DoE testing - The Last Word

Irishgoatman · 03-04-2012 11:47am

Pjwal wrote: »

they taxed mine without the doe cert, my wife did it in line when the reminder came in. so i still have the test center pass cert. i know i need to hand it in so that its intered on the the garda database, but i thought the whole idea was that you needed it to tax it

I was only changing pass cert for a roadworthiness cert. Tax is not due until later in year and then I'll be doing it on line as usual. I hope.

Pjwal · 03-04-2012 3:19pm

Buford T Justice wrote: »

No need to go to such extremes. I swapped the swivel bases around on mine. There are four bolts holding it in. I had to undo the catches that hold the seat base in and lift up the sponge and the cover. Once I did that, bob's yer uncle and jobs a good 'un

oh right, yes i can picture that, but i had an extra goal to achieve, which was for the passenger seat to go both ways as the passenger(my sister inlaw) is disabled and its much easier for her getting in and out, but i ll remember what you said if i do any more

Aidan_M_M · 04-04-2012 12:31pm

heard over the last while , a good few people failing over "altered" weight plates , according to calls we're getting , and from a friend in one of the MH clubs . And neither the RSA or the DOE centres can give a definite answer how to easily fix it . "take it to an engineer" , "get a certificate from the manufacturer".. yeah , right...

dickwod1 · 04-04-2012 1:00pm

Tested my '80s Talbot Express today it failed

because of the head lights ... guts of €200 for new headlights off ebay, but a least thats all - buy them fit them sorted.

Irishgoatman · 04-04-2012 1:41pm

dickwod1 wrote: »

Tested my '80s Talbot Express today it failed because of the head lights ... guts of €200 for new headlights off ebay, but a least thats all - buy them fit them sorted.

What was the problem with the lights?

I've always thought that the headlights on my '86 camper were a little on the dim side but it's always passed the test.

dickwod1 · 04-04-2012 2:04pm

Irishgoatman wrote: »

What was the problem with the lights

One headlights chrome/mirror inside is rusty both have faded glass and both are aligned really badly with no adjusters - on top of the very poor light even though I upgraded the bulbs to Osram nightbreakers. The test centre www.m50truckandvancentre.com (very nice, helpful people) is going to install the new ones and align them correctly for me when I go for the re-test.

Irishgoatman · 04-04-2012 2:31pm

dickwod1 wrote: »

One headlights chrome/mirror inside is rusty both have faded glass and both are aligned really badly with no adjusters - on top of the very poor light even though I upgraded the bulbs to Osram nightbreakers. The test centre www.m50truckandvancentre.com (very nice, helpful people) is going to install the new ones and align them correctly for me when I go for the re-test.

Thanks.

I changed the bulbs the same as you. The glass is clear and the chrome is o.k. and although they passed I'd still like them to be brighter.

Perhaps I ought to leave well alone:).

corkbuoy · 04-04-2012 2:39pm

Aidan_M_M wrote: »

heard over the last while , a good few people failing over "altered" weight plates , according to calls we're getting , and from a friend in one of the MH clubs . And neither the RSA or the DOE centres can give a definite answer how to easily fix it . "take it to an engineer" , "get a certificate from the manufacturer".. yeah , right...

My plate had been altered and rather than risk a fail I got a new plate and cert from SvTech. Just a paper exercise in my case and cost 240 Stg but worth it as it is now all legal and just passed the test.

dickwod1 · 04-04-2012 3:56pm

Irishgoatman wrote: »

Perhaps I ought to leave well alone:).

Yeah the new brighter bulbs and a pass - I would if I could !!!

Irishgoatman · 04-04-2012 4:13pm

dickwod1 wrote: »

Yeah the new brighter bulbs and a pass - I would if I could !!!

Mine passd before I changed the bulbs. Just did that for my own satisfaction. Nothing actually wrong with the lights as such, unlike yours.

Pjwal · 04-04-2012 11:53pm

Aidan_M_M wrote:

heard over the last while , a good few people failing over "altered" weight plates , according to calls we're getting , and from a friend in one of the MH clubs . And neither the RSA or the DOE centres can give a definite answer how to easily fix it . "take it to an engineer" , "get a certificate from the manufacturer".. yeah , right...

