, or cert., was requested.
It had expired, and they wouldn't insure him until he provided a valid cert.

I also bought a new car last October. Switched over the insurance no problem, but when it came to renewal in December, they wanted a copy of the NCT disc or cert.
As it happened, I wasn't happy with the quote, so I changed my insurance Company - and, yet again, was asked to provide a copy of the NCT disc, or cert.

So, that's three different Companies that have requested proof of NCT from this family in the last six months or so.

Out of curiosity, who are you insured with?

yes, but what about when your car fails the NCT.. they say sorry, your car is not roadworthy and they send you off down the road, where does that leave us regarding insurance? Are we insured or uninsured in the eyes of the insurance company in this circumstance?

Noreen1

Interesting. I was insured with Aviva last year, though I can't remember whether they asked for a copy of the NCT or not.
Probably not, since I was able to switch to the new car without it.

I did ring around for quotations, and I distinctly remember being told I would be expected to provide proof of NCT in the event of choosing to accept the quote - and by more than one insurance Company, too.

It begs the question why some Companies see it as a requirement, but others don't - and what the legal requirement is.

Scarcely

Honestly the amount of silly fails I've heard of is unreal. A couple years ago they wouldn't give me the cert because my indicator light "wasn't amber enough" how stupid was that!! I had to go buy a new amber light and return with it to get the all clear

pabloh999

Nash Bridges wrote: »

This was a common fault on mid to late 90's Ford Mondeos. Makes perfect sense to me.

People have fallen out of moving Mondeos in Ireland?

Noreen1

donegal_road wrote: »

yes, but what about when your car fails the NCT.. they say sorry, your car is not roadworthy and they send you off down the road, where does that leave us regarding insurance? Are we insured or uninsured in the eyes of the insurance company in this circumstance?

It left my son without insurance until he got the car tested.

I know I read somewhere on that a car without NCT can invalidate Insurance - I can't remember whether it was NCT documentation, or Insurance Company documentation. (Sorry, I've read a lot of Insurance proposals over the last few months, between my own , the OH, and the two sons - for all of which I've obtained multiple quotes. And, yes, I'm a sucker for being the one who does all the dirty work for my family:p:D)

donegal_road

Scarcely wrote: »

Honestly the amount of silly fails I've heard of is unreal. A couple years ago they wouldn't give me the cert because my indicator light "wasn't amber enough" how stupid was that!! I had to go buy a new amber light and return with it to get the all clear

on that point, my uncle's car failed because he was told his tyres didn't meet the minimum thread depth.. although they seemed fine to my uncle, so he changed them and kept the old ones he had failed with, to use again sometime.

18 months later he passed the NCT with the old tyres that had failed a year and a half before... and it was the same guy who tested the car both times.

GarH

A few years ago, an old car of mine (a 1992 civic) failed the NCT because it didn't have the 'Baile Atha Cliath' ****e on the registration plates.
Funny thing it had passed the previous year and the year before that. So how can these few words be a safety issue?
I passed by printing out the words on a bit of paper and sellotaping it to the plates.

blade1

pabloh999 wrote: »

People have fallen out of moving Mondeos in Ireland?

Yes loads but they don't mention it because they can be done for not wearing their seat belt:pac:

2 stroke

Eeeyore wrote: »

Hi all

Ok so this NCT business needs to end I do not mean the test itself but the parts of the test that has no relivence to Road Safety.

I had my NCT on Saturday over I Fonthill all was good the Car had no issues except the guy would not give me the NCT Cert as the Light-bulb on my Rear Fog-light Button on the Dashboard did not light up when pressed. (What) is that really a safety an issue.

Anyway he gave me until 06/05/2013 to bring it back for a visual so that means no extra charge or appointment needed, so I went home and it was annoying me a little so I took the Cover of the Button off the casing exposing the Light-bulb inside I pressed it in and it lit up so I said screw it I will bring this back over now and see what they say so I went back over told them I had a visual inspection your man came out pressed the button it worked and he said that is grant come in and I will give you your Cert.

How can a exposed Dashboard Panel be more safe then an enclosed panel but just not the light -Bulb working on something that quite frankly is insignificant these guys on the NCT must be on a power trip or something.

I would just like to note that this was the Dashboard button light to tell you it is on and not the Rear outside Fog Light itself.

Anyone else had their Car fail on something silly.

Bet you showed up with your fogs switched on.

Eeeyore wrote: »

I have been driving for 10 years and probably had to use that button once + if it was on when I stop and open my Door the Light on sound goes off so that would tell me it is on, also during the day you would not see that small LED yellow light but I would see that the button was pressed in so I would know it was on.

The 'lights on' sound only beeps if your main/dip or side lights are on, it does not monitor the fog light circuit on any vehicle I've ever driven. Thats one of the reasons you have a fog light warning lamp.

