Vic govt looks for roadworthy test savings

[Bobman]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/bre...-1226687071668

ROADWORTHY requirements will be changed as the Victorian government seeks to squeeze savings from the system.

People who sell cars less than five years old may not have to present a roadworthy certificate under proposed changes aimed at saving up to $73 million.

VicRoads will examine three possible options for streamlining the roadworthy system.

Treasurer Michael O'Brien said despite different testing regimes state-to-state there was little evidence of significant difference between defect-related crash rates state to state.

"We can better target the test and find savings for all vehicle owners, without impacting on road safety," Mr O'Brien said on Sunday.

Seems like common sense to me, but on the flip side, I know of plenty of cars less than five years old with a few problems.

[GASWAGON]

Well the Vic system sux at the moment for the poor RWC shops.... The guys have to take ALL wheels off the car, take photos of the brakes and suspension, then record it all on computer file for seven.... If they get audited buy VicRoads they have to be able to bring up any RW check at will....The cost of a RWC has gone up from about $120 to $180 to cover all the extra labour. And if the RW runs out in 28 days....you gotta go get another one!

[zilo]

VIV is the biggest rort in Victoria....

($575 and still gotta get a RWC $120 and high risk inspection $45)

Makes the RWC look cheap in comparison.

[GASWAGON]

Its alllll about the moolah man!

[4VCLEVO]

Not to mention you only get 7 days to get your car in a road worthy condition after the first inspection or you have to pay the $180 again to get the road worthy certificate. The 7 days makes it hard if you like to fix things yourself.

[mik]

Sounds like crap to me, a car could easily be run into an unroadworthy condition in a couple of years .

[ILLaViTaR]

I paid $220 for one when all this photoshoot crap first came out and upped the prices buying into all the extra labour involved and whatnot. Now I need another and research has shown me a few places still do them in melb for $80, I'm ringing around and have found ones at $88, $90 and a lot around the $100/$120 mark, then I call every shop on main street and they're $220 (some charged an additional recheck fee also).

rattlegun (if necessary?), photoshoot, test drive, a series of safety tests, recheck, log the evidence. 30 minutes labour to an hour absolute max for a good shop?

$80 sounds reasonable to me.

[Bobman]

I would not pay more than $120 for a roadworthy check.

[GASWAGON]

It actually sounds a bit silly to me because a RWC is still a good thing to have and the brakes at least need to checked by taking the wheels off and inspecting......Bloody Vic Roads and their stupid ways of doing things.

[pfillery]

Originally Posted by mik

Sounds like crap to me, a car could easily be run into an unroadworthy condition in a couple of years .

They rolled a brand new car straight off the production line once somewhere in Australia and inspected it, it failed. There are lots of awesome older cars and lots of crappy new ones. Do they feel that a 5 year old taxi is in the same condition as a 5 year old car belonging to Granny?

My last RWC the guy told me he can tell what a car is like in the first 5 minutes of the inspection and whether it is likely to pass or fail, although he seemed to only deal in older cars and was a bit more understanding than many that deal with later cars (ie not spouting ADRs at you the whole time)

[pfillery]

Originally Posted by zilo

VIV is the biggest rort in Victoria....

($575 and still gotta get a RWC $120 and high risk inspection $45)

Makes the RWC look cheap in comparison.

Worst part is a lot of sellers won't tell you it needs this unless you ask. A car with something like hail damage has to pass this if it has been written off but there is no onus on the owner to repair it, at least not in Qld.

[joolz]

Originally Posted by mik

Sounds like crap to me, a car could easily be run into an unroadworthy condition in a couple of years .

I wouldnt say that. If the car is serviced from new any unroadworthy items should be rectified like tyres, brakes, oil leaks and so on.

But I do think it should be changed to what the warranty period is on the vehicle from new. As to keep the warranty the owner would ensure its serviced.

[DTFRMONT]

Originally Posted by pfillery

Worst part is a lot of sellers won't tell you it needs this unless you ask. A car with something like hail damage has to pass this if it has been written off but there is no onus on the owner to repair it, at least not in Qld.

Here in Vic, a seller must advise a purchaser if a car is listed on the written-off register, even if a VIV has been done, this is done as a declaration on the transfer papers.

[KIWI-1]

Originally Posted by pfillery

My last RWC the guy told me he can tell what a car is like in the first 5 minutes of the inspection and whether it is likely to pass or fail, although he seemed to only deal in older cars and was a bit more understanding than many that deal with later cars (ie not spouting ADRs at you the whole time)

I know a guy who won't do RWC because of the paperwork and liability. For a slab he will put your car on the hoist and tell you what to fix before you take it somewhere else.

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by mik

Sounds like crap to me, a car could easily be run into an unroadworthy condition in a couple of years .

Exactly, if any changes were to be made it should be based on km not on years. some cars within 5 years can do as many as some do in 10.

[pfillery]

Originally Posted by 4VCLEVO

Not to mention you only get 7 days to get your car in a road worthy condition after the first inspection or you have to pay the $180 again to get the road worthy certificate. The 7 days makes it hard if you like to fix things yourself.

We get 14 days in qld and they last us 3 months. We can also use the same roadworthy for a new registration and then a transfer within that 3 month period.

[janddbone]

Why should we have to pay for worthless inspections? If you are not capable of working out if the brakes, tyres, light bulbs etc are working, then take the money you save and go get it serviced. That is what all those items are, maintenance items. Or use the same money to get a pre purchase inspection done that has a warranty. Much more useful than a worthless statutory inspection.

[Auslandau]

The windscreen rort is the biggest rort this side of rorting! Doesn't matter how old, clean unchipped, unpitted, unsandblasted the screen is, it always has the mandatory 'New windscreen required' ticked.

[Itsme]

Get rid of the inspections, how many times have you taken a well maintained car to be inspected for some mug to say wiper blades or some part to be replaced when you know its Ok....
Money for jam!!!

[mash again]

Lucky to be driving in an uninspected SA car, 44 and still alive, if the cops defect the crap cars no one has anything to worry about except the people relying on the income stream.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Auslandau

The windscreen rort is the biggest rort this side of rorting! Doesn't matter how old, clean unchipped, unpitted, unsandblasted the screen is, it always has the mandatory 'New windscreen required' ticked.

The company I bought my GMC Sierra from, it was literally in immaculate condition, owned by Regional Ambulance Victoria and garaged and serviced on time, then owned by the company I bought it off for 6 years, only used a few times a year.

We worked on it at my work, where I first noticed it and I had a drive and played around, was in awesome condition.

Their mechanic made them replace the windscreen and two seat belts even though they worked fine for RWC, lol.

Could put new wiper blades on it when you pull up in their car park and 9/10 times the car will fail on windscreen wiper blades lol.

[KIWI-1]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Could put new wiper blades on it when you pull up in their car park and 9/10 times the car will fail on windscreen wiper blades lol.

I think part of that is the 'need' to find something wrong.
Bit like an auditor (in any industry) - waste of time & money if nothing is 'found'.