I know, it's a big issue. And as I said before, I offered the rsa my camper, which has an altered gvw to look into it a few weeks before the test came in, and they said, "no need. It's not a problem" but we knew it would be.

clionaricho · 10-04-2012 12:01pm

Originally Posted by Aidan_M_M;
heard over the last while , a good few people failing over "altered" weight plates , according to calls we're getting , and from a friend in one of the MH clubs . And neither the RSA or the DOE centres can give a definite answer how to easily fix it . "take it to an engineer" , "get a certificate from the manufacturer".. yeah , right..

I had a very helpful lady from the RSA and I go ther to put it in writing what I need to do to get my van to pass the DOE. Here it is or I can forward it on to anyone that wants it.

Thank you for your query. My colleague Ann has asked me to reply to you in relation to the query you had about altered plate.

In your previous correspondence you advised that your motor caravan had been presented for test with the original manufacturer’s plate having been altered, and because of this your vehicle failed the test.

We suggest that in cases where a vehicle has been physically modified since first registration and the manufacturer’s plate has been removed or its data modified, the owner will have to provide the tester with written confirmation from the original vehicle manufacturer (not importer, distributor or other) detailing approval for the new maximum permissible weights. In the absence of this approval from the original manufacturer for the new weights, a Suitably Qualified Individual (SQI)- , i.e. a person with recognised qualifications and experience – may examine the vehicle and approve the modification in writing and detail the vehicle’s new DGVW and maximum permissible axle weights (the SQI approval letter must comply with the requirements for these letters as per the tester’s manuals) – which I have attached the HGV Manual to this e-mail for your information, should you wish to have a read of it.

I hope that this information is of help to you – but if you have any further queries please contact us.

Regards

She has also given me a list of places that are authorised to make new manufacturer plate which again I can forward on to anyone that wants it.

Hope this helps:-)

martyc5674 · 12-04-2012 12:45pm

Quick Doe question re tyre sizes.
I have 3 215s and a 205 on the van at the moment... Is that a prob?
My spare is also a 205..so I could easily have say the 215,s on the front and the 205,s on the back if needs be.
Or do I need the 4 the same.
Thanks
Marty.

*Kol* · 12-04-2012 3:41pm

martyc5674 wrote: »

Quick Doe question re tyre sizes.
I have 3 215s and a 205 on the van at the moment... Is that a prob?
My spare is also a 205..so I could easily have say the 215,s on the front and the 205,s on the back if needs be.
Or do I need the 4 the same.
Thanks
Marty.

You dont need four the same, however both tyres on each axle should be the same size. I doubt it would be picked up though.

bluethunder · 12-04-2012 4:24pm

*Kol* wrote: »

You dont need four the same, however both tyres on each axle should be the same size. I doubt it would be picked up though.

They picked me up on it. I had two different spec on the front, was told to get it sorted.

*Kol* · 12-04-2012 6:17pm

bluethunder wrote: »

They picked me up on it. I had two different spec on the front, was told to get it sorted.

I stand corrected!

What was the difference in the spec? Weight rating?

bluethunder · 12-04-2012 7:51pm

*Kol* wrote: »

I stand corrected!

What was the difference in the spec? Weight rating?

I'm by no means an expert but, from what I can remember, the tyres had to be over a specific number, i'm assuming to do with axles and weight. Mine was 101 when it should have been above 103 (something like that anyway). Was hoping I could just swap the spare but that was in poor shape so had to get a new tyre. Managed to find a used one for €45 that was as new.

martyc5674 · 12-04-2012 8:10pm

bluethunder wrote: »

*Kol* wrote: »

I stand corrected!

What was the difference in the spec? Weight rating?

I'm by no means an expert but, from what I can remember, the tyres had to be over a specific number, i'm assuming to do with axles and weight. Mine was 101 when it should have been above 103 (something like that anyway). Was hoping I could just swap the spare but that was in poor shape so had to get a new tyre. Managed to find a used one for €45 that was as new.

Cheers
Was the retest just a free visual?... I could spend my time better than swapping the spare over and back if I thought I'd have s chance of getting away with it.
Cheers
Marty.

12-04-2012 9:28pm

problem.presented today for test.tester a gentleman.result Fail.Two plates under bonnet.One a Fiat plate with the chassis no.The other plate headed ALKO KOBER AG with all weights specified.Problem as i understand it Fiat plate does not specify any wieghts.Question i have is this : how could it if they did not produce final vehicle.Nothing has been altered on this Euramobil 02 to my knowledge.The tester believes same i.e weights add up.Any suggestions welcome.

martyc5674 · 12-04-2012 9:35pm

181151 wrote: »

problem.presented today for test.tester a gentleman.result Fail.Two plates under bonnet.One a Fiat plate with the chassis no.The other plate headed ALKO KOBER AG with all weights specified.Problem as i understand it Fiat plate does not specify any wieghts.Question i have is this : how could it if they did not produce final vehicle.Nothing has been altered on this Euramobil 02 to my knowledge.The tester believes same i.e weights add up.Any suggestions welcome.