Eeeyore

2 stroke wrote: »

Bet you showed up with your fogs switched on.


The 'lights on' sound only beeps if your main/dip or side lights are on, it does not monitor the fog light circuit on any vehicle I've ever driven. Thats one of the reasons you have a fog light warning lamp.

Incorrect Sir as on my Car if I press the Rear Fog Light Button and even if my lights are not on it will still register a warning sound that a light is or has been left on somewhere. It is a Hyundai Atoz

crusher000

GarH wrote: »

A few years ago, an old car of mine (a 1992 civic) failed the NCT because it didn't have the 'Baile Atha Cliath' ****e on the registration plates.
Funny thing it had passed the previous year and the year before that. So how can these few words be a safety issue?
I passed by printing out the words on a bit of paper and sellotaping it to the plates.

A car I onced owned failed on the same issue with the above . that was over 10 years ago. There's a German that works at my NCT and dread getting him as he could fail you on the slightest thing. Oh ya he's only being delgent. How many crashes have been caused in the last 20 years by cars that don't have the county wrote in little writing on the reg plate ?

goz83

They failed my car because of window tints (ok thats fine). They also failed it because I had a sun strip, which covered less of the top of the windscreen than factory installed tints on windscreens. Safety issue? My hole! It was safer with the sun strip. You can wear near black out sunglasses, but they wont let you have a sun strip put onto the screen....bo11ox.

I also disagree that they give all cars a proper safety safety check, because they miss things often, even if they have been pre-noted. The NCT I had in 2011 for my car needed a retest because of emissions and 2 brake hoses and the brake line. I cant remember which, but the emmissions got siorted after I cat a cat fit to the mid section but they missed either the hoses or brake lines, which were replaced a few days later.

They fail for things not associated with safety. I dont needd to highlight them here though, ass e all know a thing or two about that. Broken aerials and different branded wiper ars wer already mentioned here. Oh that's a death trap, quick, burn it!

Eeeyore

They fail for things not associated with safety. I dont needd to highlight them here though, ass e all know a thing or two about that. Broken aerials and different branded wiper ars wer already mentioned here. Oh that's a death trap, quick, burn it![/QUOTE]


Or LED Lights on Dashboard not blinking

JP85

Ive gone on to the NCT website and the only bookings they will give me is for w/c 20th of May in fonthill and im out of the country that week and the same with Naas which is the only other one i could go to really, surely it couldnt be that booked up.

The NCT is the biggest scam, i wouldnt mind paying about €20-30 for the test but when you are at the test centre and see how many cars that go through on a daily basis and how quickly it actually takes to do a car its some money making business

eamonnq

JP85 wrote: »

Ive gone on to the NCT website and the only bookings they will give me is for w/c 20th of May in fonthill and im out of the country that week and the same with Naas which is the only other one i could go to really, surely it couldnt be that booked up.

You could try ringing them.

Bannasidhe

They passed my car in Feb but I had been having issues with a grinding noise coming from the front left wheel and the steering vibrating like crazy on certain road surfaces - had taken it to several mechanics but they couldn't find the problem.
The problem was that a piston had seized and the front left brake was partially engaged all the time causing huge wear on the pad and the steering to pull to the left. Very rarely drive the car but needed it last week when the grinding and pulling was frankly scary. Took it to a garage and they couldn't believe it passed the NCT or that they didn't notice the wear on the brake pad.

Same test centre passed my mother's car in Dec (13 years old owned from new by a little old lady, has less than 50km on the clock). Last week she got a puncture and went off to buy a new tyre, tyre guy noticed another tyre was not only split, but actually shredding - it was one of the originals. NCT failed to notice it...

corktina

lots of mis-information in this thread....try the Motors forum for informed comment

Scarcely

Another silly fail was my cousin in north point only 2 weeks ago, the day before his test he went out and bought 4 new tyres, when they tested the car the tester said one of the wheel nuts on one of the wheels wasn't tight enough, he then told my cousin he wasn't allowed tighten it, but my cousin was to go outside and tighten the nut himself and once done he would receive his cert. my cousin then done so and called the tester guy out, he checked the nut and said yea that's fine and gave him the cert!! In regards to needing the nct disc for your insurance, from my experience I have noticed if you switch insurer 99% of the time you will be asked to produce the disc along with your licence

flutered

do the nct workers not get 10% of the retest, paid in both june and december.

Eeeyore

corktina wrote: »

lots of mis-information in this thread....try the Motors forum for informed comment

What Mis-information people are telling and giving examples of why their cars failed and they silly reasons as to why how is that misinformation?

Do you work for the NCT if so then please leave a constructive comment and not just a back seat comment with no backup for your statement

corktina

well how about the one about off-road declarations finishing and all cars will have to be taxed even if they are chicken coops?

As for "silly" reasons, most of them given are clearly safety issues.