The Motor Trades Association of Queensland is pushing for annual vehicle inspections

[BF-2K7]

I was a manager of a mechanical/tyre store for 6 yrs and I managed to do it with only 3 staff (the 4th was on the road)

Got the store off its feet and into profit, through my 25 years of retail nowhow, little things count, and businesses need to find the time to do them.

We had contracts with Telstra and NSW emergency services (Police Ambo's and Firey's) maintaining their vehicles as well as doing tyres for Mr Linfox on the road 24/7 and other high profile transport customers, and the general public, so customer service was a priority.

We all slogged our guts out, but we made that store run like clockwork and was proud of everyone of my staff for the time I was there.

Nothing was a problem for them, and many at time they went above and beyond what was expected of them, granted, working after hours was a pain, but they did it to service the customers, and the customers appreciated it.

Seems alot of people think everything is way too hard these days.

A bit of effort goes a long way in a small business.

[my_gxl]

Originally Posted by burnz

NSW only test.

headlights
blinkers
taillights
suspention rebound
brake test in Nm verses G force
engine number and vin
tires
tie rods
front bearings
odometer reading

I couldn't believe how easy the NSW test was, (even though the guy would not pass my street legal semi slicks as he was scared if he did the RMS would fine him).

Every time I drive at night around Brissi there are heaps of cars with only one headlight working.

Stop with the exhaust emissions scare tactics. How about just keeping lights working people... and the police can't even spot that.

Safer cars, and less oil on the roads is always a plus.

If anyone bothered to read the OP, they might see its not aimed at taking old cars off the road. There are some old cars that will put practically new ons to shame.

Fix your car or keep the bunch of junk off the road.

But we could let them save money by not fixing the indicators, since no one uses them anyway.

[my_gxl]

Originally Posted by flappist

Maybe they fix them themselves, maybe they have a mechanic on staff, maybe they take them to another person but I don't think there will be government inspecting stations out in woop woop.

But all of this does not matter as TMR do not support either the carpetbaggers or the nannyistasrs so it is not going to happen.

I find it hard to believe that a moderator of a motoring forum is fighting against a vehicle safety program.

Can anyone in Country NSW answer where they go to get their licenses and registration?

It must be possible or there are a lot of unlicensed drivers and unregistered vehicles in country NSW.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by my_gxl

I find it hard to believe that a moderator of a motoring forum is fighting against a vehicle safety program.

Can anyone in Country NSW answer where they go to get their licenses and registration?

It must be possible or there are a lot of unlicensed drivers and unregistered vehicles in country NSW.

No what I am against is carpet baggers attempting to manipulate legislation to line their own pockets and the general nanny mentality of do-gooders.

The current law states that all cars on the road must be road worthy. All this stunt is doing is forcing everyone to pay money to a small group for a piece of paper to keep some public servants shuffling.

If there were no unroadworthy cars in NSW or the road toll was substantially lower than all the other states then there might be some grounds to investigate it. This is not the case.

[Trevor 57]

Geez flappist, I actually agree with you on this one, mark this down in the books - LOL

[aussie muscle]

Originally Posted by flappist

All this stunt is doing is forcing everyone to pay money to a small group for a piece of paper to keep some public servants shuffling.

it all comes down to money and money is probably the reason they'll introduce it in QLD.

[rors]

Hi folks,
As a motorcyclist (and owner of a now well-maintained AU XR8), I am very much in favour of annual inspections (for vehicles over 5-10 years), because I believe that would reduce the amount of fluid and other crap dropped by badly-maintained vehicles on the road surface.
Cheers

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by rors

Hi folks,
As a motorcyclist (and owner of a now well-maintained AU XR8), I am very much in favour of annual inspections (for vehicles over 5-10 years), because I believe that would reduce the amount of fluid and other crap dropped by badly-maintained vehicles on the road surface.
Cheers

As as Victorian I don't like having to pay higher TAC rates as part of my rego to pay for motorcyclists who have trouble staying on their mototrcycles.

[rors]

Originally Posted by Trevor 57

As as Victorian I don't like having to pay higher TAC rates as part of my rego to pay for motorcyclists who have trouble staying on their mototrcycles.

=)

As a fellow Victorian, I cop both the TAC charge on my car rego, plus a much, much higher TAC charge on the bike rego!

The state of many cars on Victoria's roads is a joke - maybe if cars were better maintained and therefore both cars and roads were safer we could all save a few bob on TAC costs in the future...

[big_landau]

Originally Posted by DASH GT

What is the point of checking brand new cars??

I don't see the point of that.

i have seen people buy brand new cars and get the wheels changed the same day to rims more than 1" larger than standard,then a week later get a new zorst and guess what i bet they arnt roadworthy either.any car can be unroadworthy regardless of its age.

[my_gxl]

Originally Posted by big_landau

i have seen people buy brand new cars and get the wheels changed the same day to rims more than 1" larger than standard,then a week later get a new zorst and guess what i bet they arnt roadworthy either.any car can be unroadworthy regardless of its age.

