Or are they too tough! I am doing a research project at school and would like to hear what you all think on the subject along with some examples
pollymay,
Sep 23, 9:20am
They shouldn't actually NEED to exist but NZers are too dumb.
phillip.weston,
Sep 23, 9:26am
I think WOFs are absolutely necessary as without them people would be driving around on bald tyres with the steel belts exposed and headlamps/brake lamps not functioning. I think they need to be tougher on some areas such as mis-aligned headlamps but can be quite pedantic on other things. One thing which I find is WOF workshops are not consistent. Some places will pick up on things which other places will miss completely, and vice versa. I think you can't rely on the police to be pulling defective cars over as some cars which look like a bag of crap may actually be totally safe but some cars which look a million bucks may have an underlying severe mechanical fault which isn't obvious until you get the car up on a hoist.
johnf_456,
Sep 23, 9:34am
The sad thing is a wof does not stop people from driving around in defect vehicles, they either don't wof in the first place or get a wof and let the vehicle go back to a un wof able state by neglecting to replace brake shoes despite making a massive racket or tyres that any joe bloggs can spot are wearing envenly. As a AVI I think some aspects of the wof are a tad over the top and should be a bit more lax,
carmedic,
Sep 23, 9:53am
I used to think like that John, I thought that if some of the more pedantic rules were relaxed these people you talk of would be more likely to comply with the law. However that??
johnf_456,
Sep 23, 10:03am
True but you gotta admit some avi rules are pathetic and yes I enforce them even if I agree with them or not. Some things are just plain right pedantic, the days of good old common sense from government departments is long gone and as long as they get there pay bonus all is well. But also just because a vehicle that is no wof is unsafe just like how a vehicle with one is magically safe for the next 6 month or 12 months (age dependent), the irony is it comes down to ownership responsibility and many people lack it these days. The amount of cars I fix 3 months or whatever after a wof then notice a defect part, flogged bush, exhaust leak and when asking the owner oh it got a wof a month ago how can this happen. As you would know yourself too right.
Bring on common sense and ditch pedantic unrealistic crap over someone justifying there bonus. I may be old school but I am a firm believer in common sense.
mrfxit,
Sep 23, 10:13am
Nothing wrong with the current rules (mostly) It's a general lack of consistency thats a big part of the problem along with "interpretations" of the rules.
Tainui has THAT down to a fine art ;-(
bigjerry,
Sep 23, 10:13am
i agree with your first sentiment, but screw you buddy for the second part! (pulls fingers)
phillip.weston,
Sep 23, 10:18am
most countries have semi-regular inspection or inspections which need to be carried out for a change of ownership. I think some countries are dumb for not having them.
rsr72,
Sep 23, 10:27am
#1- Just a gigantic make-work scheme for retired mechanics. Most countries don't have them as we do. Nanny State at it's best.
tigra,
Sep 23, 10:29am
Trouble ismost of the rules are devised by desk bound "experts" some of which they reverse from time to time. I'm yet to be convinced that some of the petty rules actually contribute to road safety .eg: splits in ball joint covers. Safety checks should be confined to brakes, steering,fuel leaks and major rust. But unfortunately the WoF system (and subsequent repairs) has grown into a huge industrywhich needs to have ongoing customers unlike most other motorised countries. I would be happy with the Aussie system that puts the onus on drivers to have safe cars rather than on testers finding minor issues.
rsr72,
Sep 23, 10:49am
.and as in America, the home of the automobile.
steve312,
Sep 23, 11:09am
Split ball joint covers aren't a WOF item and haven't been for a long time.As an AVI, I believe the inspection requirements are pretty good.There are a small number of more pedantic rules but by and large the majority of them are legit requirements.And still we end up with unsafe and unroadworthy vehicles on the road.The requirement to have a WOF on your car before you can register it is a good way to force people into having their cars checked.Without the WOF check, many would just continue to drive their car and have no idea what was happening underneath it.The Aussie system works well but the NZ public would have to learn to accept the far harsher penalties for driving an unroadworthy vehicle and getting caught by the Police.We already have a lot of posters on this website that hate the Police with a vengeance.No system is foolproof though.The one we have here at the moment really isn't that bad.
poppajn,
Sep 23, 12:26pm
Big variation between garages, but , yes very neccasry, up to you to do maintanence between WOF,s, especially with 12 month ones, i.e. some cars will do 100000 k plus in this period.
bmwnz,
Sep 23, 3:50pm
The majority of items appear to me (as a non-mechanic) to be safety-based and I'm perfectly happy to rectify anything that may lead to my car being a hazard to me or others. However failing a car because the washer water is empty, as some have pointed out, is just ridiculous.
