TV 3 News Tonight (Sun) modified cars for invalids

Page 2 / 2
kazbanz, Feb 25, 9:48pm
Now a somewhat different version of matters
LVVTA says it found 400 faults between the eight modified vehicles, some which it says were serious and affected the handling of the car.
LVVTA CEO Tony Johnson told Autotalk the structure of the cars and the suspension were so badly compromised by the modifications, that the standard 1.6mm toe change of the Skoda Yeti grew to 43mm in the modified vehicles.
This would cause the rear of the car to bump steer says Johnston.
Phillip??
supernova2, Feb 25, 10:13pm
Love to see a list of the 400 faults.

I can see how each one could be different as I suspect they are made to customer order.

Interesting that the LVVTA guy apparently approved things he shouldn't have. Isn't most LVVTA stuff "in the inspectors opinion"?

At the end of the day I'd be dubious of buying any production vehicle that had been hacked about to that extent but in this case I still think it disgusting that there are 10 of these things running about and then a Govt outfit comes alone and says Nope cant use it. Those decisions should have been made before the 1st one hit the road.

Wonder how much taxpayer/ACC money involved in the purchases?
kazbanz, Feb 25, 10:35pm
SN-I know its being a pedant but its actually 8 vehicles.
so spread over those 8 there are 400 faults.
Thats 50 per vehicle.
Now keeping in mind that some may be really simple stuff to fix like welds not being up to standard,seatbelt fixing points being not substantial enough etc. but lets be generous and say 10 serious faults per vehicle.
thats not good in anyones book
kellrae, Feb 25, 10:46pm
Mr Berger and his association VANZ DOES NOT AND NEVER HAS had any mandate represent Disabled Persons, especially not any of the owners of the UDM Skoda Yeti.

As for driving force - yes driving force to push another competitor out of the market, because UDM product is innovative.

Also if you saw the proposed LVVTA remedy you would laugh yourself to death!

The Manufacturer is not being pig headed. I was at the recent meeting between LVVTA and UDM - the LVVTA were the most arrogant group of guys I have ever meet.

Besides the cars cost far more than $80K - that seems to be a figure someone has pulled out of the air.
kellrae, Feb 25, 10:53pm
Goodness knows where you get your information from but there are a lot of errors here.

I cannot be bother going further as it is all 'heresay' and I do not believe you have any personal knowledge at all
supernova2, Feb 25, 11:14pm
That what I was trying to say. What are these faults, and in who's opinion are they a fault? If they are serious faults then they should never have been declared fit for the road in the first place. In that case claim is against the cerification agent.

Without been flipant it looks like they had the AA do a prepurchase check and then said good to go.

As for it only being 8 I admit I was taking a bit of a guess as I never really took any notice.

I have no idea if NZTA did the correct thing BUT I still say if it was a problem it should have been stopped at car 1 and not after 8 are ( were) on the road.

The $ value of these things is starting to become scarey. You mentioned the Wellcargo - what you reckon one of those on the road would be worth?
smac, Feb 25, 11:49pm
Have only just looked at this, what a load of. nothing.

Certifier certified vehicles he shouldn't have. somebody somewhere dobbed them in, NZTA step in and revoke the WOF's. Vehicles will need to be re-certified.

Owners/manufacturer's gripe is with the LVV certifier, end of story. I imagine NZTA are having a little chat with him as well.
zephyrheaven, Feb 26, 12:05am
Probably just revoke his authority, it happens a lot.
It will get worse before it gets better and then it will be easier, just like the building industry (ahem)
kazbanz, Jul 25, 9:15am
MMMMM-My information is heresay?
NO my information doesn't line up with your mandate therefore the best bet to push your mandate is to ignore it. vehicles So you are saying that over 8 --NOTE 8 not 7 not 9 not 10 -- 8 vehicles there were NOT 400 faults found of a serious to not so serious nature?
You are saying that very specific engineering solutions were NOT offered to the manufacturer by people (MANY PEOPLE) with a lot of years in the industry and those solutions weren't rejected by the manufacturer?
Hey again I feel sorry for you being without a vehicle--but be dead set certain you level the blame at the people who refused to sort matters out NOT those who offered solutions.--Incidently WITHOUT charge to the company concerned
-BUT hey I don't know what I'm talking about.