If I understand you correctly this shouldn't be an issue.
The likes of fiat who supply chassis's to reputable coach builders such as hymer euramobil can leave the plate weights blank.
The builder adds their plate depending what exactly they put on the chassis....alls good???
Maybe he just not used to motorhomes..

Marty.

Into Everything · 12-04-2012 9:52pm

martyc5674 wrote: »

181151 wrote: »

problem.presented today for test.tester a gentleman.result Fail.Two plates under bonnet.One a Fiat plate with the chassis no.The other plate headed ALKO KOBER AG with all weights specified.Problem as i understand it Fiat plate does not specify any wieghts.Question i have is this : how could it if they did not produce final vehicle.Nothing has been altered on this Euramobil 02 to my knowledge.The tester believes same i.e weights add up.Any suggestions welcome.

If I understand you correctly this shouldn't be an issue.
The likes of fiat who supply chassis's to reputable coach builders such as hymer euramobil can leave the plate weights blank.
The builder adds their plate depending what exactly they put on the chassis....alls good???
Maybe he just not used to motorhomes..

Marty.

Good Evening,

I'm in the same position in that I have two weight plates under the bonnet. One fiat with has a gross weight of 3,500kg and an ALKO with a gross weight of 3,850kg. I also have a hymer plate on the outside passenger which had a gross weight of 3,500kg. As far as I have been able to find out the only weight plate that can be used is the Hymer one as this was the weight plate attached after final assembly and the other weight plates were attached at different stages i.e fiat attached theirs on the production line of the cab but the cab was never attached to a chassis. The chassis was attached by alco but they didn't attached the body. Hymer attached their plate after final assembly so this is what is used. My ALCO plate doesn't have the chassis number enscribed on it and so can not be used as an official weight plate. I have mine booked in for the DOE on Tuesday but I am not expecting it to pass purely because it is on an ALCO chassis and with different weight plates and the parking brake issue. Fingers crossed.

12-04-2012 10:00pm

what you say makes sense.Do we know what the policy of the RSA is on this.One presumes individual testers are only working under their guidelines.How can this be resolved:(

martyc5674 · 12-04-2012 10:08pm

Into Everything wrote: »

martyc5674 wrote: »

181151 wrote: »

problem.presented today for test.tester a gentleman.result Fail.Two plates under bonnet.One a Fiat plate with the chassis no.The other plate headed ALKO KOBER AG with all weights specified.Problem as i understand it Fiat plate does not specify any wieghts.Question i have is this : how could it if they did not produce final vehicle.Nothing has been altered on this Euramobil 02 to my knowledge.The tester believes same i.e weights add up.Any suggestions welcome.

If I understand you correctly this shouldn't be an issue.
The likes of fiat who supply chassis's to reputable coach builders such as hymer euramobil can leave the plate weights blank.
The builder adds their plate depending what exactly they put on the chassis....alls good???
Maybe he just not used to motorhomes..

Marty.

Good Evening,

I'm in the same position in that I have two weight plates under the bonnet. One fiat with has a gross weight of 3,500kg and an ALKO with a gross weight of 3,850kg. I also have a hymer plate on the outside passenger which had a gross weight of 3,500kg. As far as I have been able to find out the only weight plate that can be used is the Hymer one as this was the weight plate attached after final assembly and the other weight plates were attached at different stages i.e fiat attached theirs on the production line of the cab but the cab was never attached to a chassis. The chassis was attached by alco but they didn't attached the body. Hymer attached their plate after final assembly so this is what is used. My ALCO plate doesn't have the chassis number enscribed on it and so can not be used as an official weight plate. I have mine booked in for the DOE on Tuesday but I am not expecting it to pass purely because it is on an ALCO chassis and with different weight plates and the parking brake issue. Fingers crossed.

Yours is a different issue...
The previous poster said there was no weights on the fiat plate and the tester took issue to this and disregarded the weights on the Alko plate..

I don't think you have a problem though..your hymer plate should be good enough for them as it would have been the last plate installed.
Marty.