I still think twice yearly is too much, however.
franc123,
Sep 23, 4:22pm
The only things that NZ is out of step with compared to other vehicle safety inspection regimes overseas is the excessive frequency of the checks for older cars and the fact that inservice emissions checks are somewhat of an unscientific joke, the rest of it is fine and as workable as it can be as it stands at present.Contrary to popular belief NZTA have actually worked fairly hard especially over the last 10 years or so with their PRS system to achieve better consistency between AVICs and AVIs,to clear up technical confusion and also weed out/help improve poor performers in the industry.Vehicles here are subject to more inspections over say a 15 year life than anywhere else, an annual check for ALL cars/trailers regardless of age would be sufficient IMO in the same way that other forms of machinery are subject to annual checks.
gabbysnana,
Sep 23, 6:10pm
Isnt this pedantic crap to protect you avi's from being sued- this pedantic crap came about when the wheelcame off that car in rotorua glades and killed people- the avi was deemed responsible,in response to that and other incidents these pedantic craps were tightened up so to save your bacon, arent you audited regularily to weed out the immigrant avi's such as those that were recently caught selling telephone warrants for $20 tanishing the reputation of the pedantic avis that keep our roads safe and their PI intact.
snoopy221,
Sep 23, 6:24pm
this pedantic crap came about when the wheelcame off that car in rotorua glades and killed people- the avi was deemed responsible THAT is a general sweeping statement IMHO and you need to be more specific. [Personaly i think you refer to the clutch job where a person was fired and the fired person removed the tie rod end and refitted the nut. And the AVI signed off a castellated nut without a split pin]
cjdnzl,
Sep 23, 6:36pm
If the warrant system is all that good checking for safety, how come the shock absorbers are never checked!A visual check for leaking oil is not enough - if the rebound control is impaired or absent then braking is compromised.The warrant people put a car on the rolling road to check brake performance and side-to-side balance, but completely ignore the effect of a juddering or tramping suspension under heavy braking due to stuffed shocks.
richynuts,
Sep 23, 6:45pm
I wouldn't say all kiwis are dumb, I have another few reasons here#1 kiwis have too much of "she'll be right attitude and will fix it tomorrow"but tomorrow comes and goes or until just before next WOF. #2 Kiwis want their car so they can be independant but ignorant when it comes to how much it actually costs to keep a car on the road safely and reliably. #3 with the cost of living increasing ever so rapidly maintenence on their car starts becoming a lower priority.
tigertim20,
Sep 23, 6:50pm
A few thoughts for your school project. A WOF, in the fine print states that a WOF is basically only a snapshot. What that means is that if you get a WOF at 3pm, and you get pulled over at 301pm, a police officers opinion can override the WOF. The reason for this is a liability issue. Often, people will swaop things over on their car, go get a WOF, then they go home, and put their illegal parts etc back on the car. In effect, it doesnt really matter too much how strict it is. Some areas are way too strict, the odd one almost pointless, and some perhaps a bit lenient on occaision. Perhaps you could also discuss how a change to the licencing system could affect WOFs, or even make then unnecessary
pollymay,
Sep 23, 6:53pm
Even the smart can be stupid. Like I said it shouldn't be needed but the sheeple have to have their hands held. I check all my balljoints etc regular, for me it's just an inconvenience.
snoopy221,
Sep 23, 6:57pm
well so far you are SHORT on EXAMPLES.I.E. it appears you have more of the general public posting than EXPERIENCED Warrant Of FITNESS Inspectors/mechanics-(AVIC'- ;S).Okay EXAMPLE.1. Legislation allows an unsafe seatbelt [JISD4604] And either an avic decides it IS unsafe-or follows the book and passes it.
rpvr,
Sep 23, 7:00pm
WOFs are not just to check for safety, they are also there to ensure exhaust systems are not so noisy that they disrupt the peace and quiet of other citizens. I believe exhaust noise should be no more than that with the manufacturer's standard system, or well below the maximum allowable level of 95Db. Anything not CLEARLY below that should be referred for certification. So why is it that I have seen vehicles with huge big bore exhausts scream into the testing station with sufficient noise to make conversation impossible in the vicinity, yet get their WOF without comment. Any AVI like to tell me how this works!
flybye_in_a_rx7,
Sep 23, 7:09pm
im happy with the way it works at the moment
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.