Personal responsibility ! I don't think it is in the Kiwi psyche. I can just see allthe idiot drivers taking financial short cuts at our expense.Great. More hospital bills.LOL
nzeva,
Mar 29, 10:41am
I think it's a good idea, just make the one year test a bit stricter (like the MOT in the UK) Removing the front wheels and checking the pad thickness and Increasing the minimum tyre tread depth to 2.5mm will help with safety. So many cars get WOF's with worn out pads.it's not funny!
therafter1,
Mar 29, 11:01am
Crikey, it would be a serious concern to me if WOF??
rsr72,
Mar 29, 11:18am
I note many Kiwis have for long been rushing up to the States to buy their numerous 50 year-old and older cars. Americans must be pleased their old non-Woffing cars are leaving their roads.
bellky,
Mar 29, 12:21pm
And brightening up ours.
mrfxit,
Mar 29, 12:22pm
compulsory insurance WILL work well, but only if it's brought in & kept at a reasonable cost, (bang for buck)
No or long delayed wof's MUST include much harsher penaltys when caught with faults & even harder for fault related accidents. THO .does need to be tempered for lesser faults
woody1946,
Mar 29, 1:19pm
Agree--how many are going to worry about faded and frayed seatbelts, window washers that don't work because the bottle is empty, tyres a bit on the thin side or mis-matched, or a windscreen chip. There's heaps of things people perceive as being minor that will go unchecked
elect70,
Mar 29, 1:29pm
With cars now being madelighter& less repairable& non serviceable,still need theWofbut once a year only.Cant rely on mr & mrsaverage to know if theircar isnt up toscratch . so no Wof isnt good idea . Aussiehasnt got all theJUCwe have .
dent,
Mar 29, 3:02pm
I still think 6 month wofs have merrit. The amount of cars that I do warants on that I wouldnt put my family anywhere near is scary. And you tell me how much are people going to save. If you have two cars your going to save $90.00 per year. Because your still guna have the same cost of repairs in the long run. Worst case you could be putting your life and others at risk for $90.00 per year $1.74 per weeek.
bellky,
Mar 29, 3:05pm
I agree fwiw.
princesspossum,
Mar 29, 3:06pm
I must profess to being a bit of a dufus when it comes to car maintenance. I wouldn't know that my brake pads were worn unless they were making a strange sound, so in that sense, a regular WOF is great.
I do think they are pretty $$ for what they are though. I wouldn't mind 6 monthly WOFs if they were $25 a pop, instead of $50+ from a testing station.
gjmman,
Mar 29, 3:22pm
Perhaps some merit in increasing the age that you can get annual wof from 5 to 10 years. I do know people who decide that 6 month wofs means time for a new car.
carmedic,
Mar 29, 3:30pm
But that??
smac,
Mar 29, 3:40pm
It's gonna be a fine balance between maintenance, which SHOULD be average Joe's concern, and safety, which has historically been considered the State's problem.
If you also make safety Joe's problem, then you open the door to damages claims. Insurance probably has to be looked at at the same time.
ladatrouble,
Mar 29, 3:45pm
This has been on the table before, about 20 years ago. When the WoF and rego stickers were changed to what they are now, it was going to be one sticker - WoF and rego procured in one go. But it was in the too hard basket - one reason being the state of cars on the road, back then we were failing cars on rust practically every day, now I'm lucky to nail one in 6 months.
We still have an old vehicle fleet, and new rules are going to make it stay, not go away. I don't want to be on the road when some clowns car has a wheel brg or ball joint fail in front of me. Doesn't happen much here, but it does in the USA.
moosie_21,
Mar 29, 3:58pm
Personally, I feel this country has no hope in maintaining it's cars. We live in an overpriced car market with underpaid people (not to mention personal responsibility being at a flat 0), they're not going to get things done unless they are made to. You would NEVER see a 1992 MS8 on the roads in North America simply for the reason cars are pumped out over there and therefore cost around half of what they do here. You can't compare apples and oranges, and therefore can't have the same rules.
tonyrockyhorror,
Mar 29, 4:03pm
If it becomes compulsory it will never be kept at a reasonable cost. Even the insurers themselves have said this.
gunhand,
Mar 29, 5:16pm
I have no issue with the current system at all. But say it is up to Mr or Mrs driver to make sure there car is up to a road worthy standard. What I see happening is because they are not car savy they will then think they have to take there car to the mechanic every so often (sure, some never will) to make sure it is because no doubt huge fines will follow for a blown tail light and car not being up to scratch for that "accidently broken light" during the pull over when some one gets lippy. So its at the mechanics and Mrs driver is told your car needs 4x roadex buhes in the osculating diff at a cost of $200 each. Being a worrysome citizen and concerned about the kids safety thinks she better have this work done for sure. Oh and Mrs Driver we found your exhaust also needs replacing.Yea I can see people being ripped left right and centre. At least where you get your car warrented is not where you have to have it fixed and therefore stops people being shafted most of the time anyway.
easygoer,
Mar 29, 6:33pm
My only issue with the current system is the frequency of the checks, I am still in favor of having regular safety checks but they should be tied to the odometer as well, for example my car (2005) shifts to six monthly checks at the end of this year, it has 55K on the clock and I add around 4K per year, that means I will have to get it checked every 2K whereas a traveler on the road each day can travel 20 to 30K in the same six months hence the wear is 10 to 15 times greater, perhaps annual checks for vehicles traveling lesser K's is the answer, in reference to a post above re the warrant cost if you can't afford the minor $50.00 cost you probably can't afford to own a vehicle
pebbles61,
Mar 29, 6:36pm
WOFs should be once a year, 6 months is too short. Also the WOF isn't worth the paper it's written on, it's just a check on that one day to see if the car is ok. Also on the subject the government better not get rid of my cheap classic car licence fees.
rob_man,
Mar 29, 6:42pm
A cunning ploy to get more old cars off the road, it's often a struggle to justify fixing six months worth of attririon on an older vehicle. Twelve months worth will bring about the demise of said vehicle often as not.
fordcrzy,
Mar 29, 6:49pm
i agree with yearly wofs or 15,000 km which ever is first. 6 months is stupid.
mgmad,
Mar 29, 6:50pm
Yes it's a check that it was road worthy on that day, but it still brings the vehicle up to standard every 6 months, rather than not at all. In NZ, crashes caused by worn or damaged vehicle components is very low compared to most countries, something like 5% (I forget where I saw this stat, but I'm sure if you want you can use google). It's one thing we actually get right in regards to our roads and driving.
pebbles61,
Mar 29, 6:53pm
Sad but true. Some Kiwis amaze me when it comes to car ownership. They'd sooner sell a car then pay money to fix the one they have it seems =/
woody1946,
Mar 29, 7:03pm
Bottom Line--There are already heaps of un-warrented heaps of junk cruising our roads as we write, you only need to walk a line of cars at a parking lot to see this. So to be serious about WOFs it needs to be policed properly . The morons we discuss on here are out there now regardless of how often a check takes place
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.