12-04-2012 11:25pm

how can an automobile manufacturer attach a specific weight to a front and back axle before the axles have been built on by hymer or euramobil.Has anyone run this by RSA:mad:

martyc5674 · 12-04-2012 11:29pm

181151 wrote: »

how can an automobile manufacturer attach a specific weight to a front and back axle before the axles have been built on by hymer or euramobil.Has anyone run this by RSA:mad:

These are the MAX individual axle weights.

13-04-2012 8:53am

I am presuming that alko or someone else put the back axle on an alko chassis after it had left fiat:(

martyc5674 · 13-04-2012 9:19am

181151 wrote: »

I am presuming that alko or someone else put the back axle on an alko chassis after it had left fiat:(

Yeah not really sure on the sequence of events... But your euramobil one should still have been last on and therefore the one to be believed??

Irishgoatman · 13-04-2012 10:40am

I don't have weight problems, or at least my camper doesn't, but I would suggest that everyone with this problem gets on to the RSA. Pester them by 'phone.

If they get 'phone calls from half a dozen or more people they will come to realise that something needs to be sorted.

The odd one or two calls possible won't disturb them too much but numbers will.

Best of luck.

bluethunder · 13-04-2012 4:48pm

martyc5674 wrote: »

Cheers
Was the retest just a free visual?... I could spend my time better than swapping the spare over and back if I thought I'd have s chance of getting away with it.
Cheers
Marty.

Yeah, that would be a free re-test as far as I know. I had other problems so had to pay

Pjwal · 15-04-2012 10:24am

martyc5674 wrote: »

181151 wrote: »

problem.presented today for test.tester a gentleman.result Fail.Two plates under bonnet.One a Fiat plate with the chassis no.The other plate headed ALKO KOBER AG with all weights specified.Problem as i understand it Fiat plate does not specify any wieghts.Question i have is this : how could it if they did not produce final vehicle.Nothing has been altered on this Euramobil 02 to my knowledge.The tester believes same i.e weights add up.Any suggestions welcome.

If I understand you correctly this shouldn't be an issue.
The likes of fiat who supply chassis's to reputable coach builders such as hymer euramobil can leave the plate weights blank.
The builder adds their plate depending what exactly they put on the chassis....alls good???
Maybe he just not used to motorhomes..

Marty.

I know that as a tester, in our test centre, we work off the alko plate anyway as alko have now supplyed a new chassis from the back of the cab to the rear of the vehicle and alko have fitted thier own rear axle, and alko are taking full responsabily for theese alterations, weather there are weights on the fiat plate or not, the alko weights supperceed the original plate.

niloc1951 · 16-04-2012 12:50pm

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Rear chassis, back axle !!!!!!
Which end would that be now Mr. RSA

:D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRgrncUGEFQ

Irishgoatman · 16-04-2012 2:44pm

niloc1951 wrote: »

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Rear chassis, back axle !!!!!!
Which end would that be now Mr. RSA :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRgrncUGEFQ[/QUOTE]

I think, er, the, eh,um, person who, er, was er, doing the, um voice over on this, um video,er, needs a few lessons in public speaking.

It would have been interesting if it was not so painful to listen to.

dickwod1 · 16-04-2012 3:04pm

Irishgoatman wrote: »

I think, er, the, eh,um, person who, er, was er, doing the, um voice over on this, um video,er, needs a few lessons in public speaking.

Well said :P

niloc1951 · 17-04-2012 11:36am

Irishgoatman wrote: »

niloc1951 wrote: »

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Rear chassis, back axle !!!!!!
Which end would that be now Mr. RSA :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRgrncUGEFQ[/QUOTE]

I think, er, the, eh,um, person who, er, was er, doing the, um voice over on this, um video,er, needs a few lessons in public speaking.

It would have been interesting if it was not so painful to listen to.

By all means do shoot the messenger in this case, BUT the message itself should be of interest to those with 'weight problems' or expect the supplier of the cab/engine/transmission sections of a motor caravan to also provide data on the 'back end'

Irishgoatman · 17-04-2012 12:24pm

Yes niloc, it was interesting and top marks for finding it.

But still painful to the ear:D.

Into Everything · 17-04-2012 5:22pm

Just back from the VTN centre and my motorhome passed, Fiat, Alko Chassis, Hymer combination. The tester used the fiat weight plate (3500kg) He also said that I didn't need beam benders for the test as the vtn centres have been told to test them as left had drive. That was a waste of €16.