Think there is a huge difference between being considered roadworthy according to all the rules, and the car actually being safe for the driver (and other road users) to operate on the roads.
There are many that would not even be considered the latter.

[big_landau]

about wheels,i see its ok to use space saver rims as long as you only do a max of 80km/h.now i wonder if i fit a set of front runners to my car is it cool to only do a max of 80km/h?or how about going the other way is it legal to fit 4 space saver rims to your car if you never go onto hyways etc and dont go over 80km/h?

[flappist]

Originally Posted by big_landau

about wheels,i see its ok to use space saver rims as long as you only do a max of 80km/h.now i wonder if i fit a set of front runners to my car is it cool to only do a max of 80km/h?or how about going the other way is it legal to fit 4 space saver rims to your car if you never go onto hyways etc and dont go over 80km/h?

It is only legal to use a space saver wheel in an emergency situation. It is not legal to leave it on after you get home or to a safe place where it can be replaced by the correct tyre for the vehicle.

The topic is being lost here.

The topic is NOT that cars should be roadworthy at all times.

The topic is that a private, non government, non academic, non community lobby group are pushing for a change in legislation that will increase the income of its members at the expense of all the other people in the state despite there being no evidence whatsoever that such legislation, where it has been implemented, has made any perceivable difference to road safety.

[Trevor 57]

well said again flappist

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by burnz

NSW only test.

headlights
blinkers
taillights
suspention rebound
brake test in Nm verses G force
engine number and vin
tires
tie rods
front bearings
odometer reading

And..........
All doors must open from the inside.
All windows must work.
Seat belts must be in good cond (not frayed)
Seats must be in good condition (no rips or tears)
No oil leaks, anywhere.
Must comply with EPA noise limit.
No play in steering.

[Xauterus]

It is interesting when people pull out the "safety" word.

What do people consider safe? Surely the latest and some of the most expensive cars are the safest on our roads now. It is easy to stand on a soap box and proclaim that safety will save the world.

I ask this, If a car is say pre air bags, about 97? Is it safe on our roads? What if its pre 1980 and lacking ABS etc is it safe? What if its an XM Falcon is it considered safe? Drum brakes, conventional tyres, no seat belts, no collapsible column in stock form.

Yes to reduce accidents ever so slightly it might help to remove/repair non maintained cars from our roads. Is this really solving the bigger problem that we have in Australia? We have a huge amount of poorly maintained roads.

Look at the number of road accidents in rural areas around mines etc. Most are driving later model company vehicles. Fatigue and poor road conditions contribute hugely to crashes. Look at the stretch of road before Gympie, It has claimed many lives, were all those people driving cars that were not "safe"??

I am sorry but I am a cynic when it comes to a body like MTAQ suggesting something like this. Sounds like more of a push to remove old cars and having people buying new cars.

[redxm]

Yep, its a cost. At the end of the day its just another thing to do.

I have a friend who does pink slips, I do all my own services on my cars, but he looks after all our work vehicles.

The $300 POS EB wagon I bought (on gas and my mate doesnt do gas inspections) that had 330K on it had less wrong with it than my 02 AU with 150k on it. And to be honest I had no idea it had issues as the bride drives it all the time.

One way or another this island needs to pull together and have the same rules across the states. Its a circus.

[noflac52]

Originally Posted by Trevor 57

As as Victorian I don't like having to pay higher TAC rates as part of my rego to pay for motorcyclists who have trouble staying on their mototrcycles.

In a post last week an op in another thread in the pub posted stastics for VIC which stated that 80% of those motorcyclists who have trouble staying on their motorcycles, as you put it were actually knocked off by car drivers!

You appear by the nature of your post, that if it doesn't directly benefit you, you object to paying any extra money.
This makes a mockery of the safety line that you are always pointing out in your posts.

The statistic of 1% of fatal crashes being contributed to mechanical failure is the same in NSW according to recent stats.

I don't know the stats for Qld but if it is any higher than the states with annual checks that would be at least 1 life.

So I have a theoretical question for the contributors to the thread. More so the Queenslanders as it will affect you more.

With reference to trev57s post about objecting to paying for someone elses well being.

Is less than thirty dollars for an inspection too much for you as individuals to pay to save that life?

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by noflac52

Is less than thirty dollars for an inspection too much for you as individuals to pay to save that life?

$30 !! that's cheap. Around here they're $49

[svo supporter]

Originally Posted by rors

Hi folks,
As a motorcyclist (and owner of a now well-maintained AU XR8), I am very much in favour of annual inspections (for vehicles over 5-10 years), because I believe that would reduce the amount of fluid and other crap dropped by badly-maintained vehicles on the road surface.
Cheers

There are plenty of cars under 5 years of age that leak oil, have faulty exhaust systems, bald tyres, frayed seat belts and non-functioning lights....

If an annual inspection is going to be put in place, they shouldn't put an age frame on the age of the car that's eligable....it should be mandatory for all ages...