Happy Camper!!:):)

niloc1951 · 17-04-2012 6:13pm

Into Everything wrote: »

....................................He also said that I didn't need beam benders for the test as the vtn centres have been told to test them as left had drive. That was a waste of €16.

Happy Camper!!:):)

Crap

Your headlights are not legal for use in countries which drive on the left, end of.
Please put on the beam benders otherwise you will be dazzling oncoming drivers unless you are using your vehicle on mainland Europe.

Aidan_M_M · 17-04-2012 6:27pm

Exactly , it's not always about the letter of the law , sometimes you have to behave with common , ethical sense.

Pjwal · 18-04-2012 12:36am

niloc1951 wrote: »

Into Everything wrote:

....................................He also said that I didn't need beam benders for the test as the vtn centres have been told to test them as left had drive. That was a waste of €16.

Happy Camper!!:):)

Crap

Your headlights are not legal for use in countries which drive on the left, end of.
Please put on the beam benders otherwise you will be dazzling oncoming drivers unless you are using your vehicle on mainland Europe.

Yes. I think that tester was very wrong there. Vtn centres were told the opposite to that.

*Kol* · 18-04-2012 9:18am

niloc1951 wrote: »

Crap

Your headlights are not legal for use in countries which drive on the left, end of.
Please put on the beam benders otherwise you will be dazzling oncoming drivers unless you are using your vehicle on mainland Europe.

I used black electrical tape on my lights and it passed no problem and I'm not dazzling anybody. Cheap solution.

The Bishop Basher · 18-04-2012 11:52am

Into Everything wrote: »

He also said that I didn't need beam benders for the test as the vtn centres have been told to test them as left had drive. That was a waste of €16.

Happy Camper!!:):)

What a farce. Typically Irish. Absolutley no consitency.

Like *kol* I used black tape and it will be staying on even though i rarely drive the camper at night.

Into everything please do everyone else the courtesy of leaving the benders on

Pjwal · 19-04-2012 10:26am

weight plates.
hey guys. some news just in this morning. in an unusual display from the rsa, they have given a clear and precise answer to an issue. if you have an older camper that only has an original manufacteres plate, and not an extra alko plate, but the original plate has had the axle or gvw weight upped to a higher weight, we are to revert back to the original weights, and ignore the alterations. most campers will weigh in light enough to pass the test on this basses, but some will be too heavy, so the best advice i can give is to have the camper as light as possable, empty water tanks and remove gas tanks, because if it is over the original weights, it will have to fail.

corkbuoy · 19-04-2012 5:18pm

Pjwal wrote: »

weight plates.
hey guys. some news just in this morning. in an unusual display from the rsa, they have given a clear and precise answer to an issue. if you have an older camper that only has an original manufacteres plate, and not an extra alko plate, but the original plate has had the axle or gvw weight upped to a higher weight, we are to revert back to the original weights, and ignore the alterations. most campers will weigh in light enough to pass the test on this basses, but some will be too heavy, so the best advice i can give is to have the camper as light as possable, empty water tanks and remove gas tanks, because if it is over the original weights, it will have to fail.

Thats not really a solution for many, for example in my case the weight plate was changed from 3500 to 3800, but it weighs just under 3500 when empty. Add some gear, water, passengers and it is illegal to drive as it will be over the max gross weight of 3500.

Pjwal · 19-04-2012 6:10pm

corkbuoy wrote: »

Thats not really a solution for many, for example in my case the weight plate was changed from 3500 to 3800, but it weighs just under 3500 when empty. Add some gear, water, passengers and it is illegal to drive as it will be over the max gross weight of 3500.

yes, i agree, its not a solution to the weight problem on the road, but it a solution to getting a lot of people over the first hurdle of getting through the test,my own plate was changed from 2800 to 3100, so i have to revert back to 2800 which is pretty low. your plate been changed from 3500 to 3800 is not a common change that we ve come across,

niloc1951 · 19-04-2012 9:25pm

Pjwal wrote: »

weight plates.
hey guys. some news just in this morning. in an unusual display from the rsa, they have given a clear and precise answer to an issue. if you have an older camper that only has an original manufacteres plate, and not an extra alko plate, but the original plate has had the axle or gvw weight upped to a higher weight, we are to revert back to the original weights, and ignore the alterations. most campers will weigh in light enough to pass the test on this basses, but some will be too heavy, so the best advice i can give is to have the camper as light as possable, empty water tanks and remove gas tanks, because if it is over the original weights, it will have to fail.

This appears to be another 'convenient' RSA solution.
However, according to DIRECTIVE 2007/46/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL the 'original manufacturer' of my Rapido is Rapido Camping-cars BP.19 53101 Mayenne France and not FIAT who supplied the front chassis section, engine, transmission, suspension and dashboard.
I expect the same rule applies to HYMER, TEC, Burstner, etc. etc. etc.
So, it now looks like the RSA are rewriting the above EU Directive instead of recognising that some manufacturers have in the past taken the lazy/cheap way out and amended the plate fixed by the supplier of the base vehicle component of the 'whole vehicle'.

A common sense solution would be to accept a revised GVW however it is presented subject to it not exceeding the sum of the axle weights provided they themselves have not been altered.
The RSA should acquaint themselves with the fact that changing the GVW upwards but remaining within the axle capabilities is/was common practice in the industry.

The 'problem' raised by the RSA does not seem to be a problem to the authorities charged to test motor caravans in other countries as can be attested to by the imports which arrived here with the plates now causing difficulties but which passed testing in their country of origin.

Yes, a very Irish situation :mad::mad:

Pjwal · 19-04-2012 10:53pm

niloc1951 wrote: »

This appears to be another 'convenient' RSA solution.
However, according to DIRECTIVE 2007/46/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL the 'original manufacturer' of my Rapido is Rapido Camping-cars BP.19 53101 Mayenne France and not FIAT who supplied the front chassis section, engine, transmission, suspension and dashboard.
I expect the same rule applies to HYMER, TEC, Burstner, etc. etc. etc.
So, it now looks like the RSA are rewriting the above EU Directive instead of recognising that some manufacturers have in the past taken the lazy/cheap way out and amended the plate fixed by the supplier of the base vehicle component of the 'whole vehicle'.

A common sense solution would be to accept a revised GVW however it is presented subject to it not exceeding the sum of the axle weights provided they themselves have not been altered.
The RSA should acquaint themselves with the fact that changing the GVW upwards but remaining within the axle capabilities is/was common practice in the industry.

The 'problem' raised by the RSA does not seem to be a problem to the authorities charged to test motor caravans in other countries as can be attested to by the imports which arrived here with the plates now causing difficulties but which passed testing in their country of origin.

Yes, a very Irish situation :mad::mad:

dealing with the rsa on a daily basis is a nightmare, and this is very typical of them, as i said before, they dive in with thier own version of the rules and regulations when itroducing something new, and then over time they have to retract, back down and change everything, they claim to do research and hold consultation but in reality, they take very little info and advice on board, it has happened many times in the past with other things, and if a question over the quality of a test pops up, they are very fast to come and tell you the proper rules and tell the tester exactly where he went wrong. rant over;) but yesit is a typical solution, they would never consider researching it deep enough to find the correct procedure. but the one thing i can say about the changes on alot of the plates is that the alteration of the weight is very amateur looking, scriped on to the plate, not straight or with uniform sized digits and sometimes it even looks as it could be scrapped on with a nail.

Irishgoatman · 19-04-2012 11:29pm

As per my post #429, I know this isn't my problem and probably shouldn't get involved, but I find it interesting.

I have to say that I don't see signs that anyone, other than testers, has been in touch directly with the RSA!. Why not? surely that is the way to go.

Get the info directly from the horses mouth, after making sure that the horse knows what the problem is of course.
Most testers will not be campervan/motorhome owners so will not fully appreciate the problem.

OuterBombie · 20-04-2012 1:22pm

Got my van tested during the week in JJ Flemings in Galway.

During the braking test one of my front brake cables severed as it had been corroded! :eek: I'm counting myself lucky that it didn't happen which out on the road. Plus one for the RSA on that one.

Flemings replaced both front cables, updated the brake fluid and also re-checked an imbalance in my back brakes and after all that re-tested and passed me.

I was expecting a large bill but it was very reasonable so pretty happy its been resolved, kudos to Flemings.

I also left beam benders in the cab and the tester fitted them.

Time to plan some weekend trips, bring on the summer (I hope :-))

OB.

Aidan_M_M · 21-04-2012 12:38am

as a matter of curiousity , is it long since the MH was serviced?

OuterBombie · 23-04-2012 9:01am

Ye guys gave it a full service about a year and a half ago.

DoE testing - The Last Word

Comments