[svo supporter]

Originally Posted by BF-2K7

I was a manager of a mechanical/tyre store for 6 yrs and I managed to do it with only 3 staff (the 4th was on the road)

Got the store off its feet and into profit, through my 25 years of retail nowhow, little things count, and businesses need to find the time to do them.

We had contracts with Telstra and NSW emergency services (Police Ambo's and Firey's) maintaining their vehicles as well as doing tyres for Mr Linfox on the road 24/7 and other high profile transport customers, and the general public, so customer service was a priority.

We all slogged our guts out, but we made that store run like clockwork and was proud of everyone of my staff for the time I was there.

Nothing was a problem for them, and many at time they went above and beyond what was expected of them, granted, working after hours was a pain, but they did it to service the customers, and the customers appreciated it.

Seems alot of people think everything is way too hard these days.

A bit of effort goes a long way in a small business.

Personally I am a service fitter, so my day is flat out (and some night/early morning work, which I don't get paid for).....Judging by your comments, my employer shouldn't be too successful, as we don't make these courtesy calls to mention faults with cars(he's only been in business 27 years)...and my reputation should be shot to pieces with these customers I do work for, because I don't call them in the middle of the night, to advise they have an obvious mechanical fault, or call them during the day to advise of problems.....(been a fitter for 20 odd years, with a client base that has followed me through a few different employers)

Seriously mate, there is more to running a business successfully, than making a simple courtesy call.....simply advising the customer in person, especially in writing, goes a long way to keeping a business successful, especially when time is very tight...(which mine is)

[burnz]

Originally Posted by GasOLane

$30 !! that's cheap. Around here they're $49

$35 for the wife's car.

previous post ..........
All doors must open from the inside.
All windows must work.
Seat belts must be in good cond (not frayed)
Seats must be in good condition (no rips or tears)
No oil leaks, anywhere.
Must comply with EPA noise limit.
No play in steering.
__________________
he just looks at the tires and brake test, he's not interested in the full detail as it would cost him more money than he makes from me.

[flappist]

It is a bit amusing the number of South Australians, New South Welshmen and New Zealanders who are so rabid about changing the law in QUEENSLAND.

I suppose it is yet another example of tall poppy syndrome with the losers trying to drag the winners back down to their level...........

[burnz]

Originally Posted by flappist

It is a bit amusing the number of South Australians, New South Welshmen and New Zealanders who are so rabid about changing the law in QUEENSLAND.

I suppose it is yet another example of tall poppy syndrome with the losers trying to drag the winners back down to their level...........

i'm not tying to change QLD laws, i understand your point as in drum up buisiness under the guise of safety...

just dispelling myths of the NSW system, the main benifit is the second hand market.
you know how many k's are on a car without checking the odometer..

[flappist]

Originally Posted by burnz

i'm not tying to change QLD laws, i understand your point as in drum up buisiness under the guise of safety...

just dispelling myths of the NSW system, the main benifit is the second hand market.
you know how many k's are on a car without checking the odometer..

That was not pointed at anyone in particular nor was it suggest that all of the above are like that, it was just an observation that everyone who is rabidly in favour of it appears to be from those places regardless of where they are now.

[nstg8a]

Originally Posted by flappist

It is a bit amusing the number of South Australians, New South Welshmen and New Zealanders who are so rabid about changing the law in QUEENSLAND.

I suppose it is yet another example of tall poppy syndrome with the losers trying to drag the winners back down to their level...........

So the south Australians, new south Welshmen, and New Zealanders that live and pay taxes in Queensland, just like you, aren't allowed an opinion?

Or do you need to be a certain age, race, creed, and sexual persuasion to be allowed the honour of contributing?

I'm all for regular enforced inspections, I'm not all for it being run by private companies as just another cash grab on the consumer.

Done properly it can only be a good thing. Unfortunately track records of recent administrations mean it would just end up in one big cluster fudge.

[BF-2K7]

Originally Posted by flappist

It is a bit amusing the number of South Australians, New South Welshmen and New Zealanders who are so rabid about changing the law in QUEENSLAND.

I suppose it is yet another example of tall poppy syndrome with the losers trying to drag the winners back down to their level...........

........ and that helps the topic how? calling people from other states losers.

We have valid opinions, and not once have we lowered ourselves to name calling, you may not agree with people having different opinions but name calling and derogitory remarks are not helping.

Most of the remarks from people in other states are about making it a National safety scheme, not just for QLD, but for all of Australia so that all vehicles in the country are on a 'level playing field', and have some uniformity.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by BF-2K7

........ and that helps the topic how? calling people from other states losers.

We have valid opinions, and not once have we lowered ourselves to name calling, you may not agree with people having different opinions but name calling and derogitory remarks are not helping.

Most of the remarks from people in other states are about making it a National safety scheme, not just for QLD, but for all of Australia so that all vehicles in the country are on a 'level playing field', and have some uniformity.

So what is the topic again?

[AU1XLS]

Closed